--> You are now talking on #iip-dev --- Topic for #iip-dev is IIP Meeting - logfiles: http://wiki.invisiblenet.net/?Meetings - http://www.invisiblenet.net/research/ it's 21:13 <-- wilde has quit (Ping timeout) --- Trent@anon.iip gives channel operator status to UserX ok !time al-jebr: 00:21 here I believe everyone has settled Let's go. :) 11:06 here let's start anyone get my agenda so they can play it back I forgot the order <-- leenookx has quit (Ping timeout) my clock is 15 minutes ahead :) --> hifi (~MetroPipe@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev on the agenda 1) Welcome 2)Our Goodbyes 3)IIP development now 4) IIP development restructuring proposal actually its xx:13 everywhere... 5) Recruiting for services to aid with IIP <-- Delly has quit (Ping timeout) 6) comments suggestions and people who want to help 23:05:28 <@nop> 1) Welcome 23:05:38 <@nop> 2)Our Goodbyes 23:05:43 <@nop> 3)IIP development now 23:05:56 <@nop> 4) IIP development restructuring proposal 23:06:16 <@nop> 5) Recruiting for services to aid with IIP 23:06:53 <@nop> 6) comments suggestions and people who want to help wow, flood in here ;) pl Out goodbyes? lol TROLLS !!! Ok, welcome all let's settle down now :) . settled --> wilde (~anon@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev settled anyone logging? --> thecrypto (~thecrypto@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev I am (sort of). mids should be. * jrand0m logs at all times let's go! ok nop: Agenda item number 2? Our goodbyes Bye! where is the livelog? Ok, mids has come to a point where he is moving to other projects --> Phiberoptika (~none@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev After having worked for IIP for more than I year now, I have decided to resign as IIP developer. Awww. It has been fun and an educative experience but it is time to move on, refresh the spirit and shuffle the cards. Will you still be online/around? I'll keep running Trent as long as needed and possible. Yes, I do plan to stay around as user --> ntk (~blob@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev * nop is in the corner sobbing oh, ah hem many thanks mids, iip w/out trent would be a pita It's so sad. yes thank you mids for all your workup work Although I'll be off on vacation soon :) . --- mids removes channel operator status from mids :D Seem's like you've done a great job. :) ..how symbolic.. we love you mids!!! you hear that that was my window opening we all do! fan base out there --> w (~w@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev --- nop is now known as we lol, yep. :D * we love you mids Go mids go! rofl --> leenookx (~leenookx@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev --- LeerokLacerta has changed the topic to: IIP Meeting - logfiles: http://wiki.invisiblenet.net/?Meetings - http://www.invisiblenet.net/research/ | We love you mids! weeeeee are the chaaaampins, my frieeeennnndd... yes mids, thanks for all your input, collaboration and hard work in code and doing general developer things for IIP. --- we is now known as nop * mids bows * Ehud stands up and gives a standing ovation to the commitment, perseverence, effort, and good hard code that mids has given the project. yeah mids take your toys and go to tigertown lol and don't forget the PR and web management he's been a vital aspect to IIP getting it this far would have been hard without his work --> ChZEROHag (hag@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev hifi bitches with mids over trolling issue <-- hezekiah has quit (Ping timeout) heh hifi --> hezekiah (~hezekiah@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev --- Trent@anon.iip gives channel operator status to hezekiah Back. :) Yay. (And in case anyone doubted, Hezekiah == Ehud.) i never used frucking trent and don't know what mids did . i only troll . obviously your hezekiah@anon.iip gave it away <-- Ehud has quit (Ping timeout) Ugh Item number 3? (If we're all done sobbing yet ...) and i never was pingouted in my life . I am the most disciplined user of IIP . 3)IIP development now heh Ok everyone! Shhh. Back on track! BUT I CRY that MIDS GO !!! ok . IIP development. Whats the current status of that code snapshot release? That was supposed to happen today? Well, unless UserX has an objection to the tarball I made, it's done. Ok. Post it on the wiki? UserX? Were there any problems with the tarball? no problems with the tarball Yes, but are there any windows compilations? OK1 http://invisiblenet.net/hezekiah Get your tarballs there! there hasn't been a windows compilation on the windows version yet hm "tarballs" sound like some sort of food... * luckypunk will try and make one. --- hezekiah has changed the topic to: IIP Meeting - logfiles: http://wiki.invisiblenet.net/?Meetings - http://www.invisiblenet.net/research/ - tarballs of the 'unstable' development release are at http://invisiblenet.net/hezekiah | We love you mids! They are. For GCC. lol Sticky food. There is one 'documented bug'. I can compile a win32 version if you'd like So, could you give a quick describtion of what is new in this release? If you run isproxy, and it fails to bind the port, then it will /not/ abort. It will just sit there wasting memory. Rain: That's too much for me to handle (not to mention I don't even _know_ all the differences). this one I assume: iip-1.2-dev1.tar.bz2 01-Jul-2003 01:45 292k tar archive ? UserX could give a much better description UserX? hezekiah/UserX can we get a changelog of the differences by chance that may be a day before that gets done Ambience: Yup! Or the Gziped one. There the same tarball. because there are a log of changes Oh, and has the expired IIP signing-key been replaced? hezekiah: ok nop: I joined IIP after the development branch was already in progress. --> Ehud (~hezekiah@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev Rain: No. I had to use my GPG key. no one has tested the compile of this dev branch in win32 have they? Hey, is this src is CVS? Rain: I couldn't contact anyone who had the IIP release key. luckypunk: Yes. * luckypunk has, but his system didn't work for it. hezekiah: Ok, roger. changes: multi-threading, bignum support via openSSL or GMP, numerous inmprovements to the memory management system luckypunk: Right now that tarball is a copy of what you get when you check out the hezekiah-dev branch from CVS and run 'make dist-bzip2'. Gah! I hate windows. UserX: niceties ;) And of course there are other internal changes that only the developers see. :) just as a question for the qurious... what defines the holder for "Trent"... One simple thing is that now that BigNum is implemented using either GMP or SSL, login is a LOT faster. May i mention a IIP quirk i noticed earlier today? * luckypunk guesses its a yes. at wiki search button is absent . only window to type in but nowhere to click lol . hit enter. and what about channel/nick expiration... --- Ehud is now known as logger registration that is... Ok, it seems to me like you cannot start isproxy from a /path/to/isproxy command, but intead have to do a cd /path/to and then do a ./isproxy Rain: Let me guess ... you get a configuration screen or a request for entropy, right? * jrand0m has a feeling this will be a very.long.meeting Is that intentional, or just some quirk of my local system? hezekiah: yes. Rain: You need to make a .iip subdirectory in your home directory. It claims that the conf-file is not found. with my .conf file? Rain: If no such directory exists, isproxy will always look for the config files in the current directory --> AmishOne (amishone@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev Ahh. Of course. OK ... nop? Was there anything else for item 3? have we tested it for win32 compile wise I haven't. UserX: ? no I will test it this week then luckypunk, tried doing hezekiah-dev recently and complained for compile errors. that's key to maintain portability I suspect there might be problems. * luckypunk tried, it balked. Yup. There are problems. I'll have to leave for the more dominant one is ordering me to and I have no choice here. So I'll be off to bed, but will be logging #iip-dev for future reference. see ya guys! later bye Bye, Ambience. :) i'll be back. <--gone (log on) ok this topic is done next on agenda what's 4? 4) IIP development restructuring proposal ok we had a meeting about a discussion and proposal brought to us by jrand0m for the future development and as well I have had a lot of privmessages directed at me for requests to focus on an arbitrary framework, instead of IRC specific aka a framework that supports IRC + a whole lot more so the want is obviously there and the developers definitely want to go there as well Amen! the question of how to go about doing it and how to make the most productive use of our developers is up in the air XML is his framework site available to everybody? this isn't specifically about language create a communications protocol ok, please let me finish I've started on that somewhere... then we can comment My apologies I'm a bit in and out at the moment ok, no prob We are at a stage where there is discussion of an arbitrary communications protocol specifically for anonymous and secure communication at this point jrand0m, any chance we can post the logs of #iip-future meeting sure perhaps those zips I sent you so people don't have to struggle through freenet for the other pages too ok hold please (btw, the logs were unedited, so expect the usual occational banter) lol. Yup! You'll get to see exactly how much I DON'T know about p2p networks! lol heh (And they'll probably have my conspiracy