To: devl at freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] New FCP command, ClientDelete References: <02020500211805.25808 at h000102c16997.ne.mediaone.net> From: Edgar Friendly <[email protected]> Date: 05 Feb 2002 13:21:21 -0600 In-Reply-To: <02020500211805.25808 at h000102c16997.ne.mediaone.net> Message-ID: <m2d6zjspji.fsf at thelema.dyndns.org> Lines: 36 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Gianni Johansson <giannijohansson at mediaone.net> writes: > I added a ClientDelete command to the node's FCP implementation to delete > keys from the local data store. It takes the admin password and a list of > keys. <SNIP> Seems like a decent idea for beta software. I'll look forward to the day that this isn't at all useful, but at the moment, I can see why it's being added. > > It returns either a Success or a Failed message. > > Here's an example of a ClientDelete message: > > ClientDelete > password=abracadabra > keys.0=freenet:SSK at npfV5XQijFkF6sXZvuO0o~kG4wEPAgM/homepage > keys.1=freenet:SSK at npfV5XQijFkF6sXZvuO0o~kG4wEPAgM/3c5f2080-04_homepage > EndMessage > > How does this look to people (esp. thelema and other keepers of the FCP spec > if there are any)? > I'm tempted to insist that we only give functionality to remove a single key per request, to get away from having any kind of enumerations in FCP and to make it tougher for government blacklists to be scanned for and removed, while still not creating a hideous burden on people removing a small number of keys. Also, a Failed message would identify specifically which key didn't get removed, instead of asserting only that _some_ key didn't get removed. Thelema -- E-mail: thelema314 at bigfoot.com Raabu and Piisu GPG 1024D/36352AAB fpr:756D F615 B4F3 BFFC 02C7 84B7 D8D7 6ECE 3635 2AAB _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
