DIY networks

Because of the net neutrality thingy the idea of DIY networks is now jumping into the mainstream, sadly it doesn't seem like there is a fast solution that can fit us all. Coincidentally in the last couple of days I've been interested in BBSs out of my interest to run a site of my own. I do have some other concerns like how could people access them without dial up modems. The issue now is what options do we have to make our own networks and how do they fit what we have already.

Let's do mesh networks. This won't only be dealing with net neutrality etc, it will also be a big boon for privacy. You can start by turning your house/apartment into a mesh.

I like the idea of mesh networks yet there are some drawbacks to it. The first one that comes to mind is trans-oceanic communication. Another one is infrastructure. It's a very nice idea, yes, but when it comes to communicatingg two blocks separated by a street there are some limitations: the city hall won't allow you to hang some cable across two buildings, even less if ISPs have a say about this (and they do, since they already have such cables there). The solution would be to hijack such communication media (cables or radio signals). And finally.... people. All the aforementioned problems would be solvable if people would only give an ounce of a fuarrrk. But they usually don't (which is the reason Net Neutrality is at peril to begin with), and their authority biases will make them choose an oppressive ISP over some geek with a single network scheme. This is not to discourage anyone, I would very much love for meshnets to be a reality over the backbone model that we currently have.

How do you build a mesh network? Can I create one and connect it with other peoples' but still remaining relatively anonymous? That's the bigger concern I have.

If you're interested in meshnets, check out Hyperboria and cjdns. They run a mesh over existing infrastructure. If you want to build physical connections yourself that's a different (and much harder) issue. Good luck, brave warrior. If you're interested in BBSs, try 'ssh einchan.god.jp', password 'ein'.

>>6008 Well nothing wrong with just using 2.4GHz channels. Let me introduce you to WLAN slovenia, which is a meshnet spanning across several countries with thousands of users: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wlan_slovenija As for casuals, learn to evangelize. No other way around it. Ofc. that means that the average lainon neckbeard like me is gonna need to us his social skills :P I am not telling you to build something big now. I am just telling you to build something for your living room. >>6010 Meshnets provide their own version of anonimity. If your device has physical proximity to the receiving device, the data is exchanged directly between the devices without a mediator. Every meshnet device does it's own routing. Without a middle man. This makes data flow monitoring complex/borderline impossible. Like who can tell if the two devices are even sending any data, or what they are sending unless they are also nearby and sniffing, or unless they have compromised one of those two devices. Or imagine you are at a protest with a mesh network setup as the information network. You can hide behind a wall and and just send the information to all connected nodes. You would be clever and use a burner phone/router, and nobody would even know of the information transaction, let alone your identity. Mesh nodes often don't even know much about each other. A third case would be that you wanted to download something from a node on a far away place in the network. In that case a potential state actor would need to guess trough which nodeds will the mesh network route your packets to be able to intercept them. From what I know about tor, the inner tor relays do work a little bit like a mesh network, except with added encryption. So it is once again the game of compromising network nodes. The big difference between tor and mesh networks is that mesh networks operate on a lower network layer, even optionally the physical layer. But you could be creative and try implementing tor on top of your mesh network node.

Seems like infrastructure is the biggest concern. Using existing infrastructure seems like the most viable way but still stuff like intercontinental communication seems difficult and what stops gov'ts or corporation taking said infrastructure down?

>>6019 >stops gov'ts or corporation taking said infrastructure down? That is why you don't use existing infrastructure.

>>6004 Since you'll need to communicate with foreign anons from time to time, you'll need to find a way to go past ISP throttling or blocks, which will be borderline simple when people push through Chinese or Russian firewalls easily, and legal because these blocks are not enforced by government. >>6008 60Hz radio bridges or laser links. Depending on your location they might be illegal without authority registration, but check that yourself. Wires can be put on communally owned land, WiFi is legal, but damn latent. >>6010 Add onion/garlic routing on top of cjdns and you will have enough anonymity keeping in mind that none of nodes are controlled by same entity. Mesh networks don't aim for anonymity, but some of them provide end-to-end encryption by default. >>6011 I thought sending password in plaintext for ssh was a bad tone. You won't be able to download singaporean bubble gum spitting videos from BBS when your ISP decides to throttle ssh. >>6013 >245997 clients so far My city block has triple of that >>6019 Launch your own pico satellites with laser transponders as payload for other space missions. Reuse existing EOL satellites. See: SATCOM Helium aerostats in neutral waters above stratosphere. Ionosphere packet radio. You're gonna fucced in da butt by FCC for doing any of things above tho.

