An overview of the differences between and the comparative strengths and weaknesses of I2P and Tor : i2p http://www.reddit.com/r/i2p/comments/13kd3t/an_overview_of_the_differences_between_and_the/A reply of mine to this submission on /r/torrents got a little out of hand. I think it would be a good idea to have an overview of the differences between and the comparative strengths and weaknesses of I2P and Tor hidden services. That's what this post is for.
Please add any suggestions, rebuttals or clarifications in the comments. I will then add them to the main text so it can serve as an reference for those comparing I2P and Tor! Input and/or feedback from the Tor community is welcomed. Some bold lines indicate doubt about the truth of a statement. Please provide your knowledge about I2P or Tor so I can fix this.
These are my personal observations and not necessarily the only possible correct set of answers, though I'm sure other experienced I2P users will agree with me on at least some of these points:
Strengths of I2P compared to Tor
I think I2P is by nature of its design more secure than the Tor network. The strengths of I2P over Tor hidden services (that means not using Tor to access regular (clearnet) resources such as https://duckduckgo.com) are:
Heavily decentralized. Tor has a user:relay ratio of 165:1 (excluding non-public bridge relays; see metrics) while I2P has a user:relay ratio of 0.99:1 (a very limited amount of users don't route traffic for others because they are, for example, in a hostile country with a limited number of I2P users). This means that you would need a a lot more resources to have a chance of deanonymizing users by observing network traffic over malicious nodes (meaning a set of relays that are all observed by a hostile entity) for I2P than for Tor.
No central point of failure for building tunnels. Tor has directory servers that form a catalog of (public) Tor relays. A user asks these directory servers for (a copy of the entire list of) Tor relays (or just part of them?) including their properties (such as Exit Node, Guard Node, Fast Node, etc.) If (a number of?) these directory servers are compromised, they could manipulate the information that they are supplying to the users that use those compromised directory servers. The Tor directory servers can also be attacked, making it impossible for users to form tunnels because they lack the required information. I2P uses DHT which allows all I2P relays to inform other I2P relays of relays that they known. There is no central (set of) point(s) that can be attacked to make building of tunnels impossible (except attacking all I2P relays).
Asymmetric tunnels. I'll use an analogy to explain this. This analogy is wrong and inaccurate in some regards because the contents of the traffic that is sent through Tor and through I2P is encrypted and cannot be read. The amount of intermediary countries used also doesn't match. The purpose of the analogy is to make you understand the difference. With Tor, you send a letter from US to Canada through France, Germany and Brazil (in that order). The letter reads "Please send me the combination of our granddad's bank vault now that he has deceased.". The letter that is sent in reply from your friend in Canada (reading "19502118") is sent to your address in the US through Brazil, Germany and France (in that order). With I2P, the first letter (from US to Canada) is sent through France, Germany and Brazil (in the order), but the second letter is sent through Paraguay, Norway and Ukraine (in that order). Suppose the postal services in France, Germany, Brazil and Paraguay are compromised. In that case, those postal services can figure out that 19502118 is the combination for your granddad's bank vault, if you were using Tor to send the both of those letters. If you used I2P, they would not be able to figure out what the combination for the vault is, although they do know that you have requested the combination for the vault. A version of the above scenario that is more true to the nature of Tor and I2P would include letters sent in an unbreakable envelopes (the encrypted data). If that was the case, the compromised postal services would be able to confirm that a letter was sent from a person in the US to a person in Canada in both the case of Tor and I2P, but only in the case of Tor would they be able to also confirm that a letter was sent from that person in Canada to that person in the US. (They would also be able to guess that it was probably a letter in reply to the US -> Canada letter because of the rapid response time).
Short-lived tunnels. Adapting the analogy above, this means that communications between the US resident and the Canadian resident are only shortly passed through Brazil, Germany and France + Paraguay, Norway and Ukraine. Much sooner than is the case with Tor will I2P change the intermediary nodes that the communications are using (to, for example, Peru, Mexico and Australia + Greece, Nicaragua and Russia). This is useful because if a tunnel is compromised, you will only send data using that tunnel for a short amount of time, thus limiting the amount of data that is compromised (though the data is encrypted, so unless the server you are connecting to is also compromised, the adversary cannot inspect the unencrypted data).
Some protection against human errors. Tor simply relays TCP/IP packets while I2P is able to modify or trim those packets for some tunnels (such as the default IRC tunnel) to prevent human errors. Once again, an analogy is useful, though not accurate. Suppose you want to anonymously leak a document to a newspaper. You decide to use the (analog) Tor network to prevent your identity from being compromised. You send the letter through Bolivia, Colombia and Japan and then finally to the US HQ of a newspaper. Unfortunately though, you have forgotten to remove some identifying remarks from your letter (your data). Let's for the sake of clarity say that you have left fingerprints on your letter (a digital equivalent would be HTTP headers that indicate the local server time). You can then be deanonymized even though the delivery of the letter was securely anonymous.
