[Freedombox-discuss] Freely Available Access?

Nick M. Daly nick.m.daly at gmail.com
Fri Apr 20 03:41:41 UTC 2012

Hi folks, this is something that started on the FNF mailing list that
fits better here, and I'd appreciate some ideas on it, because I think
this is something the FBX needs.

The background doesn't matter much.  We need to consider part two:
making FBX sites and data available to consumers who aren't within the
FBX system.

Charles Wyble wrote:
> > imw wrote:
> > > There's still the problem of making content available to people outside
> > > the free network.
> Nick Daly wrote:
> > Yes, there is.  That still needs to be resolved and is the next step in
> > what I want to cover with the FBF.  James and I discussed related
> > concerns very slightly during the FBX-hackfest (during a few random
> > minutes of downtime on the second or third day), and it involved munging
> > PGP certificates into SSL containers.  I'd like to hear some input as to
> > how much that can solve the external-availability problem.  It makes
> > external-identity much more reliable, but I don't know whether that
> > solves availability as well.  This needs a smart hack, along the lines
> > of enabling OpenNIC by default.  I don't think it's fair to say that the
> > FBF isn't focused on availability, because having boxes hosted for
> > communities by local hackers would be meaningless if they weren't
> > generally available.
> Hmmmm. Indeed. So this would be a DNS hack? Can you spin up a dedicated
> thread on this? On the FBX list would be great, as it's a tad out of scope
> for FNF network development in my opinion.

These "external consumers" could be one of two groups, each which needs
a different solution:

1. End users receiving a FBX for use, not so much for hacking.

2. Folks who have no access to a FBX.

I don't think we need to solve the availability issue for both or either
of the groups right now, but it is another problem that needs solving
that the FBX is well-poised to solve.

I think the first group is easy to fix things for: we can, by default,
add access to whatever naming systems we desire.  OpenNIC,
Santiago/Neruda, Tor, you know, whatever systems we find it useful to

The second group is more difficult to reach, because, well, we can't
control the system.  They're external and, because we don't control the
system, any solutions must work within the existing system.  This means
web-availability (Tor2Web) or (following the lead of the SecuShare
project) an Android/iPhone app.

What other solutions exist or can exist for the second group?  What
other complications exist for the first group?  How do we best get this
stuff off the ground in the first place?  When is it necessary that we
start solving these problems, instead of just designing for them?

Also, aside from direct replies or requests, I'll probably fall off the
list for the next two weeks, I have an upgrading day-job customer that's
consuming all my time.  I had hoped to push the final Santiago commits
out before this weekend, but couldn't finish it in time, my apologies.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20120419/edf75f3e/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list