ANONIMITY and P2P : an "OXIMORON' ?

This is a discussion on ANONIMITY and P2P : an "OXIMORON' ? within the Networking/Device Communication forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; Being in a p2p network means that one computer has to make a peer connection with another.. well.. leave p2p ...

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    7

    Red face ANONIMITY and P2P : an "OXIMORON' ?

    Being in a p2p network means that one computer has to make a peer connection with another.. well.. leave p2p any internet connection needs a node to node communication.. hence in a network of nodes.. any node has to "connect" with any other node in order to communicate.

    Consider a p2p network.. with the usual p2p.. the ip address of the nodes that make a direct connection to accessa particular resource can easily be logged. With "proxing".., if a node A has to communicate with node B..A establishes contact with a random node in network say C and C connects to B and serves as a proxy..but in the case of anti-privacy people.. imean the music record companies.. who want to get to the nodes that pirate thier music albums.. so that they can be prosecuted.. even if they dont get to A.. they can surely get to C.. and charge a lawsuite against C for piration or helping A to pirate... thus even when A escapes.. C is caught...

    IS there any way.. for total anonimity.. without "SACRIFICING" the security of other nodes in the network?.. CAN there ever be? MAY be its a constitutional/technological flaw with the tcp/ip protocol.. or may be the flaw was intended to curb privacy..unless there is a patch to that flaw in the tcp/ip protocol.. and privacy be a inherent property.. or lets say an option in the protocol suite itself.. that allows application developers to choose.. i think.. P2P and ANONIMITY will remain an OXIMORON...

  2. #2
    'AlHamdulillah
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    790
    you need remember that TCP/IP was originally developed when only the military used any form of the internet, and therefore, the only people on were authorized so there was no reason to have privacy of IP addresses.

    anyway, i think it is good there isnt privacy in terms of IP addresses as I dont condone the use of P2P software for the "legit" purposes that people try to explain .

  3. #3
    Yes, my avatar is stolen anonytmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    2,544
    TCP obviously has to have a return address to know where to send the information.

    See http://freenet.sourceforge.net/

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    7
    i think ... freenet is way too "difficult" for the concept to materialise... the reason bieng.. the "content" that freenet demands to be "anonymous" needs to rtemain in the freenet environment.. ie., unless everyone(major internet applications and networks.. including ISP's) support freenet.. its basically useless.

    i think .. Invisible Internet Project.. i2p from invisiblenet.net is a far better and effective approach. However.. if the tcp/ip suite was made inherently secure and privacy feature was given as an option things would have been definitley easier. I think if i2p materialises... then it would be really "great".

    Well.. privacy is definitly an important area.. its more of a combined need of the moral,technological..and constitutional framework of an individual..and the country. The powerfull people ..i mean the dictators(like hitler..and the communist party in china).. breach the privacy and bring harm to the people...

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21