BitTorrent functionality. Unlike Tor, I2P has been designed with BitTorrent support in mind (can someone verify this?). Tor isn't supportive of the Tor network being used for clearnet BitTorrent activity and, unlike I2P, it doesn't have its own internal BitTorrent functionality.
Weaknesses of I2P compared to Tor
Technical
No family flag for relays. This means that if one entity controls a bunch of relays, he can add this information to his relays so that the anonymization software will never choose more than 1 relay from the same family to build a tunnel. I'm not sure if I2P is actually missing this feature!
Non-technical / social
Lower amount of users (though more relays).
No extensive documentation and noob-friendly start-up tutorials (though there has been some progress as of late).
No extensive academic peer reviewing.
No noob-friendly user interface.
No noob-proof out-of-the-box solutions like the Tor Browser Bundle.
No (charismatic) public representative like Jacob Appelbaum is for the Tor Project.http://www.reddit.com/r/i2p/comments/13kd3t/an_overview_of_the_differences_between_and_the/
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still not sure if we can go public on btct due to legal reason. Although unlike Giga everyone who put a claim in will be paid and profit. If I am forced to do a buyback of any shares then I will pay a minimum of BTC0.60 per share. So everyone who claimed will receive dividends until they have been paid BTC0.60 per share (eventually). So everyone who invested doubles up on their investment. Then after everyone has had their shares are bought the equivalent amount coin worth everyone else who invested dividend would have been apart from my investment will be paid to charity from then on. These charity payments will be made public. Although it could take a while to rise the funds for a complete buyback. That course of action of the buyback is only one course of action for the future of many that I am considering.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree he should offer to buy them back. Just plain old stealing them shows how much of a scam it is.
|
|
|
|
If you were in his position (well known, large amounts of money) and everyone had some 3 letter agency (IRS, FBI, and SEC) after them would you cover all of your bases in a similar manner? Bitcoinland isn't the same as it used to be, this isn't free for all anonymous fest anymore.
So I vote No.
But I also say that's really shitty maaaannnnn.
I'm sure he could have set up a third party to proxy all the shareholders who couldn't submit that info if he wanted to but the greed of keeping more of his asset for free which was paid for by investors kicked in. The third party could even list all those shares on - https://btct.co |
|
|
|
All unclaimed shares will come under my ownership but all dividends from them will be paid into the expansion fund of buying more ASIC's. As well as the 50% of profits to be paid in to the growth fund of buying more ASIC's to increase profits along with dividends. Along with me stating that I wish to eventually turn 90% of profits into the growth fund to increase profits along with dividends. We need an aggressive organic strategy if we are to continue operating in the mid to long term. We may move to - https://btct.co - so everyone who has put a claim in should receive their shares in the form of an account on that exchange. All dividens from unclaimed shares will be paid into the growth fund to buy more ASIC's to increase profits and dividends. So far 50% of profits are going to be paid into the growth fund. Depending on how fast we grow I will be pushing for the growth fund to be increased up to 90% of profits. I hope you will all support me increasing the growth fund. As I see the rapid growth in dividends payments a lot more important than a larger but slowly dwindling dividend payment. |
|
|
|
Looking at the price per GH/s in ASIC farming, it is lower than the price per GH/s when buying ASIC's directly from BFL.. How come? does he get a discount or something? Or are the figures wrong?
Here we don't use ANYTHING related to BFL. And we don't sell ASICs to end users. So we don't need to care about making a user-friendly software/interface/enclosure/whatever, we don't need to provide user support, and so on. This keeps our costs lower, at the benefit of everyone. Have you thought about adding alt-coins to your payments? It would probably attract additional investment if people new they were going to receive more than just bitcoins if they wish. Maybe you could also offer a way to invest into Pyramining with alt-coins such as namecoins and devcoins? Are you an investor on Pyramining? Do you suspect everyone to be like you?I still remember you opening a thread offering a bounty for a logo and never paying up...  Pyraming has kept his promisses until know. No one else is asking for more besides you. You have 2 choices: You invest or you don't. What do you gain from post like that? Now really your just a trolling and I must have way too much time on my hands to even bothering replying. Trying to tarnish my reputation by trying to boost your own. Sad don't you have any hobbies or anything else to let your steam out. That post was a waste of time but only to rattle my cage a bit and the fact I bothered replying probably gives you some form of satisfaction |
|
|
|
|
So everyone who made a claim at the GLBSE will receive their shares and everyone who didn't well their shares will be returned the company until claimed. Or will every shareholder from the GLBSE have an account created and shares allocated?
|
|
|
|
Looking at the price per GH/s in ASIC farming, it is lower than the price per GH/s when buying ASIC's directly from BFL.. How come? does he get a discount or something? Or are the figures wrong?
