[tahoe-dev] Tahoe-LAFS is widely misunderstood (was: odd comment about #shares and confidentiality)

Kevin Reid kpreid at switchb.org
Mon Jan 31 14:20:25 UTC 2011


On Jan 31, 2011, at 2:35, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:

> 2. This post to the p2p-hackers mailing list a couple of days ago in
> which the author, Michael Militzer, says he wants a distributed
> storage system which is resistant to adversarial behavior, and then
> seems to say that Tahoe-LAFS is designed to trust the nodes. I don't
> understand why he says that. Perhaps he is thinking of some sorts of
> advanced attacks and defenses that we don't address. Or maybe he just
> completely misunderstood the Tahoe-LAFS design principles. :-)
> http://lists.zooko.com/pipermail/p2p-hackers/2011-January/002805.html

Why hasn't someone posted to that list inquiring? (I don't follow it  
myself, so I excuse myself from being someone.)

> 4. The misunderstanding that Tahoe-LAFS puts secrets into filenames
> which (if I understand correctly) James Donald was under when he
> posted http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2011-January/005966.html

This reads to me as non-agreement about "what is a filename" not "what  
does Tahoe-LAFS do with filenames-in-sense-a".

-- 
Kevin Reid                                  <http://switchb.org/kpreid/>




More information about the tahoe-dev mailing list