• KiranWells@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think Lokinet and Veilid are two different solutions to the same problem. Lokinet is intentionally based on the block chain to prevent attacks, while Veilid is intentionally non-blockchain based. Additionally, Lokinet seems to be more similar to Tor in its makeup and purpose, but I can’t find any information on how the encryption functions to compare to Veilid’s.

      • Lemmchen@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        AFAICT they’re both multi-protocol (or even protocol-agnostic) onion routers. Tor on the other hand can only transport TCP.
        And while Lokinet has a stronger focus on exit nodes, I doubt there’s no way to host exit nodes on Veilid either.

        So from what I can tell they look to be very very similiar. Maybe they differentiate on which cryptographic primitives they use, but otherwise the same concept (except for the node hosting incentive approach).

        Maybe I’m entirely mistaken though. It’s hard to find technical data about Veilid.

        Edit: From their pre-release docs: https://gitlab.com/veilid/veilid/-/blob/main/docs/guide/guide.md?ref_type=heads#user-privacy

        User Privacy

        In order to ensure that users can participate in Veilid with some amount of privacy, we need to address the fact that being connected to Veilid entails communicating with other peers, and therefore sharing IP addresses. A user’s peer will therefore be frequently issuing RPCs in a way that directly associates the user’s identifying information with their peer’s ID. Veilid provides privacy by allowing the use of an RPC forwarding mechanism that uses cryptography to similar to onion routing in order to hide the path that a message takes between its actual originating peer and its actual destination peer, by hopping between additional intermediate peers.

        The specific approach that Veilid takes to privacy is two sided: privacy of the sender of a message, and privacy of the receiver of a message. Either or both sides can want privacy or opt out of privacy. To achieve sender privacy, Veilid use something called a Safety Route: a sequence of any number of peers, chosen by the sender, who will forward messages. The sequence of addresses is put into a nesting doll of encryption, so that each hop can see the previous and next hops, while no hop can see the whole route. This is similar to a Tor route, except only the addresses are encrypted for each hop. The route can be chosen at random for each message being sent.

        Receiver privacy is similar, in that we have a nesting doll of encrypted peer addresses, except because it’s for incoming messages, the various addresses have to be shared ahead of time. We call such things Private Routes, and they are published to the key-value store as part of a user’s public data. For full privacy on both ends, a Private Route will be used as the final destination of a Safety Route, and the total route is the composition of the two, so that neither the sender nor receiver knows the IP address of the other.

        • KiranWells@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Regarding exit nodes, I have heard that Veilid does not distinguish normal nodes from exit nodes, meaning any node can be an exit node. However, I did not see this in their presentation, and the system seems to be more focused on peer-to-peer communication within the network than private accessing of outside web sources.

        • KiranWells@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Regarding exit nodes, I have heard that Veilid does not distinguish normal nodes from exit nodes, meaning any node can be an exit node. However, I did not see this in their presentation, and the system seems to be more focused on peer-to-peer communication within the network than private accessing of outside web sources.

  • RxBrad@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wonder if it plays nice with CGNAT and ISP port blocking…

    (looks at my T-Mobile 5G gateway…)

    • mholiv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I haven’t done anything but skim over the slides but if I had to guess I imagine it might be like using bit torrent behind CGNAT on IPv4. (a.k.a. You can use it but you can’t really contribute anything back to the community.)

      I would bet that it would work fine with IPv6 on T-mobile. :)

  • Twashe@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel really dumb but I can’t find any documentation on his to use it other than instructions on how to install a node