>>6026 >That is why you don't use existing infrastructure. Except government claims authority over all infrastructure. Radio links? Cables in ground? Replacing your broken water heater inside your house? All requires government permission.

>>6028 >245997 clients so far >My city block has triple of that a) you live in an exceptionally populated place then b) tamper your expectations Why is everyone here thinking about starting a global network rather than starting as a small grassroots project? >>6034 >Replacing your broken water heater inside your house? >requires government permission Lol that's fuarrrked up. My government doesn't require that. But let me ask you this, have you heard of public use 2.4GHz and 5Ghz wireless channels? IDK in what kind of police state you live in, but here at my place you can use those channels however you want without any registration. And if you think your government will start sending vans to hunt your legal 2.4GHz signal for muh illuminaty reasons then you have much bigger security issues that are way too off topic for this thread. Let me give you all one final piece of advice: You aren't gonna make the internet 2.0 overnight. Nobody is. Start small, really small, local. And if it is good it will hopefully grow organically. As for infrastructure, 2.4GHz wireless would almost certainly work for most people. Is it so hard to put dd-wrt on a second hand router? >>6019 Did you know that on mesh networks, if one node has internet access, the internet access is shared to the whole mesh network?

>>6035 >But let me ask you this, have you heard of public use 2.4GHz and 5Ghz wireless channels? Using currently...! >IDK in what kind of police state you live in, but here at my place you can use those channels however you want without any registration. And if you think your government will start sending vans to hunt your legal 2.4GHz signal for muh illuminaty reasons then you have much bigger security issues that are way too off topic for this thread. Or, the unlicensed spectrum becomes licensed. b/c its good fo' bidness. That wireless spectrum thats competing with muh corperate offerings is rarely even used anymore, only for meshnets which have terrorism and child porn problems anyway. Why would anyone not want corpnet? With corpnet, you get access to the best authorized content at a fair price and it respects copyright and creates jobs. Why not make it faster by liscensing 2.4 and 5 to mom corp.

>>6036 Well that is way off topic. And I think if we continue down this lane we would just end up repeating things we have already said on this chan 100 times. But I do agree with you on corporations=bad. However as of right now the 2.4 GHz and 5Ghz channels are publicly owned and are just fine.

>>6036 And if the equipment is still there what's stopping you from making illegal mesh networks. I mean we're rebels here, who cares if its illegal. On the other hand the government wil pronablyl always keep an unlicensed band somewhere as it makes sense to have one for small businesses with innovative products and for science.

>>6011 That image is super interesting, thanks for posting it

>>6010 >Can I create one and connect it with other peoples' but still remaining relatively anonymous? That's the bigger concern I have. Anonymity is a big concern of mine too with wireless mesh networks. You are basically broadcasting your physical location and anyone with a directional antenna can track you down if they wanted to. That really is like kicking dead whales down the beach from an anonymity perspective, especially if your equipment is not portable and basically just sitting in your back yard. >>6013 >A third case would be that you wanted to download something from a node on a far away place in the network. In that case a potential state actor would need to guess trough which nodeds will the mesh network route your packets to be able to intercept them. Have you considered that the state actor can also join the network? And they can insert themselves anywhere through changing their physical location and using high power radios. If a state actor sets up a node next you your house then you've suddenly inherited all of Tor's problems with untrusted entry nodes.

>>6028 >245997 clients so far >My city block has triple of that That's 245,997 people who bothered to participate, not the total number of people who live in Slovenia. fuarrrking Americans.

