Files
i2p.www/pots/comparison.pot
2018-08-24 11:50:16 +00:00

708 lines
22 KiB
Plaintext

# Translations template for I2P.
# Copyright (C) 2018 ORGANIZATION
# This file is distributed under the same license as the I2P project.
# FIRST AUTHOR <EMAIL@ADDRESS>, 2018.
#
#, fuzzy
msgid ""
msgstr ""
"Project-Id-Version: I2P website\n"
"Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: http://trac.i2p2.de\n"
"POT-Creation-Date: 2018-08-24 11:47+0000\n"
"PO-Revision-Date: YEAR-MO-DA HO:MI+ZONE\n"
"Last-Translator: FULL NAME <EMAIL@ADDRESS>\n"
"Language-Team: LANGUAGE <LL@li.org>\n"
"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8\n"
"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
"Generated-By: Babel 1.3\n"
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/freenet.html:2
msgid "I2P Compared to Freenet"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/freenet.html:8
msgid ""
"Freenet is a fully distributed, peer to peer anonymous publishing "
"network, offering \n"
"secure ways to store data, as well as some approaches attempting to "
"address the loads\n"
"of a flash flood. While Freenet is designed as a distributed data store,"
" people have\n"
"built applications on top of it to do more generic anonymous "
"communication, such as \n"
"static websites and message boards."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/freenet.html:16
#, python-format
msgid ""
"Compared to I2P, Freenet offers some substantial benefits - it is a "
"distributed data\n"
"store, while I2P is not, allowing people to retrieve the content "
"published by others \n"
"even when the publisher is no longer online. In addition, it should be "
"able to \n"
"distribute popular data fairly efficiently. I2P itself does not and will"
" not provide \n"
"this functionality. On the other hand, there is overlap for users who "
"simply want to \n"
"communicate with each other anonymously through websites, message boards,"
" file sharing\n"
"programs, etc. There have also been some attempts to develop a "
"distributed data \n"
"store to run on top of I2P,\n"
"(most recently a port of <a href=\"%(tahoe)s\">Tahoe-LAFS</a>)\n"
"but nothing is yet ready for general use."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/freenet.html:29
msgid ""
"However, even ignoring any implementations issues, there are some "
"concerns \n"
"about Freenet's algorithms from both a scalability and anonymity "
"perspective, owing \n"
"largely to Freenet's heuristic driven routing. The interactions of "
"various techniques \n"
"certainly may successfully deter various attacks, and perhaps some "
"aspects of the \n"
"routing algorithms will provide the hoped for scalability. "
"Unfortunately, not much\n"
"analysis of the algorithms involved has resulted in positive results, but"
" there is still\n"
"hope. At the very least, Freenet does provide substantial anonymity "
"against an attacker\n"
"who does not have the resources necessary to analyze it further."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/index.html:2
msgid "Comparing I2P to other projects"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/index.html:4
msgid ""
"There are a great many other applications and projects working on "
"anonymous \n"
"communication and I2P has been inspired by much of their efforts. This "
"is not \n"
"a comprehensive list of anonymity resources - both freehaven's \n"
"<a href=\"http://freehaven.net/anonbib/topic.html\">Anonymity "
"Bibliography</a>\n"
"and GNUnet's <a href=\"https://www.gnunet.org/links/\">related "
"projects</a>\n"
"serve that purpose well. That said, a few systems stand out for further\n"
"comparison. The following have individual comparison pages:"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/index.html:20
#, python-format
msgid ""
"The following are discussed on the <a href=\"%(othernetworks)s\">other "
"networks page:</a>"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/index.html:33
#, python-format
msgid ""
"The content of this page is subject to update, discussion and dispute, "
"and we welcome comments and additions.\n"
"You may contribute an analysis by entering a <a href=\"%(trac)s\">new "
"ticket on Trac</a>."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:2
msgid "I2P Compared to Other Anonymous Networks"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:5
msgid "The following networks are discussed on this page."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:17
#, python-format
msgid ""
"Most of the following sections are fairly old, and may not be accurate.\n"
"For an overview of available comparisons, see the\n"
"<a href=\"%(comparison)s\">main network comparisons page</a>.\n"
"You may contribute an analysis by entering a\n"
"<a href=\"%(trac)s\">new ticket on Trac</a>."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:29
#, python-format
msgid ""
"RetroShare is a set of peer-to-peer applications running in a\n"
"<a href=\"%(f2fwiki)s\">Friend-to-friend (F2F)</a> network. Each peer of "
"such F2F \n"
"network makes direct IP connections only to authenticated peers "
"(\"friends\") after explicit \n"
"certificates exchange. It can discover unauthenticated peers (e.g. "
"friends of friends), \n"
"but connections to them are relayed over \"friend\" peers for providing "
"privacy and anonymity."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:37
msgid ""
"RetroShare is designed to build a private network of trusted peers, while"
" I2P is designed \n"
"to be a large-scaled public anonymous network. Recent versions of "
"RetroShare have options to run \n"
"as a public \"darknet\" by using I2P or Tor as a transport. That way all "
