The only true data havens will be effected through onion routing and/or a cryptographically (and traffic-analysis-proof, ie. mixmaster based) FreeNet type system.
Yes, but why should I trust something like "Zero Knowledge" or "HushMail". It would seem to me that one of the most effective ways to get knowledge on people seeking anonymity is to come out with a service claiming to provide it.
There is nothing, not even mixmaster remailers, that can guarantee you privacy. And, if you're really serious you should not trust the services they offer, and perhaps even steer clear of them altogether.
If their system was well designed, there would be no way of telling if a particular web page was on a server, even by the administrators of that server.
FreeNet would ideally be considered a "common carrier", like a phone company. You don't sue a phone company because someone used a phone in the commision of a crime. Unfortunately, the phone system is not designed for anonymity or security (phone taps and traces are made easier every day), so its not a perfect analogy.
In your FAQ you admit that FreeNet does not offer even a modicum of anonymity (ala Mixmaster), does not encrypt communication between nodes, and (I infer) is vulnerable to trafic analysis. So why is it useful? How can you possibly claim that "individual documents cannot be traced to their source or even to where they are physically stored"?
Junkbuster can allow/block cookies from an arbitrary list of hosts. It also allows you to send false cookies, which they call wafers, containing whatever information you want.
Slashdot Mirror
Bravo, Gilroy. Yours is probably the most intelligent post I have ever read on Slashdot. You cut right to the heart of the matter. --Sergey
The only true data havens will be effected through onion routing and/or a cryptographically (and traffic-analysis-proof, ie. mixmaster based) FreeNet type system.
All you have to do to silence any 'offensive' content is get their upstream providers or peers to block traffic.
Simple censorship.
Yes, but why should I trust something like "Zero Knowledge" or "HushMail". It would seem to me that one of the most effective ways to get knowledge on people seeking anonymity is to come out with a service claiming to provide it.
There is nothing, not even mixmaster remailers, that can guarantee you privacy. And, if you're really serious you should not trust the services they offer, and perhaps even steer clear of them altogether.
You sound like David Brin, pathetically naive.
Piss away your privacy, and watch the powers that be pick their teeth with the bones of you progeny.
If their system was well designed, there would be no way of telling if a particular web page was on a server, even by the administrators of that server.
FreeNet would ideally be considered a "common carrier", like a phone company. You don't sue a phone company because someone used a phone in the commision of a crime. Unfortunately, the phone system is not designed for anonymity or security (phone taps and traces are made easier every day), so its not a perfect analogy.
Slashdot has always had a dim view of anonymity, and would pejoratively label anyone who publishes via FreeNet an "Anonymous Coward".
In your FAQ you admit that FreeNet does not offer even a modicum of anonymity (ala Mixmaster), does not encrypt communication between nodes, and (I infer) is vulnerable to trafic analysis. So why is it useful? How can you possibly claim that "individual documents cannot be traced to their source or even to where they are physically stored"?
Junkbuster can allow/block cookies from an arbitrary list of hosts. It also allows you to send false cookies, which they call wafers, containing whatever information you want.
http://www.junkbuster.com
What is described in this article are "covert channels" which are ancient and very well researched.