Zero-Knowledge Open-Sources Linux Client 61
jailbreakist writes "Zero-Knowledge Systems, a Montreal based privacy software company, has released the source code to their Linux client. The software in question provides anonymous web browsing, pseudonymous email, form filling, cookie management and more. You can get the source at opensource.zeroknowledge.com. The source is available under the MPL, and our clientshim and Yarrow (random number generation) implementations are under GPL." A while ago, we had covered Mike Shaver's move to ZK.
What is meant by untraceable (Score:1)
Good Concept but Impratical so far (Score:2)
PGP != answer.... (Score:1)
1. PGP, at least the newer versions is susceptable to an attack. Use GnuPG instead. It's
developed outside the US in crypto-friendly Germany, and is pure raw open source implementation of public domain crypto.
2. Don't use Netscape. The Konqueror is a lot less noisy than Navigator; check out http://privacy.net/anonymizer and you'll see what your browser spews out.
3. Java is not your friend. Java downloads take a lot of time and resources, and it may require a second connection to a server, either the one feeding it to you or another site.
4. Turn graphics off. Remember the doubleclick 1x1 graphiccookie?
Hell, I use Lynx for a lot of browsing.
Re:So more or less a general purpose system (Score:3)
The idea here is not that you trust us. The idea is that you don't have to. The name isn't just self-deprecation: the Freedom system is designed to protect us from knowing things about you, as well as protecting you from having us -- and others -- know things about you. The whitepapers [freedom.net] cover this approach[*], and the limitations of it, so I won't bore you with the details here.
[*] though they focus on the 1.0 technology, the issues remain largely the same. The biggest change is in the mail system, where the removal of ``reply blocks'' removes the chain-of-warrants attack from that part of the system.
Freenet, not "Freedom Network" (Score:3)
- Both authors and readers of information stored on this system
may remain anonymous if they wish.
- Freenet does not have any form of centralized control or
administration.
- It will be virtually impossible to forcibly remove a piece of
information from Freenet.
- Information will be distributed throughout the Freenet network
in such a way that it is difficult to determine where information
is being stored.
- Anyone can publish information. They don't need to buy a domain
name or even a permanent Internet connection.
- Availability of information will increase in proportion to the
demand for that information.
- Information will move from parts of the Internet where it is in
low demand to areas where demand is greater.
For more info: http://freenet.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]The freenet FAQ [sourceforge.net]
Finally! (Score:1)
Good work, guys! You actually did it! Now it will be possible to make Mojo Nation [mojonation.net] run over Freedom.
:-)
Regards,
Zooko
Zero Clue (Score:2)
I am so sick of 'what-ifs'.
So what if sickos use the software? The same sickos use the US Postal Service. Would you ban that?
I suppose digital cameras make it easier for the sickos to make kiddie porn - after all, you don't have to get film developed. Would you ban digital cameras? Hell, ban Polaroid for that matter.
Cryptography makes it easier for criminals to communicate with each other. Would you ban cryptography?
Most new technology has a up side and a down side.
I think in most cases the good far outweighs the bad.
--K
And really, do you honestly think the ZKS people never imagined that their software could be used for illegal/immoral purposes?
---
Re:who cares (Score:2)
(I'm a Zero-Knowledge employee, but am not speaking for the company except where noted otherwise.)
I don't think the ``their own network'' part of the argument indicates a deep understanding of what's going on here: you can configure Freedom to use AIPs that are not owned or operated by ZKS, quite happily.
As far as the server source goes, I'm behind you 100%: the server source must be released, and it will be. We've said this in public, and I'll say it again here: <speaking officially>all of Freedom -- client and server software alike -- is destined for source release</speaking officially>. It's not going to happen all at once -- there's a fair amount of code involved, and trying to bite it all off at once is a recipe for unbridled pain -- but it's definitely going to happen.
When? Soon. Before you've forgotten that you read me write ``Soon''. =)
Re:Of course.... (Score:3)
One of the primary features of the Freedom system is that it provides IP obscurity: people see your traffic originating at one of the Freedom network ``wormholes'', not from your real IP address. Is that not clear from the whitepapers?
Web-Based Privacy Solutions vs ZeroKnowledge (Score:1)
(1) Costs money which experience shows very few will pay for
(2) Very slow due to fundamental network design of bouncing packets multiple times across smaller ISPs - nothing can be done about this
(3) Easy to block at firewall because it always runs at fixed high numbered ports (51101,02,07,09) so forget about relying upon access at work, libraries, schools, etc
(4) Currently only works/supported on Win95/98 - other version promised but none delivered and it will be a long, slow, expensive process to port and support - do you really think that Mac or Linux users will get the same support levels as Win95/98 users?