Here we don't use ANYTHING related to BFL. And we don't sell ASICs to end users. So we don't need to care about making a user-friendly software/interface/enclosure/whatever, we don't need to provide user support, and so on. This keeps our costs lower, at the benefit of everyone. Have you thought about adding alt-coins to your payments? It would probably attract additional investment if people new they were going to receive more than just bitcoins if they wish. Maybe you could also offer a way to invest into Pyramining with alt-coins such as namecoins and devcoins? |
|
|
|
|
The NAV/U has now reached 0.9159031871 and there is 5104 shares at 1.00LTC left from the IPO of 10,000. After the initial IPO is over we may look at another issue of up to 5000 shares at a dearer price than the inital 1.00LTC issue offer. If the conditions are right.
|
|
|
|
Learning from past mistakes, I advice to research how much control the asset issuer has over the shareholder information. As with GLBSE, any exchange can vanish over nite, taking all the data with it. ADDENDUM: Also, I advice larger shareholders to still take advantage of the "direct" shares lock-in option offered by friedcat, once the claims are processable. & LTC-GLOBAL security issuers have full access to shareholder information(email address & # of shares held) updated every transaction. This information is also periodically emailed to the asset issuers email address of record. Safeguards against a GLBSE like calamity have been built into both exchanges from the start. Disclosure: I am a LTC-GLOBAL shareholder and asset issuer. Yeah I'd like the few shares I own on that exchange too. I use both Cryptostocks.com and litecoinglobal.com (the same software as the quoted exchange) and litecoinglobal.com is much more easy to use and with more features too. |
|
|
|
I guess some (all?) of us would appreciate a new ETA, even in the range of months. That would be better than standing in the dark.
+1 |
|
|
|
If you plan on continuing operations with a new exchange, I would highly recommend https://btct.co/ burnside has spent a lot of time on the Litecoin version of his exchange (where I manage an asset), and has now just released the BTC side. Burnside got a lawyer, and registered it in Belize. As a standard feature, you will be emailed all shareholder information on a routine basis--just in case. And, it's not slow! +10 +1 |
|
|
|
I wonder why Nef pulled that feature.
He wouldn't even have needed to code up anything new if he'd just left that in. =/
It is very likely that Nefario is trying to modify the share number balance and steal some shares and funds from the users. Or he had already decided not to return the asset info and money at the very beginning. I've met Nefario and he came across as being very honest and trustworthy. Not at any time did I think this guy was dodgy or even grey-area. I have nothing to gain and everything to loose for commenting on his character as such. |
|
|
|
|
I may be interested for my mining stock RSM. We were on the GLBSE since v1.0 and I also have a fund on litecoinglobal.com but I haven't had my asset holders list yet. Will you also be emailing asset issuers the full shareholders list like litecoinglobal.com do every twelve hours in case your exchange ever goes dark?
|
|
|
|
Sorry if I missed something... perhaps someone here can me explain the following:
Except for November-ASIC deposit special ...
where is the advantage in ASIC deposits after November OR if you deposit less than 10BTC
- IF all "Pyraminer" benefit from ASICs - as soon as they are setup at pyramining
I mean the following:
If I deposit not for ASICs - my "investment" starts immediately - and as soon as ASICs arrive at pyramining - I benefit, too.
If I deposit for ASICs (after November or less than 10btc) - I have to wait untill ASICs arrive (am I right?) at pyramining and the "investment" starts only then.
What did I miss?
Only want to know if it makes sense adding some BTC after november for ASICs
Regards
I think the late November date was picked as ASIC's were due to be shipping by then? |
|
|
|
Triple B is nearest thing to a mining company. Unfortunately the asset issuer doesn't seem to know difference between a bond and a share - so it's kind of somewhere in between.
Personally, as an investor I would have very little interest in mining companies. Mining profit is fairly marginal (as more capacity gets added any time there's significant to profits to be made until the profit margin drops to being minimal). After whoever runs the company takes their management cut, investors are lucky to get out breaking even (becasue the manager ALWAYS takes their cut out of revenue rather than out of profit). Because of that, capacity will get added even if it becomes unprofitable - as the manager of a mining company can always make profit so long as they can find people who can't do math to invest.
Indeed. Its a marked difference to glbse which was almost entirely mining. Its probably why there hasnt been a massive crash in stock value as well.... There was a big crash during the GLBSE drama. With asset issuers now being given shareholders lists this should help moot that. On www.litecoinglobal.com as should be on https://btct.co asset issuers are emailed a full and up to date shareholders list every twelve hours. So if the website does every go dark a lot of the problems that the GLBSE caused should be non-existant. |
|
|
|
|
AJM has a growth plan in place.
|
|
|
|
All unclaimed shares will come under my ownership but all dividends from them will be paid into the expansion fund of buying more ASIC's. As well as the 50% of profits to be paid in to the growth fund of buying more ASIC's to increase profits along with dividends. Along with me stating that I wish to eventually turn 90% of profits into the growth fund to increase profits along with dividends. We need an aggressive organic strategy if we are to continue operating in the mid to long term. |
|
|
|
|
I've not received a payment from Anon Ads since October 24th - 143Jgi4ycmHG3AUNEFTaWWTWXtAdMKNTpu - Has traffic just died off?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
