[Strint-attendees] Do we need a breakthrough in key management first?

Johan Pouwelse <peer2peer@gmail.com> Sun, 23 February 2014 19:11 UTC

Return-Path: <peer2peer@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: strint-attendees@lists.i1b.org
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (mail-wi0-f182.google.com [209.85.212.182]) by diego.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC8F48F1E for <strint-attendees@lists.i1b.org>; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:11:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id f8so2333065wiw.15 for <strint-attendees@lists.i1b.org>; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:11:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=6i4uRBCmDBVtzvfoMOyKx8yAgIJLGWySct5gwWHssEM=; b=AYO7TByYcZz3VLoNyizahCLnn328CGeqr3S1zqEXPTs/TsL7MIFiM6nwgHgIK+1T9F P4Qim3PfkM4ElurhUeig2NFtSHzIODPV9GOXB/u3MIDfHJJOqqHQv3IXjniZiFCXOJYu ++JZN0DqtK9koj+Tw8uWpvSL8i9HTSMFGgM2641aiQr0gXmZCxr41gW7KDn3EYqB4Q/8 8RLCNwglVeCbB6tYR2yfE4Xk8swMkdGF5QPXa33+pfQv3aHPvMiC3RmlgNrLloewIyme xgbTQjpKhJdbrk5ZoaCBiUS9yPKeCasL4BnRoWMCwp+D5vhriS7DYs46rTde5RJH9IHB HqzA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.85.75 with SMTP id f11mr15652016wjz.47.1393182704233; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:11:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.191.14 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Feb 2014 11:11:44 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 20:11:44 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJYQ-fS6Lh1B_1eOY9q5RGY4KETb9P_=1Jre81Czm_F3iW15-A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Johan Pouwelse <peer2peer@gmail.com>
To: strint-attendees@lists.i1b.org, "Carlo v. Loesch" <lynX@we.were.webeteer.pages.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: [Strint-attendees] Do we need a breakthrough in key management first?
X-BeenThere: strint-attendees@lists.i1b.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: STRINT Workshop Discussion List <strint-attendees-i1b.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.i1b.org/options.cgi/strint-attendees-i1b.org>, <mailto:strint-attendees-request@lists.i1b.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.i1b.org/pipermail/strint-attendees-i1b.org>
List-Post: <mailto:strint-attendees@lists.i1b.org>
List-Help: <mailto:strint-attendees-request@lists.i1b.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.i1b.org/listinfo.cgi/strint-attendees-i1b.org>, <mailto:strint-attendees-request@lists.i1b.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:11:46 -0000

On 17 February 2014 11:31, Carlo v. Loesch
<lynX@we.were.webeteer.pages.de> wrote:
> And there are some papers, that propose fundamental
> rethinking of the way we run the Internet. Some are
> just rough ideas (26, 38) while others appear to have
[snip]
> 65: The Internet is Broken: Building a GNU Network
>
> Alas, I am biased. This is the paper I contributed to.
> For several years we have been working on design and
> implementation of an alternative Internet. Although it
> currently runs as an overlay network, it has developed
> protocols to replace DNS, X.509, BGP and various other
> insecure technologies. DHT-based cryptographic routing
> has matured in over a decade and grown well out of its
> infancy (just watch Tor). Why stick to horse carriages
> if there is a car waiting outside?

Key management seems to me the key problem that needs
a breakthrough and re-thinking.

How far can we travel without crossing that bridge?

But what does a solution look like. DHT-based overlays?
As an academic I think that the most promising direction
is a fully distributed key directory and reputation system.
Taking the idea of the "the people's CA" even further.
Everybody issues certificates in public and private.
End-users themselves store all data (so no DHT needed)
and successful user-to-user interactions feed into it.

We have Internet-deployed code within this direction.
It combines parts of the Tor specs with reputations
and removal of all central components/servers.
The aim is called the "Shadow Internet", see fresh I-D:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pouwelse-perpass-shadow-internet/

For the past decade my university research team has worked
on this. We obtained 1.4 million installs, mainly due to the
Bittorrent-backwards compability. We now have implemented
the Tor tunnel specification.

Technical documentation: https://github.com/Tribler/tribler/wiki

Looking forward to discussion "alternative Internet" matters
with you at STRINT. (my whitepaper was too late, sorry,
became the above 19-page IETF draft)

Greetings, johan.