(5) Doesn't work with AOL (23M users in US), CompuServe 2000 (?M users) and free ISPs like DirecPC - over a quarter of US Internet users denied access.
(6) doesn't work with very popular software including McAfee Personal Firewall, Microsoft FrontPage personal webserver, Netware Client32, MS 98SE' Internet Connection Sharing, etc. Nyms will not work with common software such as MS Outlook, Napster, PCAnywhere, cookies filter utilities, etc. I don't know many web surfers who are not using at least one of these applications, which mean ZeroKnowledge will not work for them.
(7) Does not work with common web sites because it does not support client side cookies with nyms. How many users will tolerate being locked out of NYTimes.com or Yahoo.com?
(8) Is a large software download that is easily blocked from installation, detected running, and removed automatically from managed corporate networks - upto 50M US corporate workers lost.
The best way to avoid all these problems is to avoid download software packages altogether. A web-based privacy solution should work with your existing browser, computer, network, and ISP but provide the same levels of encryption as ZeroKnowledge.
Anonymizer [anonymizer.com] has been the best of the web-based privacy solutions but it (1) costs money $60/yr, (2) doesn't encrypt you personal web traffic so all data is visible except the URL, and (3) doesn't work with most popular rich web sites like sony.com, hotmail, webvan, etrade, etc because they cannot handle DHTML like JavaScript, VBScript, CSS. Instead, it either blocks all DHTML breaking a site's functionality *OR* passes it unprotected which reveals your identity online.
SafeWeb.com [safeweb.com] is a web-based privacy solution that just launched last Wednesday (See CNET news.com [cnet.com]). SafeWeb is the solves all the problems that both ZeroKnowledge and Anonymizer have listed above and enables users to surf the entire web privately (cookie management anonymity) and securely (128bit SSL) from anywhere at anytime for free - no downloads. SafeWeb finally delivers a practical solution to the growing problems of online privacy by solving all these technical problems with an easy to use service for your existing browser. Let us know your feedback at webmaster@safeweb.com and in this forum.
Jon Chun
President
SafeWeb
Re:Freenet, not "Freedom Network" (Score:2)
It's not fair to say that Freenet "takes this concept to another level." They're two different concepts. Freenet allows people to publish and view information anonymously, and the information that is published through Freenet has a high level of resistance to censorship. Which is really, really cool. On the other hand, you can't send private email with Freenet, you can't telnet anonymously, and you can't post anonymously to newsgroups. These are things that Freedom can do, that Freenet can't.
Also, it's misleading to state that control of ZKS servers is centralised. The Freedom Network relies on the concept of distributed trust, meaning that no single Freedom server has the ability to compromise the identity of a pseudonym. ZKS runs some of the servers on the network, but the majority are owned and operated by companies not affiliated with Zero-Knowledge. Since selection of the servers is placed in the hands of the end user, it becomes difficult for multiple servers to work together to compromise the identity of a user.
Available protocols (Score:2)
- Mail
- Web
- SSL
- News
- IRC
- Telnet
I am a ZKS employee. I am not representing them in any offical capacity.Let's not forget (Score:1)
Let us take this opportunity to ban all sticks, except for those in the possession of licensed stick-users.
We are also aware of the fact that some people may be using ink to write offensive and/or illegal messages on various surfaces. Rest assured that the FBI is looking into the matter, and will deal with the miscreants accordingly.
support for 2.4.0-test9 (Score:1)
any chance that it will soon support 2.4.0-testX?
- brett
Re:Available protocols - not fully supported (Score:1)
Re:Good Concept but Impratical so far (Score:1)
I am a ZKS employee. I do not represent them in any any official capacity.
Re:What I want to know is.... (Score:1)
It's not mathematical proof, but it's good enough for me.
Re:support for 2.4.0-test9 (Score:1)
Yes support for 2.4 series kernels is a goal, but is not going to happen in the immediate future. That said, since netfilter emulates most of the hooks the shim uses, it's probably a small undertaking to make them happy together. Deep support for 2.4 is probably where we want to be, most of what our kernel stuff does is in netfilter, but getting it all to work won't happen tomorrow.
Hey, you got the source. If you want it now, go for it!