theories about nop too! So be sure to read the logs! ;-) ) <-- logger has quit (Ping timeout) Ugh ok the logs will be a lot to read. can someone summarizze for the meeting what was covered and some key points of all this? http://office.invisiblenet.net/iip_future.zip and At this point, the 'stable' release is being more unstable than the 'unstable' one!! Urg. http://office.invisiblenet.net/meetingPrepnotes.zip http://office.invisiblenet.net/jrand0mnetwork_protocol.txt meetingPrepnotes.zip is a small doc that summarizes the meeting, and the meeting was basically "ok, any thoughts?". <-- Delly has quit (EOF From client) essentially, the proposal is to get going on a generic secure anonymous message based system, and run iip on top of that is there a zip with anonCommFramework too? I didn't see that jrand0m can you zip and send I'll post to site sure, h/o <-- Phiberoptika has quit (* ciaito mua mua *) what is anonCommFramework? uber-quick summary of the meeting in iip_future.zip is "ok, here's the proposal, any comments?" and comments were basically "ok, can IIP work as planned on this? if you're on freenet, anonCommFramework is at SSK@MQNd5lT-X5wHA4vONvtVadi6q1IPAgM/anonCommFramework/2// * jrand0m is sending nop a zip of that momentarily Did you discuss support for PGP-based nyms? ah hem, this is early discussions <-- ChZEROHag has quit (Ping timeout) no, endpoints in the framework are not nym based, they're idents Right. So nyms an higher level. are (and for lots of reasons, they shouldn't be long term idents like nyms) yes I was just thinking of something like trent with PGP signarute auth. trent is central central=bad --> logger (~hezekiah@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev briefly, anonCommFramework is a meta-network. a generic set of protocols & structures that an anonymous communication network could use to interoperate to provide militant grade anonymity what's the one sentence explanation of your ideas on network topology? --> ChZEROHag (~hag@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev that was fun --> Delly (dedede@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev mids: Yea. I meant similar services. what about having to pay with hashcash to send data? couldn't that help against flooding? wilde> heterogeneous. no one answer solves all problems. interoperate, balancing latency, bandwidth, anonymity, and reliability to provide the user's needs still in 4) ? Delly: Yup thx I think when the ircd is removed from the equation, we'll have far better options than (hash|think|real)cash jrand0m: any luck sending ;) uploading to hush now. ChZEROHag> anonCommFramework has built in support for providing network use authorization credentials There has been a lot of talk of IIP-Freenet interoparability. Will that fit into the framework, or are we talking application-level again? come again? app level what we're discussing is splitting iip into two parts - the irc part, and the message based secure anonymous network one solution could be: jrand0m: k. Application <-> SOCKS5 Proxy Interface <-> Onion Wrapper <-> Onion Router 1 <-> ... <-> Onion Router N <-> Exit Relay <-> Public Server building a DHT on top of the message layer should be fairly easy DHT? distributed hash table (ala freenet) ok, jrand0m let me clarify wilde: I think the plan is to design it such that the 'public server' could be removed from the equation at some point are we talking about splitting irc, or merging to focus on anonymity framework well, given unlimited # of developers, splitting and doing both (well, 3 things ;) in parallel. what I mean is that the irc part is application layer given reality, there's prolly only enough dev time to get the comm system running first, then iip on top right exactly and since we have a somewhat viable network working with IIP irc is just another app running on it then the idea should be is to have developers start focusing on framework aspects ChZEROHag: ok, what I suggested is an anonymizing layer for regular internet traffic, not a seperate network (This could get fun.) wilde there are weaknesses to that just to let you know aka the clear text on the outer ends <-- AmishOne has quit (EOF From client) nop: yes, so all connections should be encrypted to the ends we have an effort as well to have anonymous web browsing possible with this network yes. it must be able to operate without ever leaving the mixnet but it is not as real time direct as your proposal wilde it uses some time delay tactics with caching etc timing attacks are a serious threat to anonymity I WANT ANONYMISER BASED on IIP !! I DON"t TRUST OTHER ANONYSERS THEY ARE FBI TRAPs !! http://mids.student.utwente.nl/~mids/anonCommFramework/ hifi, this isn't changing IIP, this is moving us forward thanks mids heh word mids, my moz is