P2Psign, Verisign for P2P

[thewhitrbbit]

Why not create a network were everyone who enters has to have a certificate, similar to the way certificates ensure that SSL sites are truly secure and who they say they are.

THis is a mix between a dark net and a light net because anyone can request a certificate, but only those with certificates can join.

to ensure downloading security, the clients would exchange certificates before downloading/uploaing.

[Sephiroth]

Any how would one certify the security certifitcates in a non centralized way? Thats why it hasnt been done yet even though there have already been a few ideals proposed.

[eivioolla]

I don't really see the point in client certificates for P2P? Perhaps I'm missing something.

[Malicious Intent]

I'm glad you asked that question Eivioolla. I didn't want to ask in case I looked stupid lol.

[d-koolest]

I'd never verify my identity on a p2p service. That's like RIAA suicide.

[Nothingface5384]

why not just use a community p2p..u can basicly do the same thing..u got have dc++ XS, ed2k server if thets able to be password only..and theirs always WASTE...most similar to the idea u mentioned

[eivioolla]

Unfortunately basing the system on trust about people will always drive it underground, into small elitistic groups (and even then there's a chance someone rats out on the group). I think it's the wrong direction, imHo we need a way to keep the masses in P2P, it's more power to us that way.

[Sephiroth]

why not just use a community p2p..u can basicly do the same thing..u got have dc++ XS, ed2k server if thets able to be password only..and theirs always WASTE...most similar to the idea u mentioned

Those never work. Not only would some people vote on others for stupid non technical reasons giving bad votes because they didnt download as fast or they got cut off for whatever reason which arent important, but just getting enough people to partcipate would be extreemely hard to do.

password only and invite only places suck and isnt was P2P is about.

The idea is to protect the data on the networks to stop spammers and fake files and etc.

[Nothingface5384]

Those never work. Not only would some people vote on others for stupid non technical reasons giving bad votes because they didnt download as fast or they got cut off for whatever reason which arent important, but just getting enough people to partcipate would be extreemely hard to do.

password only and invite only places suck and isnt was P2P is about.

The idea is to protect the data on the networks to stop spammers and fake files and etc.

yea i know thats not what p2p is about..but its the best thing your got if your looking for a safer way, or a more community orianted system...but what doesnt voting have to do with anything..non of those apps..last i xchecked had a voting system for anything....but yuea i 2nd keeps p2p to the masses,we need some new technolgy that'll keep p2p open and main stream

[Sephiroth]

Content rating systems, whatever you want to name it, its still the same thing. Kazaa has it, i think a few others have clones it as well.

They dont work, they cause more problems and dont fix anything and its because of that they are not the best
possible solution because they dont work.

Just because its new, doesnt mean its better all the time. And since current protocols can be adapted doesnt mean that p2p protocols have to be scrapped every 6 months because of some flavor of the month protocol tries to reinvent the wheel.

These invite only places is the equilivent to Ratio FTP's and shouldnt be considered P2P because they arent..