Talk:Darknet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Though, its also use as another term for honeynets, see: http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/04/06/07/2123245.shtml?tid=126&tid=172&tid=95

This looks like of copy of this page:
http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf Terrible Tim 22:29, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure the author knows what this sentence means: "Their work with darknets is modeled after a Small world network, such that the interconnected darknets are essentially scale-free" Scale-free-ness is almost completely irrelevant here. (AC)

Shouldn't get Waste mentioned as well? And there's a recently published book titled 'Darknet', quite recommendable!

Someone more knowledgeable, please fix this: Paul England links to a NASCAR driver, not the Paul England intended here. -Prometheus

Pirate Party's darknet should be mentioned, too. Still, I'll leave the job for someone more savvy in these matters. Possible references: [1] [2] --Oop 10:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Added a vague mention of Relakks (Pirate Party Darknet), link with Pirate Party, and a couple of reports on it (BBC and /.) - That OK by all? JebJoya 14:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

IMHO Relakks does not offer a Darknet service. They themselves have removed the "World's first commercial darknet service"-slogan. A darknet implies a small world network (according to the original paper by the people at Microsoft, IIRC), and I fail to see how Relakks accomplishes this. I suggest that the references to Relakks be removed, and a note about the misconception should be added.

Is AllPeers a darknet? Although the AllPeers article describes it as using "a darknet style of communication", it also says that all clients connect to a central public server... isn't it really just an online social network? Michael Rogers 09:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] contradict

either the communication is obvious or secure. both is impossible.-- ExpImptalkcon 11:58, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's how I viewed it: the frequency-jumping transmissions are obviously noticeable, but the content of the transmissions are still unreadable and secure. An analogy would be, say, an American Football quarterback alerting his teammates to a new play ("Blue! Forty-two!"). It's obvious to the opposing team that the audible has a secret meaning yet is still secure in that the opposing team has no idea what that meaning might be. You're still right, though. It's a poor way of stating things. Mang 08:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Somebody removed the part:
The video game Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory mentioned a concept for a wireless Darknet that used non-standard frequencies, possibly illegal unlicensed ones, to make it very difficult for any signal to be intercepted. With sophisticated hardware and use of spread-spectrum random frequency hopping over a large frequency band of, say, 900MHz to 10 or even 50GHz, this could be a very effective method of security, and indeed is similar to the random frequency hopping that is used by military radios to make signal interception very difficult. Note that this, in and of itself, is pure fiction as this method would only serve to make presence of the communication very obvious.
I'm not so sure if it is non-notable, but as it is removed i also took out the CONTRADICT-template..-- ExpImptalkcon 12:40, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Serious Copy Issues

This "article" is a total mess. It is rambling, unstructured and explains little. 100% Typical Wikiality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.226.85 (talk) 15:59, 25 December 2007 (UTC)