On 06/29/2016 10:34 PM, grarpamp wrote:
On 6/29/16, Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
<SNIP>
What do you see as promising?
Hard to say as keeping track of all the papers and few actually coded implementations is hard.
Yes, far more papers than implementations. Once you have something that works well enough, or that people are at least so convinced, new ideas don't attract much interest. But maybe that's changing now.
I2P is still interesting as a packet switched net. PS tech tends to have more modification flexibility to new pluggable ideas than circuit switching.
Why did Tor go with circuit switching? Was it mostly about efficiency? We have a very different Internet now. Also, is it easier to bury packet switching in chaff?
All the other little more specific messaging / file systems have some good elements.
Which ones, in particular? With global active adversaries, which can observe and modify packets on every public network, it's hard to imagine how substantive [anonymity | unlinkability | deniability | privacy] is possible. Sure, every node might send traffic that's not provably nonrandom to every other node at constant rate. But it's still obvious that you're up to something. And once they tweak your traffic, they can look at what other nodes start behaving differently. So I come back to the need for covert channels.
More than asserting something promising from the mess, there might be value in the prior step of sorting out what may be promising. There are folks who would be good partners in that.
Maybe so. But many of them tend to keep to themselves ;)