[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/netplus/ - Networks and Plus

Catalog

8chan Bitcoin address: 1NpQaXqmCBji6gfX8UgaQEmEstvVY7U32C
The next generation of Infinity is here (discussion) (contribute)

You may buy ads now for any board, betakey is removed. Please contact ads@8ch.net for information or help with this service.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


File: 1439628076317.png (2.25 KB, 160x107, 160:107, freenet.png)

 No.329

found this cool program says it's different than tor… just wanted to know if it's "more secure" it's also open source (java)

Link to project https://freenetproject.org/

 No.335

>>329

>open source (java)

Heh, not really.

The open source JVM isn't the same as the closed one, it's also shit in comparison, and for some reason, the paid one has 3000% superior performances. And even then, if you wanted to make your own JVM, you'd have to certificate it to have called it that, using a test tool that isn't open source.

I seriously like all those cool languages like C# too, but for now I'd rather stick to C/C++ if I want something truly open source.


 No.360

File: 1441376753127.png (52.37 KB, 740x600, 37:30, Freenet_Request_Sequence.png)

>>329

If you want to access content anonymously:

If you are using Freenet in opennet mode, it is as secure as Tor. If you are using Freenet in darknet mode with trusted friends/peers, it is superior to Tor.

If you want to publish content (website, files):

Freenet is probably more secure, because you dont need to operate your own server. Just upload data and you can shutdown your computer. No entity will be able to hack your content or take it down.

>>335

I don't have any problems with "OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM"


 No.368

>>335

> The open source JVM isn't the same as the closed one, it's also shit in comparison, and for some reason, the paid one has 3000% superior performances. And even then, if you wanted to make your own JVM, you'd have to certificate it to have called it that, using a test tool that isn't open source.

> This is how clueless Java haters are.

I only wonder about one thing. If you are so stupid, how easy would it be to trick you into defeating all layers of security a great many people worked on by your own hands?


 No.372

>>335

lol, openjdk is completely fine. 3000% is a number straight out of your ass. C++ is fine, but java is, too. C# is shit.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]