The developers of this “HolePunch” protocol suite have publicly claimed that they can deploy a messaging app which is more resistant to transport interference than any other app. However, their app still employs some variant of DHT, and others believe that the popular DHT implementations are vulnerable to Denial-of-Service attacks:
As also discussed in this comparison, both I2P and Tor have some open issues with their use of DHT technology prone to sybil attacks. GNUnet has designed its routing (core) and GNU Name System (GNS) in ways that are resistant to such attacks.
Both Tor and I2P can scale well in the number of one-to-one communications, but this only re-enforces the client/server paradigm which is threatening the privacy and thus the democratic civil rights of billions of human beings. Actual scalable, serverless, distributed social interaction requires a pubsub system over a distributed scalable multicast backbone, natively capable of spawning distribution trees somewhat like BitTorrent.
We leverage GNUnet’s sybil-attack resistant routing mechanism and its GNU Naming System (GNS) while combining it with PSYC’s distributed social graph.
Scalability is such a boring topic, it is usually left for last - and then it is too late, when millions of people want to use your software but you can’t fix it to make it scale.
…On the one side we have journalists in hostile jurisdictions who want to prevent leakage of metadata and location. On the other side we have people in various countries who just need the system to work when domains or Autonomous System Numbers are blocked (or the ISP default DNS servers are temporarily disabled because of some government edict.) On top of that is the application update problem and the choice of push service.
At the present time, neither Google or F-Droid accommodates the needs of all users in every possible circumstance. Is there any solution that addresses all of these issues?