Re:Web-Based Privacy Solutions vs ZeroKnowledge (Score:2)
You know, I really hate blatant sales plugs.
SafeWeb doesn't prevent SafeWeb from abusing users. It's sad that you guys even try to compare yourselves to a cryptographically secure protocol like Freedom.
First, SafeWeb is nothing more than a filter proxy. SafeWeb prevents doubleclick from profiling you, but who is to stop SafeWeb from profiling you?
SafeWeb could easily monitor any HTML FORMs you submit, and over time, build up a profile of you, including your name, address, credit card, etc. There is no theoretical security in SafeWeb, it's just another anonymizer.com/proxymate/etc solution.
Whats more, it slaps irritating ads on top. I'd personally pay $5/month for a privacy service just to get rid of the ads.
And because SafeWeb's only way of making money is advertising, it can't provide services for non-web based services like NNTP, IRC, SMTP, FTP, etc.
Finally, SafeWeb's business model is fundamentally at odds with its service. To sell ads, you have to target users. If you can't profile your users, you can't target ads. Non-targeted ads have extremely low CPM rates.
SafeWeb's only recourse is to sell URL-based targeting. In any case, I predict once the funding runs out, it won't last long.
Last but not least, you are not "first free, complete private, way to surf anywhere, anytime" Lucent's ProxyMate deserves that title.
Re:Random number generators (Score:2)
Johan
GPL: If it sucks fix it (Score:1)
Re:Web-Based Privacy Solutions vs ZeroKnowledge (Score:1)
ZeroKnowledge's product, although very sophisticated, suffers from a number of drawbacks that make it difficult to use for most people in common situations. It is clearly not a one click solution to privacy that is accessible for everyone, anywhere, for free, without downloads. Online privacy problems affect everyone, yet most publicized solutions are only partial or specialized and consequently impractical and frustrating for the average Internet user. These users then resign themselves to surrendering their online privacy as a technical cost of using the Internet. The result is a flawed Internet community, and governments threatening to regulate the Internet with overtones of censorship [cnet.com].
First, let's address some issues I raised in my original post.
(1) ZeroKnowledge's product, Freedom, costs: $49.95 USD [freedom.net]
(2) It is unnecessarily slow, bouncing packets between three 2nd tier ISPs [freedom.net].
(3) It is easy to block at firewalls since it requires fixed ports 5110 through 51113 to be open ( the second to last line on this page describes this incompatibility [freedom.net] ).
(4) It only runs on Win95/98 [freedom.net].
(5) It does not work with AOL, CompuServe2000, and some free ISPs [freedom.net]. Even if you think "AOL sucks" as one commentator [slashdot.org] said, Internet privacy is a global issue and by protecting the 24M AOL users [hoovers.com] we protect ourselves by making it more difficult for eavesdroppers in general.
(6) It does not work with popular software such as McAfee's Personal Firewall, FrontPage webserver, Netware Client32. If you are using Nyms, it also does not work with Outlook, Napster, or PCAnywhere. This is documented on the ZeroKnowledge website under the main support page as #3 among the Top 10 Known Issues [freedom.net] and detailed in Issue #57: Applications not supported by Freedom [freedom.net].
(7) ZeroKnowlege has difficulty with cookies. Their support page lists two known, unresolved problems dealing with client-side cookies in Issue #222: Websites say I don't have cookies enabled [freedom.net] and Issue #223: Some websites won't let me log in [freedom.net].
(8) Most users are simply not going to be willing to (or, in managed networks, permitted to) install Freedom. The office is where users have access to a new computer, fast Internet connections, and a nice laser printer. In the increasingly long workday, many people are forced to attend to personal matters from their workplace. Individuals need private access to the Internet at work just as they need private access to the telephone to conduct their lives.
(9) ZeroKnowledge users must register personal and credit card information [freedom.net]. The less information out there about you the more secure and private you'll be online.
I respect and admire ZeroKnowlege for the challenges they took on in addressing Internet privacy issues. However, their product is very specialized in its architecture and designed to solve a particular subset of privacy problems. The ZK folks have been big supporters, educators, and sponsors of privacy, and we owe them our gratitude. Finally, the depth of their technical product speaks directly to their skill set and ingenuity.
