Re: [Wfw-discuss] Hi people. Alive?

[Matthew T. <mto...@ca...>]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 08:56:46PM -0600, Brandon wrote:
> 
> > Is this project alive?
> 
> No, but it would be nice if it started up.
> 
> > Is this project hopelessly abusable?
> 
> Not at all. It will be very nice.
Really. What is to stop it being spoofed massively? Every script kiddie from
here to china will insert his home page as www.slashdot.org
> 
> > Does this project require features only in freenet after 0.n, n > 4 ?
> 
> Not at all. It could be implemented today.
How? The original freshmeat editorial said basically:
In parallel,
1. Do the HTTP request
2. Request the URL as a key from Freenet.
If it comes in through #1, insert it into freenet.
Is this still the proposal? You know it won't work. So some details, please?
If you just insert http://www.blah.com/ into Freenet as an SVK, it will not
be updatable. And it is infinitely spoofable. You can get around the first
problem with pseudo-updating (cost quite large). You can't get around the 
second problem, in general, although you could define a metadata format to
encapsulate a URL, insert the file separately as a CHK (to avoid
duplication), and return an SVK for the inserted file (metadata), which
would be a pointer to an archived web site. This won't be transparent
though.
> 
> > Does this project want help?
> 
> Yes! It could be implemented pretty easily as a proxy. I've been thinking
> lately that you could implement a generalized proxy that would work with
> and peer-to-peer network, or a combination of them. That would be way
> cool.
It should definitely be a proxy. However squid redirectors are not the way
to go IMHO, we want to send the HTTP request *in parallel* to the freenet
request. But it's not that hard to write a simple threaded proxy.
> 
> If somebody will write the overall proxy that queries Freenet and upon not
> getting a result queries the web, I have the Freenet side covered because
> it provides a web proxy.
> 
> Actually, most peer-to-peer networks provide web proxies nowadays. So if
> you just came up with a metaproxy that would try another proxy then that
> would pretty much be it.
> 
> Wow, this project suddenly got a whole heck of a lot simpler from when we
> were going to modify Mozilla to have Freenet code in it.
That would have been silly.