Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication • Hacker News Board

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#311

Post by cgtzczykldpq » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:32 AM UTC

notanzaiiswear wrote: post #297

cgtzczykldpq wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freenet does not give you the decryption keys to the data you host, you don't know what you're hosting, hence you're not responsible for what it could be decrypted to. And even if law enforcement could successfully convince a court that you're doing something illegal by hosting data which you cannot look into: They couldn't first acquire the necessary search warrant because they couldn't prove that you are the one wh…

But if somebody downloads the data, and they can track the source to your computer, do they even have to decrypt it on your computer? (I mean does law enforcement have to decrypt it on your computer, or could they just indirectly prove you hosted the data).

The anonymized routing prevents them from tracking the source to your computer.

If someone downloads something on Freenet they don't know where it is coming from.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#312

Post by austincheney » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:35 AM UTC

hutzlibu wrote: post #301

b5 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my experience too, the few times I tried it. I haven't been back for just that reason. There's nothing that I can do on there that I can't do on the real internet and even the tiniest risk of CSAM material reaching my machine is not worth it. It's sad but I think in most modern democracies that are relatively free, like the USA and EU, the primary use for these services is CSAM. There's no other reason to us…

" There's no other reason to use it, except maybe paranoia or technical curiosity," How about idealism? I mean 20 years ago, you would have been declared paranoid, if you said secret government agencies and big corporations track everything you do online - but now you just speak a inconvinient truth, most people are aware of, but try to ignore it as much as possible. It is good, to have working alternative plattforms…

You are falsely equating anonymity for privacy.

The goal of anonymity is to avoid disclosure of identity but not secrecy of content. You don’t care if the entire world sees the substance of the communication. You care that they cannot detect who you are. Networks like this and Tor share your information across a large number of nodes to resist identity detection.

Privacy is the opposite. You don’t care that the entire world knows who you are so long as they can never read your communications. Privacy is challenging to achieve with anonymity because it is almost impossible for one party to trust the other against information disclosure if they have no idea who they are.

The first world problem is confusing these concepts so that you can have your cake and eat it too, typically for self-serving reasons.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#313

Post by lr4444lr » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:36 AM UTC

cgtzczykldpq wrote: post #171

Yuioup wrote: post #9

I stay away from it because chunks of the data is hosted on your local machine, and it could potentially contain very unsavory data. Sure it's encrypted but try to explain that to your local law enforcement.

Freenet does not give you the decryption keys to the data you host, you don't know what you're hosting, hence you're not responsible for what it could be decrypted to. And even if law enforcement could successfully convince a court that you're doing something illegal by hosting data which you cannot look into: They couldn't first acquire the necessary search warrant because they couldn't prove that you are the one wh…

...hence you're not responsible for what it could be decrypted to.

You do NOT want your defense in court to rest on convincing a judge or jury of this.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#314

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:37 AM UTC

ArneBab wrote: post #285

b5 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my experience too, the few times I tried it. I haven't been back for just that reason. There's nothing that I can do on there that I can't do on the real internet and even the tiniest risk of CSAM material reaching my machine is not worth it. It's sad but I think in most modern democracies that are relatively free, like the USA and EU, the primary use for these services is CSAM. There's no other reason to us…

Have you ever been threatened by a right-wing extremist that they would come to your house when you answered their hatred online and pointed out the flaws in their logic? I have been. That’s why I deeply appreciate having a pseudonym that’s separated from where I live so I don’t have to fear Neonazis turning up at my doorstep or attacking my kids when I write something they do not like.

[deleted]

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#315

Post by cgtzczykldpq » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:40 AM UTC

lr4444lr wrote: post #313

cgtzczykldpq wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freenet does not give you the decryption keys to the data you host, you don't know what you're hosting, hence you're not responsible for what it could be decrypted to. And even if law enforcement could successfully convince a court that you're doing something illegal by hosting data which you cannot look into: They couldn't first acquire the necessary search warrant because they couldn't prove that you are the one wh…

...hence you're not responsible for what it could be decrypted to. You do NOT want your defense in court to rest on convincing a judge or jury of this.

So we must shut down all hotels because they all unknowingly hosted some illegal activities in their rooms, e.g. if someone met a prostitute there?

In fact we cannot have people rent out condos or houses anymore either because illegal stuff will happen there and the owner is responsible even if they don't know!

Also we need to shut down all ISPs because at some point in time illegal data was cached on their machines during transit!?

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#316

Post by quotemstr » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:43 AM UTC

Ah, yes. We've descended to the point where HN gets mad at you for building technology that lets people speak to each other without people on the west coast sitting in meetings and deciding whether that speech is moral.

All I see on this thread is people saying speech is bad, censorship resistance is irresponsible, and that it's very important that the Bay Area control words that go over the internet.

To hell with that attitude. Technology should start to just ignore HN and its moralistic and increasingly irrelevant screeching.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#317

Post by quotemstr » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:49 AM UTC

xvilka wrote: post #158

fsflover wrote: post #2

How is it better than I2P: https://geti2p.net ? Upd: found this: https://geti2p.net/en/comparison/freenet .

There is one more key difference - I2P has C++ implementation[1] which allows it to be run on the low-performance machines, e.g. routers. It is impossible in case of Java. I wish it had been Rust, though... [1] https://github.com/PurpleI2P/i2pd

Why would it be impossible to run Java on low performance machines? There have been mobile and embedded Java implementations for literally decades. C++ doesn't magically imbue a program with performance superpowers either.

It's lazy to equate implementation language with performance profile.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#318

Post by quotemstr » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:51 AM UTC

ddtaylor wrote: post #68

Some HN users are stuck in an interesting privacy paradox. Most of the time when a company or government tries to undermine privacy or encryption they jump at the throat and point out the need for both. However, it seems when we actually accomplish those goals and create systems that are truly anonymous, private and/or encrypted they basically say it's only for criminals and child abuse.

There is no privacy paradox. HN types aren't actually opposed to censorship and surveillance. They just think they should be the ones doing it.

It's a good thing that the legacy tech scene that the loud, high-karma moral busybodies on this site represent is becoming hated, bypassed, and ultimately irrelevant.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#319

Post by ArneBab » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:52 AM UTC

austincheney wrote: post #312

hutzlibu wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" There's no other reason to use it, except maybe paranoia or technical curiosity," How about idealism? I mean 20 years ago, you would have been declared paranoid, if you said secret government agencies and big corporations track everything you do online - but now you just speak a inconvinient truth, most people are aware of, but try to ignore it as much as possible. It is good, to have working alternative plattforms…

You are falsely equating anonymity for privacy. The goal of anonymity is to avoid disclosure of identity but not secrecy of content. You don’t care if the entire world sees the substance of the communication. You care that they cannot detect who you are. Networks like this and Tor share your information across a large number of nodes to resist identity detection. Privacy is the opposite. You don’t care that the entir…

Freenet provides both: Secrecy of content and pseudonymity — both are required to enable confidential disclosure to a journalist on the (typically valid) assumption that the opsec of the journalist is far from perfect.

Re: Freenet is a peer-to-peer platform for censorship-resistant communication

#320

Post by agumonkey » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 10:56 AM UTC

kkcorps wrote: post #292

Unpopular opinion - People keep on creating so many privacy focused platforms but general public doesn't seem to care. Seems like there is only like a small minority which cares about privacy.

Also I believe that even those who care and use it don't achieve more.