I'm posting to inform people about our web-based solution to the privacy problem, a solution that addresses all the issues outlined above and that aims to serve a broader audience. Our approach has many distinct technical challenges just like the download model. We do not claim to have the complete solution, but we feel we are the closest to a practical solution that works for the majority of Internet users. Ultimately the veracity of these claims will be borne out by users: try out SafeWeb [safeweb.com] and compare it to Freedom [freedom.net]. Decide for yourself. Again, if you have constructive feedback in how we can build a better privacy technology we are eager to hear your suggestions. Email us at webmaster@safeweb.com.
Jon Chun
President
SafeWeb
Re:Web-Based Privacy Solutions vs ZeroKnowledge (Score:1)
Re:Web-Based Privacy Solutions vs ZeroKnowledge (Score:1)
(1) SafeWeb is a filter proxy and more. It not only rewrites HTML but also is the first to seriously rewrite and sanitize all DHTML (our unique achievement). It also encrypts all content with up to 128 bit SSL protecting you against dangers bigger than DoubleClick like invasive employers, IT staff, ISPs, governments, etc.
(2) Anyone you trust your data stream to is in a position to abuse it including SafeWeb. ZeroKnowledge has designed an elegant system that makes this much less likely, but ultimately some trust must be vested in all these systems.
(3) SafeWeb targets ads based upon content, not cookies. We can accurately target a Nike Tiger Woods ad based upon the fact we are serving up Yahoo:Sports:Golf rather than knowing anything about who is viewing this page. This is more than sustainable.
(4) SafeWeb is a web-based privacy product and is not intended to secure NNTP, IRC, SMTP, or FTP. However, it can secure web-based news, chat, mail, and ftp via your browser which is the ubiquitous Internet application.
(5) Anonymizer, ProxyMate, and others predate SafeWeb, but they are not encrypted nor do they rewrite DHTML so most sites break or are passed unsecured. This is why we make the claim of "first".
I apologize for inflaming the many passionate supporters of ZeroKnowledge. It is a technically elegant product that works well in specific situations. SafeWeb's strength is its effectiveness, free accessibility, and ease of use for general situations. This is the fundamental distinction I think is reasonable to draw without slighting either side unfairly. Let's take this discussion off-line; please email any serious follow-ups or inquires to webmaster@safeweb.com.
Re:Umm... (Score:1)
Zero-Knowledge comes from something called Zero-Knowledge Proofs (or something like that, it was a while since I read that crypto book). What it means is that you can prove your identity to someone else, in a manner such that the other part will not be able to impersonate you when talking to a third party.
I don't remember the details, but it works with probabilities - for each communication with you, you have 50% chance of getting away with a wrong answer. So, if he asks you 30 questions, and you don't know the answers, your chances are one in 2 to the power of 30 (slightly more than one billion) of fooling him that you are someone else. The "zero-knowledge" comes from the fact that the questions are chosen by the other part, so he can't "recycle" your answers - unless he's very lucky (the third party asks exactly the same questions as he did, in the same order). I don't remember my combinatorics classes either, but I believe his chances would be better by guessing what to answer, since the order does not matter then.
Re:Great privacy (Score:3)
(for both cash and credit card transactions) to be connected in any way with any Nyms that are created."
read their privacy statement [freedom.net]
Re:Great privacy (Score:4)
TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS (Score:1)
Actually it's quite good. Here's how it works: (Score:4)
Also regarding how it works, it's a kind of "onion" system. Let's say A wants to send a bunch of packets to B. The first thing that A has done upon setting up ZK is to choose up to 3 gateway servers for ZK, call them G1, G2, G3, in that order.
For each packet sent out by A, it will do the following:
- Put header with destination address to B
- Encrypt packet with G3's public key
- Add header with destination address to G3
- Encrypt the whole thing with G2's public key
- Add header with destination address to G2
- Encrypt the whole thing with G1's public key
- Add header with destination address to G1
Then it will send it using the first destination address. At each gateway, one layer will be peeled off using the private key, the destination address read, and the packet will be sent forward.
The cool thing about this is that at any point in the path, if someone intercepts and somehow knows the private key of a gateway, it can only figure out the previous and next hops, not the whole path.
Of course, if B has PGP or anything like that, nothing stops you from also encrypting the packet with B's public key.
The ZK system is an addition to this, providing anonymous transfer, not encryption of data.
It does take a performance hit to do all that, but it's not that bad. I just wish they made it free.
Zero Responsibility (Score:1)
Right. What if this software becomes standard among kiddy-porn traders? Would the guys at ZK find that funny?
Same old story.
