Re: [draft] Defeating Botnets and Trojans: Episode 1
Imho the operating systems we use aren't adequate. No single user is 100% accountable for what he/she does on the network. I'm not an expert in this field at all, but I thought about this quite a lot figuring things out. Here it goes: Suppose you implement a blockchain for identities as early in the boot process as possible, then you find the public key of every user in the blockchain and can communicate with every user while that user knows you are connected to him/her. Now you have a blockchain and can connect to virtually anyone. But the operating system is still vulnerable to hijacking and you should verify correctness somehow. Suppose, I'm really not sure if this effectively works, you implement a hashing function as early as possible in the compiler, then you can hash the code of the compiler and verify if the compiler's code changed. Then up to the operating system which you compile with that compiler and hash the code in its development stages. Now you're able to connect other users in the network and compare hashes of comparable computer systems. Maybe there are better alternatives. What happens in memory is a black box to me, somehow I like to hash and compare that too, and I understand that our computers become quite a lot slower. Privacy issues do arise with this system, but it's nothing more than in real life where you meet someone and say 'Hi, I'm ...', politeness, naivety, in this world now where the internet is totally different, not moral indeed. And also, the internet is free, with such a system an internet with different speeds might be more easily made as every user is known within a certain time span. I'm currently working on a blockchain of identities ( https://github.com/nvrrdt/onzecurrency) and I'd like to continue developing this, so I hope the concept has a chance to succeed in its endeavor. Op di 7 jun. 2022 om 10:20 schreef Nico Verrijdt <nicoverrijdt@gmail.com>:
Imho the operating systems we use aren't adequate.
No single user is 100% accountable for what he/she does on the network.
I'm not an expert in this field at all, but I thought about this quite a lot figuring things out.
Here it goes: Suppose you implement a blockchain for identities as early in the boot process as possible, then you find the public key of every user in the blockchain and can communicate with every user while that user knows you are connected to him/her. Now you have a blockchain and can connect to virtually anyone. But the operating system is still vulnerable to hijacking and you should verify correctness somehow. Suppose, I'm really not sure if this effectively works, you implement a hashing function as early as possible in the compiler, then you can hash the code of the compiler and verify if the compiler's code changed. Then up to the operating system which you compile with that compiler and hash the code in its development stages. Now you're able to connect other users in the network and compare hashes of comparable computer systems. Maybe there are better alternatives. What happens in memory is a black box to me, somehow I like to hash and compare that too, and I understand that our computers become quite a lot slower.
Privacy issues do arise with this system, but it's nothing more than in real life where you meet someone and say 'Hi, I'm ...', politeness, naivety, in this world now where the internet is totally different, not moral indeed. And also, the internet is free, with such a system an internet with different speeds might be more easily made as every user is known within a certain time span.
I'm currently working on a blockchain of identities ( https://github.com/nvrrdt/onzecurrency) and I'd like to continue developing this, so I hope the concept has a chance to succeed in its endeavor.
Op di 7 jun. 2022 om 09:22 schreef Karl Semich <0xloem@gmail.com>:
Cypherpunks, Anarchists, and Security Professionals can agree on something. Something we have agreed on for a long time, but fought viciously over.
We need uses of computer networks to be moral.
Our communities have been attacked for quite some time now.
On 6/7/22, Nico Verrijdt <nicoverrijdt@gmail.com> wrote:
Imho the operating systems we use aren't adequate.
This is traditionally done by managing one's own communications in and out of a system in depth.
effectively works, you implement a hashing function as early as possible in the compiler, then you can hash the code of the compiler and verify if the compiler's code changed. Then up to the operating system which you compile
There are a lot of people working on technologies that verify executable content, it's quite exciting ideas, tough ground to move forward.
Privacy issues do arise with this system, but it's nothing more than in real life where you meet someone and say 'Hi, I'm ...', politeness, naivety, in this world now where the internet is totally different, not moral indeed.
Pseudonymity is a common solution to privacy issues. People need a way to stay private when they are not impacting others. When you impact others, I think it's eventual that harmful impacts show who you are.
And also, the internet is free, with such a system an internet with different speeds might be more easily made as every user is known within a certain time span.
I suppose the internet is free so long as we have the freedom to build its infrastructure; we can then build it as fast as we want, like a handmade go-cart. This takes a lot of r&d.
I'm currently working on a blockchain of identities ( https://github.com/nvrrdt/onzecurrency) and I'd like to continue developing this, so I hope the concept has a chance to succeed in its endeavor.
It's great to see a blockchain project; I glanced at the page. I'm not familiar with the security guarantees of a blockchain that doesn't resist a sybil attack, but I like the idea of heuristically proving people's uniqueness in some way. I'm sure many people have considered such things.
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 10:23:38 +0200 Nico Verrijdt <nicoverrijdt@gmail.com> wrote:
No single user is 100% accountable for what he/she does on the network.
accountable to whom?
Suppose you implement a blockchain for identities as early in the boot process bla bla bla Privacy issues do arise with this system,
Oh really. What you are proposing, like the good cop you are, is total surveillance - again. So yeah, not good for 'privacy' - and so not the kind of thing you'd promote in an allegedly 'cypherpunk' list eh.
No single user is 100% accountable for what he/she does on the network.
accountable to whom again? Oh yeah, accountable to cops like you.
I'm currently working on a blockchain of identities
kill yourself, fucktard.
participants (3)
-
Karl Semich -
Nico Verrijdt -
punk