>>6054 >Have you considered that the state actor can also join the network? And they can insert themselves anywhere through changing their physical location and using high power radios. If a state actor sets up a node next you your house then you've suddenly inherited all of Tor's problems with untrusted entry nodes. Yes. I have considered that. And a) if we are already at tor level considerations then I say: 'It's good enough, I am satisfied.'. b) it is nothing that good OPSEC cannot overcome. >Anonymity is a big concern of mine too with wireless mesh networks. You are basically broadcasting your physical location and anyone with a directional antenna can track you down if they wanted to. That really is like kicking dead whales down the beach from an anonymity perspective, especially if your equipment is not portable and basically just sitting in your back yard. c) always, always buy mobile hardware, buy it second hand on flea markets with cash, treat it like single use throwaway hardware and use it only for that single illegal operation. I hate to say it but hiding from the governent requires some monetary sacrifice. d) again, nothing that OPSEC can't help you against. OPSEC, because to defeat a spy you have to think like a spy, and sometimes that includes no-tech thinking and hiding.

>>6011 >If you're interested in BBSs, try 'ssh einchan.god.jp', password 'ein'. The user is einchan, so use ssh einchan@einchan.god.jp instead

>>6059 >Yes. I have considered that. And if we are already at tor level considerations then I say: 'It's good enough, I am satisfied.'. Obviously you didn't consider it very hard. Attackers can't instantly make themselves your entry node without you even knowing. This is definitely worse than Tor. >it is nothing that good OPSEC cannot overcome. All problems can be solved if you are smart enough? Thanks for that. >always, always buy mobile hardware It might not be your choice, depending on the network. >>6038 >And if the equipment is still there what's stopping you from making illegal mesh networks. I mean we're rebels here, who cares if its illegal. Because it is very easy to find out where radio signals are coming from and people taking down their nodes every time a squad car rolls past their house is not conducive of a stable network. Also keep in mind that encryption itself is typically illegal on licensed frequencies even if you have a HAM license. Illegal is not the way to go because if people need to break the law to use your network then you will only pull in pedos, terrorists and edgy teenagers who don't know any better and you will get stomped on by law enforcement. You need a plan to attract casuals too like how Tor does.

>>6065 Oh so now it should be secure and stable and for normal people. Along with the other things mentioned in this thread the list of requirements is just growing. I am afraid that what you are looking for doesn't even exist. If you want to fight the government... mesh networks are just a single lego brick in a much larger security puzzle.

>>6067 (me) Just to add up. Once again tamper your expectations.

>>6067 >Oh so now it should be secure and stable and for normal people. That's a very inaccurate description. What >>6065 said was that it shouldn't be inherently illegal to join the network (e.g. hijacking licensed bands), and ideally it should appeal to different types of people, to diversify the anonymity set (e.g. not just people who are trying to do illegal things). Seems sensible to me. If Tor and i2p are anything to go by it's probably unrealistic though. Most people don't even care about downloading and running free software nevermind buying new radio hardware. A mesh network that could use smart phones as nodes might be a starter though.

>>6061 >Einchan Oh soykaf, I almost forgot about this, thanks.

>>6075 cell phones would be really easy to appeal to the masses. make some application that allows them to connect together directly and let the app handle all the protocols, and it would become very simple. >>6076 please post more on einchan, it's nice to see new replies

>>6075 >>6101 >phone mesh network Technically, Serval is a thing that exists, but I don't think anyone actually uses it. There are proprietary apps out there but I won't name them since a goal of this thread is security. I think the closest thing to what you lains want that has people actually participating in the network is goTenna. It has appeal to average people since it uses a smartphone app to pair with the device that does the actual work, and one of the intentions of the project is to drive enough adoption and get people talking enough that mesh functionality makes it into the phones themselves.

I wondering about dns over packet radio. I don't think dns is encrypted so it shouldn't be illegal on ham frequency's. though there may be something im missing.

>>6028 Why not hf radio? Just bounce it off the atmosphere to hit foreign countries. I'll bet this could become big quickly in India, China, and Japan. This is about as cyberpunk as it gets.

>>6767 The frequencies that will bounce on the ionosphere are relatively low. And a low frequency implies a low bitrate of information, by shannon's theorem. This adds up to the fact that the low freq band will get crowded much faster than hf bands (less frequency space, and need for wider frequency bands in each channel).