"Zero Knowledge" != "Zero Cost" (Score:1)
These guys are in business, and they do need to make money. If you think there aught to be a zero-cost system to provide these services to the public, go right ahead and set it up.
Random number generators (Score:4)
You all recall that netscape's already paltry 40 bit encraption actually only had something like 14 bits of entropy, because so many bits came from the easily guessable clock (or something like that).
Anyway, Yarrow is from the always popular counterpane people. I haven't had a look at it myself yet, so if anyone has given it a gander, a summary would be well appreciated.
Re:Of course.... (Score:2)
They provide an encrypted, anonymous link from the website you're accessing, through your ISP to your machine.
All your ISP sees is you accessing a Freedom server, and all the website you're accessing sees is a Freedom server.
The whole point of Freedom is that, in theory, it should be impossible to trace back a name to an IP address.
You can't do this by using 'paranoid settings' in your browser.
--K
---
Re:Good Concept but Impratical so far (Score:1)
Umm... (Score:1)
Re:What a name. Zero Knowledge. (Score:4)
You can find out more here: .hu t.fi/Opinnot/Tik-110.501/1995/zeroknowledge.html [tml.hut.fi]
http://www.tml
I have no idea if any part of Zero Knowledge Inc.'s sytems use zero knowledge proofs or whether they just chose it for its cool name and vague relevancy.
Re:Great privacy (Score:2)
I don't think it matters. They've designed the system so that they *can't* trace anything.
The most they can do is deactivate a nym, but the nym can't be traced back to the person using it.
--K
---
More about Zero Knowledge Systems (Score:3)
URL:
http://www.net-security.org/ tex t/articles/zks.shtml [net-security.org]
I'll also try to find out an old interview I did with them, when Freedom wasn't even created, where he talks about future plans etc. I'll add the URL to this thread...
Cheers
Has anyone looked at the source? (Score:1)
Re:Good Concept but Impratical so far (Score:2)
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
who cares (Score:2)
Opensourcing an app the relies on their own network/servers- big risk, big deal; its just a publicity stunt.
Anyway, Sneakemail.com [sneakemail.com] has better anti-spam/remailer features anyway, and their optional client [freshmeat.net] has been in the the public domain. I'm sure the other features of zeroknowledge can be found elsewhere too.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:Of course.... (Score:1)
> All your ISP sees is you accessing a
> Freedom server, and all the website
> you're accessing sees is a Freedom
> server.
---
I'm hoping the Zero-Knowledge white papers address these questions: won't ZK be classified as a service provider, thus making them a target for Carnivore to be installed (under court order, of course) on their network? How does installing a Carnivore system on the ZK network affect the privacy ensuring capabilities of the system?
Re:Let's not forget (Score:1)
Thanx for the nickel. But einstein didn't like the idea of people using atom bombs to kill people :O)
rmstar.
P.S: Take it easy.
Traffic Analysis (Score:1)
I've used Freedom for 9 months,even for this post! (Score:2)
They took a while to release the source code. Some of the cypherpunks were wondering if they had been pressured by their VC backers not to. (one of the founders is one of the original cypherpunks). Im thrilled that they released the client code and expect that they will fulfill thier promise to release the server code - but dont take too long guys. They are also working on a semi-anonymous payment system. I say semi-anonymous because their comments indicate that UNLIKE the Freedom web product, they feel like they need to restrict the financial anonymity somewhat to comply with laws / banks wishes. I cant wait for it anyway.
Alot of you on slashdot have libertarian attitudes. Attitudes that include being against censorship and illegal snooping (like many think includes Carnivore / Echelon). If there is any company that will protect you against people who want to take away your right to anonymous speech that (US) Supreme Court cases have held exists from cases of anonymous political phamplets, it is Zero Knowledge systems.
