/g/ - Technology

install openbsd

[Make a Post]
[X]





Lokinet Nanonymous No.8983 [D][U][F][S][L][A][C] >>8991 >>8996 >>9002 >>9013 >>9575 >>9603
File: 7d22dc6fe49cebbe4563b9250129eb13de388cf5bfe9caacee28fbee3cace8ca.png (dl) (402.69 KiB)
Stop using compromised, US funded Tor and start using secure, fast and independent LOKINET today and browse your favorite shitposting sites!
https://lokinet.org/
https://github.com/loki-project/loki-network
8kun
http://pijdty5otm38tdex6kkh51dkbkegf31dqgryryz3s3tys8wdegxo.loki/
http://s5swbfcf4joom9tzf8w7ss5fptywwpnnfop3pxcf5ebjnz8ioksy.loki/

Nanonymous No.8985 [D] >>8989
never heard of this before 8kun used it. how's it compare with Tor? Why would they use it rather than Tor, when Tor worked fine for ages for the Daily Stormer?
some possible reasons:
1. loki gives site owners more tools to deal with spam (not an issue with the Daily Stormer)
2. loki is a little DOS-resistant
3. hotwheels' treachery and DOS direction required a lot more than a band-aid solution, where the usual "just slap a hidden service on it" would still get 8kun taken down, and loki happened to be what Ron was looking into. If you're going to do a lot of original work, go with what you know.
4. the Daily Stormer shit was a surprise to the Tor community, or Jim thinks 8chan is even more hated than the Daily Stormer, so it's reckoned that 8chan relying on it will just trigger some full and open act of treachery by the tor team
5. 8ch had a hidden service forever and it was total garbage forever and there are some actual technical reasons for this that lokinet alleviates

Nanonymous No.8987 [D] >>8990
JEFF PLEASE

Nanonymous No.8988 [D] >>8989
high effort post

Nanonymous No.8989 [D]
>>8985
>>8988

Nanonymous No.8990 [D][U][F]
File: b9b1ffdf7b94540a0abf1fdd45866c63b4d2c43884df611db88a3dfc99b72ffd.jpg (dl) (6.49 KiB)
>>8987
What is wrong with you?

Nanonymous No.8991 [D] >>8999
>>8983
>glowniggers shilling lokinet just as (((8kun))) adopts it
No thanks Mr. Micheal, I'll stick with Tor.

Nanonymous No.8992 [D]
Where's the file sharing?

Nanonymous No.8996 [D]
>>8983
Is Lokinet same to Tor network?

Nanonymous No.8997 [D]
no. https://github.com/loki-project/loki-network/blob/master/docs/high-level.txt
it's an I2P successor.

Nanonymous No.8998 [D]
How to access child pornography with Lokinet?

Nanonymous No.8999 [D] >>9000 >>9001
I think the mistake they do is they only provide Lokinet access. it should have Lokinet and Tor access. And maybe also some clearnet gateway, at least for reading posts

>>8991
if 8chan is CIA then why did CIA cloudflare remove 8chan?

Nanonymous No.9000 [D] >>9006
>>8999
Plausible deniability

Nanonymous No.9001 [D] >>9006
>>8999
We don't need clearnet address. It only makes our and admin's anonymity weak. We only need Tor address.

Nanonymous No.9002 [D] >>9006
>>8983
"If you need help, come talk to us on our Discord!"
How secure can it really be when they communicate with Discord?

