Try not to flood the world with attempts at things, be VERY certain it WILL actually be safer than anything else.

And those nagging about it being prone to kiddy porn and such, get a clue: THEN DON’T DOWNLOAD IT. You’re barking up the wrong tree and scared of the wrong groups of people. The ones that want to hide their identity in order to exchange forbidden data will NEVER be discouraged or encouraged by any new peering technology like this.[/quote]

Hell, judging by the ease with which the mafIAA has penetrated the bitTorrent network [we may as well be transparent:], and yet the continued presence of pedo rings online [with their heavy funding from organized crime], I would think they use a radically different p2p approach than bitTorrent, or they would be caught by now!

almost makes ya wish there were big funding behind greyhat issues too….

Trackers can use encrypted disks.

Tracking tables already are memtables.[/quote]

Correct; centralizing power is always a bad idea; but the only way to efficiently have decentralized power is to have global communications and inter-personal/entity/community relations. This only happens with communications, with communications that are “centralized” in the sense that they are global, and all individuals and communities can access the communications network.

So yes, centralizing power is bad (ie, cenralizing all tracking lists onto one site); but globalizing tracker communications (ie, giving each shared file a list of failsafe trackers)? That’s just smart.

Are you kidding? If this actually comes out, it’ll be the biggest thing since header/protocol obfuscation debuted 2-3 years ago!

Of course, I haven’t even BEGAN to touch on the problems of sending the public/private key along with encryption data, Which, Might I add, Doesn’t even make sense.

The majority of the problems seen in America is due to the rampant business nature of the economy. Music exec’s have to be seen to do something about the p2p problem or else they’ll be fired for incompetency, up steps the lawyers “hey guys! we’ll take the problem away for you! no win, no fee!” and here we arive.

To answer a few of the questions from the comments:

* All sites in each “federation” or whatever you want to call it, have to trust each other. This is left up to the torrent admins who want to try running a script like this. If they believe that they can trust one another, then they add each other (including the passkeys, domain names, etc) to the list of trusted sites in the network. If you trust someone who happens to work for the MPAA, well, you must not know your friend / fello admin that well, and I don’t know of a way to get around this threat, really.

* There can be multiple (any X number) of federations. i.e. as from the example, you can have “bacon.org, eggs.com, ham.net, etc” in one federation, sharing torrent / user data. Then another group of admins, with completely separate torrents and data, can get together, and perhaps have a different focus on their content (music, instead of video, for example). This separate network would operate on their own domain names, e.g. fido.net, shaggy.com, lassie.org, whatever.

* It *is* indeed true that if every single one of the sites gets raided at the same time, the entire network will crumble. It’s easy to make backups, but if the network has lost control of all domain names, then the .torrent files people have downloaded will simply no longer work. Having servers in Sweden, China, South America, etc (one “head” of the Hydra in each) may well be a good idea for the truly paranoid.

If you want to hack on code (RoR, PHP or python), drop me a line at: shantibraford (at) gmail.com