GNU/consensus/berlin-2013

From LibrePlanet
< GNU‎ | consensus
Revision as of 18:02, 25 July 2013 by Hellekin (talk | contribs) (DRAFT for thread review of Socialnet_3.0)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Socialnet_3.0

Preparing Berlin's workshop, August 24-25 2013.

Klaus' Proposal (KS)

1) End-to-end encryption

End-to-end encryption whenever I share information with friends - that will be realised by secushare.org

2) Self determined storage

Self determined storage of my data in a platform independent way - that will be realised by unhosted.org (and it is already built into Diaspora as a possibility afaik).

3) A migration strategy

A migration strategy, which makes the transfer to socialnet_3.0 painless. This was the most difficult requirement to understand. But the solution is not complicated: Socialnet_3.0 will be a "social browser" that keeps my old contacts going in the world of faceboogle via plugins.


Elijah's Proposal (ES)

1) Client side encryption

Covers KS#1. Consensus.

2) Social graph obfuscation

Consensus.

3) Self determined data storage

Covers KS#2. Consensus. See OwnCloud, GNUnet, RetroShare.

4) Scalability

Need details

5) Integration of old friends on legacy networks

(which would compromise 1 and 2 for those, of course). Covers KS#3. NO Consensus.

  • Option #1: keep bridges with legacy infrastructure
  • Option #2: abandon legacy infrastructure

In any case, a migration strategy is needed in the meantime.

6) High availability

you should be able to access your data when you want it.

Need details.

7) Device portability

you should be able to access your data from multiple devices at the same time

Need details.

8) Client choice

you should be able to use a mobile, desktop, or html5 app client (once webcrypto is deployed in browsers).

Need details.

9) Multiple identity

you should be able to maintain multiple identities, and choose to link them or not.

Need details.

10) Protocol agnostic

you should be able to cross-communicate with different protocols, be they XMPP, HTTP, or p2p based.

Need details.

11) Secure groups

groups with membership determined cryptographically. Groups function as a virtual user, with all users in the group able to receive and send as the group, because they share a private group-key.

Need details.