Having said all this you all should know that it is quite likely that laws will be created to make strong anonymity like Freedom offers illegal. No kidding. The opponents of anonymity have not had much luck in congress yet. But right now there is the "Cyber Crime" treaty nearing signature that would require internet service providers to keep records that would make Freedom illegal. It would force DMCA like provisions on its signers. Who wants this and why will it happen ? Media companies, FBI, NSA and non us equivalents. From cnet.com [Edgar Bronfman Jr., chief executive of Universal Music Group parent Seagram, said last week. "As citizens, we have a right to privacy. We have no such right to anonymity."] http://www.canada.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-198335
They are afraid it becoming far more difficult to go after Napster users if they need to. The FBI and NSA and thier non US equivalents like thier Carnivore and Echelon. Many believe that dispite thier assertions they do things that should require a warrant, without one. Here are some quotes from wired.com about this treaty proposal:
{..Require websites and Internet providers to collect information about their users, a rule that would potentially restrict anonymous emailers.}
{ "It's a direct assault on legal protections and constitutional protections that have been established by national governments to protect their citizens," says Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "It's both an end run by police agencies and a bit of policy laundering by the U.S. Department of Justice to get more (surveillance) authority." }
Strong anonymity is the only sure protection to the current level of corporate invasion of privacy. Do you know that for $50 you can get anyones SS# ? For a few hundred you can get all kinds of things like bank statements securities holdings, real estate holdings. I want pervasive strong anonymity so that i control my information and only a series of court orderd warrants can get it.
We won the battle on encryption. But we are likely going to loose this at least with the lawmakers. Why ? BECAUSE in the ENCRYPTION debate BUSINESS was ON OUR SIDE. Now they are almost entirely against us. ZKS is for us. Who else ? You know the power of money. Help fight for anonymity and against the DMCA and DMCA like provisions. Write your representatives and support an organization that is part of The Global Internet Liberty Campaign : http://www.gilc.org/ (includes organizations like the ACLU, EFF, EPIC, CDT)
Re:[OT] Sig (Score:1)
What I want to know is.... (Score:3)
I'm very curious. Please let us know. Maybe an interview with ZKS would be a good
Re:Of course.... (Score:1)
--K
---
Why surf anonymously from work? Try one. (Score:2)
You're trying to fix a software issue. You find a link to a page that should solve all your problems -- but it's hosted on Geocities [ugh!]. Your company's proxy blocks Geocities. Arrgh!
It's lunch time. You're not going to convince anyone to get you around the proxy. Sure would be nice to be able to circumvent it yourself, no?
(Btw, this occured while assisting a friend at his place of work -- I'd never work for such a non-clued company).
So it's just a fancy app interface (Score:1)
No it's in relation to other paties (Score:1)
Great privacy (Score:3)
So you will need a serial number to use the "privacy services". Where's my privacy if you can track me down to a serial number? It's worst than the Pentium 3 serial number, because you only used it at one computer. If I want to use this software at different places then I should move with my serial number. Or purchase another.
Food for thought.
So more or less a general purpose system (Score:1)
Re:So it's just a fancy app interface (Score:2)
Paranoid? (Score:1)
Perhaps I am just paranoid, but why do I need to make a device (in /dev) for this to work? Maybe it is just me....usually is :-)
What are your takes on this?
Re:Great privacy (Score:1)
Onto your post though. ZeroKnowledge is a company trying to make money. They can't just open up their network in hopes that people will send in envelopes stuffed full of cash for them to pocket for their services. They need to be able to authorize people to use their network... It's just too bad that they're subpeona-able, rather than being based in a country that's not extremely cooperative with the US.
Re:So more or less a general purpose system (Score:1)
These are the guys who figured out a way to get a P!!! to send out its serial number [zeroknowledge.com] even if that capability was supposedly shut off in the BIOS, something Intel insisted could never happen. (/. covered it in this article [slashdot.org] about a year and a half ago.) I would characterize that as a white-hat activitity (though INTC was able to convince a few anti-virus companies otherwise).
What is Zero-Knowledge? (Score:2)
Don't confuse Freedom with PGP. PGP will keep the contents of your messages a secret, but Freedom will also keep the origin of your communications a secret. In that respect, it's a little like a mixmaster remailer. Except it anonymises the http and telnet protocols as well. And it's much easier to use than the mixmaster remailer.
It's not a perfect system. One of the white papers on their site talks about the security vulnerabilities [freedom.net] in the product. Another issue is performance. Performance is always traded for security, and that's the case here as well. I think that over time, things will get faster though.
Some people are complaining because it actually costs money to use. Well, the software itself is free. Anyone can download it. They are actually charging for people to access the network. Last time I checked, that's what every single service provider in the world does. (Except those free ISP companies, but they keep ending up in fuckedcompany.com.)
Serial Number Eplanation (Score:4)
The tokens are all identical. No traces can be done on the token, and the token can't be linked to the serial number or the nym it is exchanged for.
All of this is explained in the Zero-Knowledge white papers. Zero-Knowledge is commited to providing privacy.
Re:Serial Number Eplanation (Score:1)