[tor-talk] Facebook brute forcing hidden services

[odinn]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

"Why Not Both?"

;-)

edhelas wrote:
> On dim., nov. 2, 2014 at 2:37 , rysiek <rysiek at hackerspace.pl>
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> okay, fuck that, I'm going to dive in, because the level of FUD
>> is strong in this one.
> 
> Well, thanks :)
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dnia niedziela, 2 listopada 2014 12:19:24 edhelas pisze:
>>> I can resume this fragmentation issue by a simple sentence that
>>> I'm saying more and more these days : "If you have a problem,
>>> do not write an API, write a protocol".
>> 
>> Sure: https://xkcd.com/927/
>> 
>> I don't understand why we need over9000 different, incompatible
>> federated social web protocols. It would seem to me we need *ONE*
>> with several *GOOD* implementations.
>> 
>>> The social federation protocol is already here : it's XMPP. And
>>> yes it can support everything a social network has to offer
>>> (feeds, subscriptions, profiles, contact list…). There is
>>> already millions of users on the XMPP network, and you can
>>> easily find several clients on all the plateforms for it.
>>> 
>>> I'm working since 2008 on the Movim project
>>> (https://movim.eu/), to build a full, good looking,
>>> "decentralized" (federated) and open source social network on
>>> XMPP. And believe me, yes it's possible.
>> 
>> I won't discuss that. I will however point out that "possible" is
>> not enough.
> 
> It's possible to push it forward and try to not reinvent the wheel
> again and again by creating a new protocol.
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> I like the link that the guy made in the presentation with
>>> Firefox. Why Firefox surpassed IE ? Because they just choose to
>>> implement the W3C standards and try to improve it (and they
>>> offer some nice features too).
>> 
>> Absolutely.
>> 
>>> Diaspora, GNU Social, Friendica are not trying to do that, they
>>> create their own "proprietary" protocol
>> 
>> Oh, wow. Do you even understand the words that you use? I mean, 
>> "proprietary"? It's documented, the code is open, the protocol
>> has at least two FLOSS implementations. Seriously, what were you
>> trying to achieve here?
> 
> Ok, the term "proprietary" was a little strong. Of course the
> sourcecode of theses projects is open. But can you give me any
> serious documentations (more than a Wiki or some ML links) that can
> help me to implement properly the Diaspora/Friendica/GNU Social
> protocols like RFC, IETF stuffs ?
> 
> A protocol have to be stable in the time, most of theses project
> just create their own protocol from their need. The Diaspora
> protocol was re-written already one time (which totally broke the
> Friendica compatibility at this time), the guys from Status.net
> moved to Pump.io…
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> to talk between each other and after that face the same issues
>>> than all the others network : "Hey, we are not compatibles !
>>> Lets create an API and the other networks will be compatible
>>> with us".
>> 
>> No. They created a protocol that other networks implement. For
>> example Friendica implements GNU Social's protocol, Diaspora's
>> protocol and their own (documented, opensourced) protocol. Red
>> similarily.
> 
> No, they wrote their own protocol for their own project, and
> someone just try to implement it to try to be compatible. But it's
> a one way work, the guys from Diaspora will not adapt their
> protocol to help the guys from Friendica/GNU Social/whatever.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Reading a bit on it would be a good idea.
>> 
>>> So keep calm and implement XMPP ;)
>> 
>> No. Come to The Federation assembly at #31C3, get involved in a
>> more meaningful way than calling open protocols "proprietary"
>> just because you don't know them, and try working with quite a
>> few projects that already cooperate and federate with common
>> *protocols* (not APIs).
>> 
>> The question is not "which protocol is better", because while we 
>> bikeshed on this question, people are still sitting on Failbroke
>> and Shitter, instead of moving out of these walled gardens.
>> 
>> The question is: "how can we *cooperate* to get people on the
>> libre, federated side of social networks". 1.5 year ago I
>> submitted to all the fedsocnet devs a simple question, here's the
>> link again: 
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fedsocweb/2013May/0058.html
>>
>>
>> 
The answer was: "impossiburu, we won't, not invented here, my protocol is
>> better than yours". So instead of trying to herd those cats, I
>> am grabbing the opportunity arising from the fact that we already
>> have The Federation. Let's expand it and build upon it, eh?
> 
> What is your plan with The Federation ? To build a project to help
> all theses project to talk each others and find a way to
> "standardize" the communications between them to be compatible with
> eachothers ?
> 
> Then you will define some basic schema of authentication/packet
> format (JSON/HTML/XML…)/global architecture… In the end it will
> looks like this : https://xkcd.com/927/
> 
> If your aim is to ask theses project to have a public API to share 
> stuffs between their different servers, well good luck.
> 
>> 
>> Shouting "XMPP! XMPP!" is not helping.
> 
> No, but I prefer to contribute and improve a 15 years old protocol,
> with millions of users and hundred of implementations, managed by a
> strong Fundation that works with the IETF than on a 4 yo protocol
> implented by ~2 project where all the documentation you can find on
> it is here 
> https://wiki.diasporafoundation.org/Federation_protocol_overview.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- Pozdr rysiek
> 

- -- 
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUVooxAAoJEGxwq/inSG8C2UYH/iHIaDFFyj3dwAXRFsLotmRy
M7TfDItF0CVNkSRLXfpBytt6RXMLgQnF9G8cd9SbVTdCWzP1kM3QO/aLWbw42SYj
MCSM0vXtiheY12cgwoGbrMainCC9ovyoY7gS09ch1NMjTp8xZJVfOL4ZBOzAdoQB
XRjWy1egPWv6hn6AtW1kSV0s0bbwyeBZ5oYE5kJkYIGg/eYqHkyHGyqrjk6JbMCa
pvxBzli/h4Z3BtRtpfV17FRcWZ6LRhjZWbPy5yNHLyZmte+huWq5xTIa+DnOrc5D
AoVXnIlpL60aVBXxH15lS90jNsEdvzG6jsmJ2D+Q7JbVkAaCnU6aS+xwYrBLuRc=
=PvkC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----