The truth is majority of people dont care about security. And while you can watch other compters with your botnet too, do not expect anything interesting there.
Yes, most people don't care. And thats bad for the few who do care since the spotlight will be on them instead. 
Topic: Internet was badly designed from security perspective (Read 739 times)
Originally, the internet was a new thing, and I don't think the security we have today was a priority at the time.
The truth is majority of people dont care about security. And while you can watch other compters with your botnet too, do not expect anything interesting there.
agree most of peoples don't care about security and just because of this lost many things
sometimes I also believe the internet was designed that way, to be "insecure", it's a military invention after all.
but then again I guess we can't take such things for granted. Communication technologies for the masses before were never anonymous at all. You always had to register your phone in one way or another, and communication was unencrypted of course, and you had to take the authorities' word that they follow the law and don't monitor everything without a reason and strong suspicion.
Same with former data services like BTX, it was just self-evident that all communication data would be available for authorities on request. But in this new internet-www-thing it was at least new and (at least here in Germany) very unusual and anarchic that the providers of content (website owners etc) or e-mail would not really and necessarily know who you are.
but then again I guess we can't take such things for granted. Communication technologies for the masses before were never anonymous at all. You always had to register your phone in one way or another, and communication was unencrypted of course, and you had to take the authorities' word that they follow the law and don't monitor everything without a reason and strong suspicion.
Same with former data services like BTX, it was just self-evident that all communication data would be available for authorities on request. But in this new internet-www-thing it was at least new and (at least here in Germany) very unusual and anarchic that the providers of content (website owners etc) or e-mail would not really and necessarily know who you are.
The truth is majority of people dont care about security. And while you can watch other compters with your botnet too, do not expect anything interesting there.
The internet was never intended for bad people. It was intended for scientists, who we all know could never do a bad thing and so internet was completely safe even without encryption. Unfortunately at some point AOL and Eternal September happened and now the Internet is full of normals fighting their gang wars and selling drugs to little pre-school children and stealing pennies from the blind men and scratching other mens cars and god knows what else these people do.
Its a constant battle... what do you expect?
My point is that it wasn't even a battle from the beginning, and still aint no battle if you browse web or send/receive emails using default protocols. 
Its a constant battle... what do you expect?
Internet has a poor design from security perspective if you think about it - all communication can be traced and encryption is not a default feature.
This poor design is either due a new technology that became huge before it was mature, or it was intentionally designed so to make surveillance of the communication easy.
If encryption and anonymity was a default feature of internet protocols you could communicate with anyone, and read/post any content without being tracked.
But this is not the case. Therefore we need a layer above internet, and it must be really easy to use such solution to gain a global usage among noobs.
We wont get internet liberty before noobs also start to protect their privacy!
If just 0,01% of all users encrypt their communication they automatically becomes targets of gov surveillance, but if 99% encrypt it will be much harder for the gov to target specific individuals.
Software solutions (PGP, Freenet...) has been around for many years, but they haven't gained any large user base yet.
I believe a hardware router should be the best solution for most users since they just plug it in and run.
I just read about McAffes D-central, I dont know if it is the solution for dark internet, but it seems promising.
I also expect similar hardware solutions to be developed through Kickstarter.
This poor design is either due a new technology that became huge before it was mature, or it was intentionally designed so to make surveillance of the communication easy.
If encryption and anonymity was a default feature of internet protocols you could communicate with anyone, and read/post any content without being tracked.
But this is not the case. Therefore we need a layer above internet, and it must be really easy to use such solution to gain a global usage among noobs.
We wont get internet liberty before noobs also start to protect their privacy!
If just 0,01% of all users encrypt their communication they automatically becomes targets of gov surveillance, but if 99% encrypt it will be much harder for the gov to target specific individuals.
Software solutions (PGP, Freenet...) has been around for many years, but they haven't gained any large user base yet.
I believe a hardware router should be the best solution for most users since they just plug it in and run.
I just read about McAffes D-central, I dont know if it is the solution for dark internet, but it seems promising.
I also expect similar hardware solutions to be developed through Kickstarter.
Jump to: