From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:37:22 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.1-gentoo; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <52A3C8A5.7010606@gmail.com>
	<1795f3067ba3fcdd0caf978cc59ff024.squirrel@fruiteater.riseup.net>
	<52A435EA.7090405@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52A435EA.7090405@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <201312081237.24473.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org,
	your thoughts?
Precedence: list

On Sunday, December 08, 2013 9:03:38 AM Sa=C3=AFvann Carignan wrote:
> Binaries:
> Sourceforge is not encrypted, actually. Although binaries hosting /
> sharing could be a separate subject discussed later I think.

Encryption is useless here. We want everyone to be able to download Bitcoin=
=20
clients. Binaries on sourceforge are signed by multiple parties using gitia=
n.

> Decentralization:
> So long as we actually use DNS, the website is centralized :( However,
> its content isn't (can be forked on GitHub), but regarding the domain
> name, there is not much we can do against this AFAIK.

So long as someone has root (or a user that can modify it), the website is=
=20
centralised. To really solve this, we would need a dedicated server that=20
accepts commands only when signed by N-of-M parties, inside a cage locked b=
y=20
padlocks with keys held by independent parties, with a SSL certificate issu=
ed=20
by an authority that has multiple parties watch it every step of the way in=
to=20
that server.

Luke