Hacker News Reader

I skimmed your paper, but I'm curious, based on your research into this area what an alternative would be to create private networks for citizens without laying out cable everywhere (which theoretically could also be tapped).

View on HN

As opposed to wireless which doesn't have to be tapped (i.e. can just be listened in on with antennas)?

That's orthogonal. Private networks can be made up from any technology, privacy is another axis.

My point is that if you are opposed to cables because they can be tapped, wireless poses more problems....

I saw the 'also' in the ggp as referring to both wireless and cable networks. So he's aware of that.

Yes, but P2P mesh networks that are built for security have an advantage. They're encrypted end to end, for every node, and there's no one to implement a backdoor for the government, like in the case of ISP's. The ISP's right now are giving the government access all the data, unencrypted.

It's going to be a lot harder to "tap" a secure mesh network that's encrypted at every node. I would look more into this one:

http://hyperboria.net/

This is true. And if the FCC were to give up spectrum for use in mesh networks, they could always require that no encryption be used. They mandate this with amateur radio. A HAM's license could be revoked if he was caught sending encrypted transmissions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com