Nanonymous No.9006 [D] >>9008 >>9014
>>9000
>Plausible deniability
for what purpose?
if it was CIA honeypot why they destroy it and make it again? it doesn't make sense

>>9001
>We don't need clearnet address. It only makes our and admin's anonymity weak. We only need Tor address.
doesn't make our anonymity weak, because we are not retarded to use clearnet. but other people could visit in with clearnet, then learn that the truth and that they should use anonymity network
doesn't make admin's anonymity weak, because clearnet IP doesn't have to be real server IP, you can just use another server to get clearnet traffic and route it to real server using Tor

>>9002
>How secure can it really be when they communicate with Discord?
not secure at all

Nanonymous No.9008 [D][U][F] >>9010
File: 2490ecc044b77c855a0ef7f5ccc54f5c8370e09f8704ee4bfe59a50e297745eb.gif (dl) (2.51 MiB)
>>9006
Why Cuckflare dropped 8chan/kun is plausible deniability. Destroying it probably had more to do with increased scrutiny on the site. Either way gives plausible deniability though through your exact line of reasoning.
>it's alphabet soup
<why'd they destroy it then only to bring it back? huh? HUH?! #shotsfired

Nanonymous No.9010 [D] >>9012
>>9008
it is plausible deniability because they had no motive to destroy it if it was in their hands

they didn't need to produce plausible deniability for the site, as 8chan already attracted many dangerous individuals and they weren't scared of posting on the site, especially with onion gateway

Nanonymous No.9011 [D] >>9012
also, when they destroyed 8chan, people moved to or created other places, giving even less control to them
some cucks moved to 4chan, but those people were not dangerous

Nanonymous No.9012 [D][U][F] >>9058
File: 147dd2810ce35cdfdf2a8e332a745111a223ab3de63d290cc131cc420b742b79.jpg (dl) (13.42 KiB)
>>9010
>>9011
>it is plausible deniability [...]
Good. I'm glad we agree.

Nanonymous No.9013 [D] >>9015 >>9058
>>8983
>https://lokinet.org/
If I use umatrix to disable scripts the site loads fine, but if I disable js with the javascript.enabled flag or devtools the site only loads the background with some text at the bottom. Anyone know what is happening here?

Nanonymous No.9014 [D] >>9058 >>9604
>>9006
Black markets and phdophilia sites use only .onion addresses. Surface web addresses make it easy to track by the law enforcement.

Nanonymous No.9015 [D]
>>9013
have you tried scrolling down?

Nanonymous No.9016 [D] >>9062
>9011
>some cucks moved to 4chan
The majority of 8chan's users went back to 4chan they actually never left in the first place.

Nanonymous No.9017 [D] >>9024 >>9062 >>9590
This is just a zeronet fork. Nothing original. There is zero reason to use this over tor.

Nanonymous No.9018 [D] >>9019
I don't see a gentoo package for this.
It also doesn't make the user a relay by default, which is stupid.

Nanonymous No.9019 [D]
>>9018
>oesn't make the user a relay by default, which is stupid.
This should make the network faster

Nanonymous No.9024 [D]
Literally
>>9017
this.

Nanonymous No.9031 [D] >>9062
>zeronet fork
isn't zeronet written in python? this is mostly c and c++.

Nanonymous No.9035 [D]
More links:
http://icxqqcpd3sfkjbqifn53h7rmusqa1fyxwqyfrrcgkd37xcikwa7y.loki/ - Wiki + IRC
http://zqkddypocxnu3r53ddy6hkogcdi1xz6kcitjjsh483jom336wo5y.loki/ - some pleroma instance
http://4g8bkc1ar8ubgotj1s8gdhftnrj4nxn7hrp8qkddoqhurbno6b8y.loki/ - endchan

Nanonymous No.9058 [D]
>>9012
I am not sure if we agree. I thought you implied they closed 8chan because they wanted to have proofs that new 8chan is totally not CIA. I think they didn't do it, it doesn't make much sense, people used 8chan, they weren't scared that it is honeypot, they posted dangerous stuff on it

>>9013
I don't know why is it but don't disable javascript globally like that. disabling globally is safer but there are risks like this, different fingerprint from Tor Browser on Safest mode
consider running Tor Browser in special virtual machine if you are concerned about exploits

>>9014
>Black markets and phdophilia sites use only .onion addresses. Surface web addresses make it easy to track by the law enforcement.
there are ways to provide clearnet access while not revealing real server
onion only will cut you from 99.9% people, leaving them only with jewish propaganda. those people need to be reached by us

