From 4887823361dec425e68eb72d9b9466ab1bf3acf6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ugha Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 00:04:48 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Cleanup, W3C XHTML 1.1 compatibility: * Lowercase tags (ul and h2) * Fixed 'img' tags - added alt attribute, added terminator ('/>') * Removed the Wiki link brackets around [attack] (ugha) --- pages/how_networkcomparisons.html | 48 +++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) diff --git a/pages/how_networkcomparisons.html b/pages/how_networkcomparisons.html index 7a64e972..d6b07ca8 100644 --- a/pages/how_networkcomparisons.html +++ b/pages/how_networkcomparisons.html @@ -1,26 +1,23 @@ -

-There are a great many other applications and projects working on anonymous +

There are a great many other applications and projects working on anonymous communication and I2P has been inspired by much of their efforts. This is not a comprehensive list of anonymity resources - both freehaven's Anonymity Bibliography -and GNUnet's related projects serve -that purpose well. That said, a few systems stand out for further comparison:

- - - -

Morphmix and Tarzan

+and GNUnet's related projects +serve that purpose well. That said, a few systems stand out for further +comparison:

+ +

Morphmix and Tarzan

[Morphmix] [Tarzan] -

-Morphmix and Tarzan are both fully distributed, peer to peer networks of +

Morphmix and Tarzan are both fully distributed, peer to peer networks of anonymizing proxies, allowing people to tunnel out through the low latency mix network. Morphmix includes some very interesting collusion detection algorithms and Sybil defenses, while Tarzan makes use of the scarcity of IP @@ -29,14 +26,12 @@ these systems and I2P are related to I2P's threat mode and their out-proxy design (as opposed to providing both sender and receiver anonymity). There is source code available to both systems, but we are not aware of their use outside of academic environments.

-

-Stealing quite directly from the Tarzan paper, the following includes a quick +

Stealing quite directly from the Tarzan paper, the following includes a quick comparison of Tarzan, Crowds, Onion Routing (OR), and I2P:

- - -

TOR / Onion Routing

+Anonymous networks comparsion +

TOR / Onion Routing

[TOR] [Onion Routing]

@@ -73,8 +68,7 @@ database and peer selection.

  • TOR is written in C while I2P is written in Java
    • -

    Mixminion / Mixmaster

    - +

    Mixminion / Mixmaster

    [Mixminion] [Mixmaster] @@ -85,8 +79,7 @@ model as we reach I2P 3.0 along side the needs of low latency users, providing a significantly larger anonymity set. As with TOR and Onion Routing above, both Mixminion and Mixmaster take the directory based approach as well.

    -

    Freenet

    - +

    Freenet

    [Freenet]

    Freenet is a fully distributed, peer to peer anonymous publishing network. @@ -99,8 +92,7 @@ attacks. In addition, there seem to be some performance issues that can arguabl be attributed to the global blackboard model which will likely rule out interactive low latency communication.

    -

    JAP

    - +

    JAP

    [JAP]

    @@ -113,7 +105,7 @@ are not satisfied with an Anonymizer-like service, JAP is worth reviewing. One caution to note is that anyone under the jurisdiction of the German courts may want to take care, as the German Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigation (FBCI) has has successfully mounted an -[attack] +attack on the network. Even though the method of this attack was later found to be illegal in the German courts, the fact that the data was successfully collected is the concern. Courts change their minds based upon circumstance, and this is evidence that