hanging ok although independant mixnets are cool, the real killer apps will probably be general ip traffic anonymizers wilde, they are myths killer apps? no <-- thetower has quit (EOF From client) wilde> that could be a service built on top of the comm layer general ip traffic anonymizers or ip traffic anonymizers? so far they don't exist they exist in papers only --> thetower (none@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev if you build an anonymizing service on top of the comm layer, however, your outbound routers will get shut down quickly Haha, I just noticed I wasn't port forwarding. Oop, sorry, wrong chan nop: what about the ZKS system? is it still around? and working nope, bad business few people paid but the framework seemed to work, but all nodes were ZKS:s paid relays wilde but they were internal and it wasn't complete it still had certain vulnerabilities it was a start I met Ian Goldberg at CodeCon 2k2, and he himself admitted it was incomplete to what he desired yes, everything has vulnerabilities, we just raise the cost of tracing dramatically right, after the mixnet is up and running, i'd like to see wilde offer generic outbound proxy services. that'd be cool (sincerely) jrand0m: but again the ultimate would be using that magic mirror concept for optimum protection Probably the hardest option, but wouldn't freenet be a good framework to build from? wilde, maybe you and I can discuss this in another forum at some point but in any case, the network must be built first Or is that not what we're discussing? ChZEROHag> no. freenet doesn't provide hard anonymity aah I should try paying attention ok, moving forward UserX you still here nop: yes, if you have decided on topology there is no need to discuss this in public I'm still here well it's application layer, so that comes after net design etc ok where did we leave off at #iip-future meeting <-- hezekiah has quit (Ping timeout) let's start there --- logger is now known as Ehud * nop is catching up on the meeting logs [04:31] I think we're back to your question. can / should the irc functionality move forward as its going or move towards this mixnet. there are significant benefits to move towards the mixnet, but some aspects of the irc side seem to require some redesign to operate on it. [04:31] the right way for the irc development to go is not for me to say Basically, UserX had some thinking to do about wether IIP could run satisfactorily on the mixnet. nite all <-- mids (mids@anon.iip) has left #iip-dev (mids) Would it not be an idea to create a replacement irc in parallel with a mixnet? After all it's going to be damn hard to use a normal ircd ChZEROHag> given infinite # devs, yes ok ChZEROHag silence please :) Assume infinite devs Oh is this not a question bit? --> hezekiah (hezekiah@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev not yet Unfortuantlely I haven't had time to seriously sit down and think about how your proposal would fit in with IIP oh oops just want to get into the discussion well UserX> think of the mixnet as a socket let me suggest something do we agree that our goal is not just IRC ? well it's a great idea sure nop: Beyond all doubts, I agree that the goal is an anonymous network. doing something traffic-intensive would have the potential to ruin the whole project nop: IRC is just a starting point. ok, well what we should look at is this NOT doing something traffic intensive has the potential to get us to overlook problems :) instead of saying IIP doesn't fit or it does fit let's look at what modifications need to be made for irc to fit with this mixnet, whether it's a mod to the mixnet itself jrand0m: hmm for instance UserX has a vision of using channels as endpoints Jrand0m calls them idents are they having subtle differences or are they largely different there's substance to those differences. can we review that on both sides from jrand0m and UserX <-- hezekiah has quit (EOF From client) actually read the log nevermind ;) --> hezekiah (hezekiah@anon.iip) has joined #iip-dev the hesitancy I have w/ sending messages to a channel ident and having that channel redistribute it to members is that the channel gets plaintext how does it get plaintext? instead, I'd suggest having a channel contain just the channel info (modes, users, topic, etc) the channel is just an application running on one (well, 3+) routers listening to one (well, 3+) identities. when you /msg a channel, you send a message to that identity (application). it then resends it out to the N users in the channel, encrypted to each well I had a proposal for that that would have the channel not contain plaintext directly at least, without adding a channel key (which would be managed by the channel application itself, which defeats the point) well we were having channel keys