Nanonymous No.9062 [D] >>9149
>>9016
>The majority of 8chan's users went back to 4chan
but those were cucks that used 8chan with clearnet and didn't post dangerous stuff except "gas kikes" and "fuck niggers". I doubt dangerous people just went to 4chan with their bare IP

>>9017
>This is just a zeronet fork. Nothing original.
not a valid argument. forks can be superior

>>9031
fork doesn't have to be copy paste of code. algorithms, designs, can also be forked

Nanonymous No.9113 [D]
Their use of Discord is highly fucking suspect.
>oh but Discord says they love open source communities
Yeah, in the same way big cats "like" gazelles.
For literally the same effort they could gotten a Matrix whatever room and not look like derps.

Nanonymous No.9149 [D]
>>9062
>not a valid argument. forks can be superior
Actually it is an argument. Claim: no reason to use this over tor. Evidence: it is just a zeronet fork. And just because forks can be superior does not mean that they are (not that "superior to zeronet" means much).

Nanonymous No.9367 [D]
>Lokinet is the reference implementation of LLARP (low latency anonymous routing protocol), a layer 3 onion routing protocol.
why low latency when we already have Tor? we need medium latency protocol, with automatic noise

Nanonymous No.9575 [D] >>9656
>>8983
Can I get cryptocurrency by running a node?

Nanonymous No.9590 [D] >>9591 >>9657
>>9017
>This is just a zeronet fork
No it's not.
Zeronet is html over bittorrent hacked together in Python. It's not anonymous or private and their censorship resistance strategy is "you can't arrest us all".

Loki is created by ex-I2P devs who want to take the best parts from Tor and I2P to create a new anonymity network and is written in C++.

Nanonymous No.9591 [D] >>9596
>>9590
>Loki is created by ex-I2P devs
No, it's not. One of the Loki devs worked on an I2P-router, but he's not an I2P dev.

Nanonymous No.9596 [D] >>9597
>>9591
>Working on I2P has been a really big learning experience for everyone involved.
>After much deliberation I have decided to start making a "next generation" onion
>routing protocol.
I see now, he contributed to that C++ version of I2P which is full of buffer overflows, not the real I2P.
https://github.com/majestrate/i2pd

Nanonymous No.9597 [D]
>>9596
>Lokinet uses onion-routing
It looks like he's learnt nothing from "working on I2P".

Nanonymous No.9603 [D]
>>8983
>Using the Loki coin provides optional upgrades, but the core of Lokinet is free.
fuck the actual fuck off capitalist cocksucker

Nanonymous No.9604 [D]
>>9014
no actually neither do. most of such sites are on clearnet.
even the warez scene is 100% clearnet

Nanonymous No.9656 [D] >>10015
>>9575
You can get cryptocurrency that's similar to Monero by running a Lokinet node.

Nanonymous No.9657 [D]
>>9590
>"you can't arrest us all".
It sounds like Freenet!

Nanonymous No.9681 [D]
kinda but it's not because LN is essentially a proxy as tor and i2p and FN is not

Nanonymous No.9957 [D] >>9959
Can Loki be trusted technically at its current state of development?
Anons?

Should I just stick to I2P and Tor

Nanonymous No.9959 [D] >>10073
>>9957
Stick to I2P and Tor. There is no advantage in Lokinet.

Nanonymous No.9960 [D]
>one man project
>"My proposed solution would be to permit inbound traffic from 'exit nodes' in addition to allowing outbound exit traffic."
And the reasoning behind this security flaw:
>hurrdurr people use tor2web instead of using tor themselves
>"alpha state"
>I can't avoid traffic correlation attacks, so why should I even try?
It's absolute garbage and a shitty meme. Like the name of the protocol implies the whole project is nothing but a (L)LARP.

Nanonymous No.10015 [D]
>>9656
By running LokiNet node, you can earn money.

Nanonymous No.10073 [D]
>>9959
>no advantage in Lokinet
not until enough people use it