"connections are \n"
"anonymized and no trust is required for adding new \"friends\"."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:48
#, python-format
msgid ""
"Morphmix and Tarzan are both fully distributed, peer to peer networks of"
" \n"
"anonymizing proxies, allowing people to tunnel out through the low "
"latency \n"
"mix network. Morphmix includes some very interesting collusion detection"
" \n"
"algorithms and Sybil defenses, while Tarzan makes use of the scarcity of "
"IP\n"
"addresses to accomplish the same. The two primary differences between \n"
"these systems and I2P are related to I2P's <a "
"href=\"%(threatmodel)s\">threat model</a> \n"
"and their out-proxy design (as opposed to providing both sender and "
"receiver \n"
"anonymity). There is source code available to both systems, but we are "
"not aware \n"
"of their use outside of academic environments."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:172
#, python-format
msgid ""
"\n"
"Mixminion and Mixmaster are networks to support anonymous email against a"
" very\n"
"powerful adversary.\n"
"High-latency messaging applications running on top of I2P\n"
"(for example <a href=\"%(syndie)s\">Syndie</a> or I2PBote)\n"
"may perhaps prove adequate to meet the threat\n"
"model of those adversaries, while running in parallel along side the "
"needs of low latency users, to provide\n"
"a significantly larger anonymity set.\n"
"High-latency support within the I2P router itself may or may not be added"
" in a distant future release.\n"
"It is too early to say if I2P will meet the needs of users requiring "
"extreme protection for email."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:184
msgid ""
"As with Tor and Onion Routing, \n"
"both Mixminion and Mixmaster take the directory based approach as well."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:194
#, python-format
msgid ""
"JAP (Java Anonymous Proxy) is a network of mix cascades for anonymizing "
"web requests,\n"
"and as such it has a few centralized nodes (participants in the cascade) "
"that blend\n"
"and mix requests from clients through the sequence of nodes (the cascade)"
" before \n"
"proxying out onto the web. The scope, threat model, and security is "
"substantially \n"
"different from I2P, but for those who don't require significant anonymity"
" but still\n"
"are not satisfied with an Anonymizer-like service, JAP is worth "
"reviewing. One\n"
"caution to note is that anyone under the jurisdiction of the German "
"courts may want\n"
"to take care, as the German Federal Bureau of Criminal Investigation "
"(FBCI) has \n"
"successfully mounted an \n"
"<a href=\"%(url)s\">attack</a> \n"
"on the network. Even though the method of this attack was later found to"
" be illegal \n"
"in the German courts, the fact that the data was successfully collected "
"is the \n"
"concern. Courts change their minds based upon circumstance, and this is "
"evidence that \n"
"if a government body or intelligence agency wanted to, they could gather "
"the data, even \n"
"if it may be found inadmissible in some courts later)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:216
#, python-format
msgid ""
"Both of these systems work through the same basic \n"
"<a href=\"%(antnet)s\">antnet</a> routing, providing some degree of\n"
"anonymity based on the threat model of providing plausible deniability "
"against a simple \n"
"non-colluding adversary. With the antnet routing, they first either do a"
" random walk or a \n"
"broadcast search to find some peer with the data or identity desired, and"
" then use a feedback\n"
"algorithm to optimize that found path. This works well for applications "
"that merely want to know \n"
"what other people around them have to offer - \"How are y'all doing\" vs."
" \"Hey Alice, how are you\" - \n"
"you basically get a local cluster of nodes that can share files with and "
"maintain some degree of \n"
"anonymity (though you don't have much control over who is in that group "
"of peers)."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:228
msgid ""
"However, the algorithm does not scale well at all - if the application "
"wants to speak with a \n"
"particular peer it ends up doing a broadcast search or random walk "
"(though if they are lucky enough\n"
"for that to succeed, the antnet routing should optimize that found "
"connection). This means that \n"
"while these networks can work great at small scales, they are not "
"suitable for large networks where\n"
"someone wants to get in touch with another specific peer. That does not "
"mean that there is no \n"
"value in these systems, just that their applicability is limited to "
"situations where their \n"
"particular issues can be addressed."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:239
#, python-format
msgid ""
"This was a closed-source network targeted at Iranian users.\n"
"Tor did a <a href=\"%(torpost)s\">good writeup on what to look for in a "
"circumvention tool</a>.\n"
"Suffice it to say that being closed source and publicly targeting a "
"specific country are not good ideas.\n"
"I2P is, of course, open source. However, that source, and our\n"
"<a href=\"%(docs)s\">technical documentation</a>, need much more review."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:248
msgid "Paid VPN Services"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:249
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:255
#, python-format
msgid ""
"You may contribute an analysis by entering a\n"
"<a href=\"%(trac)s\">new ticket on Trac</a>."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/other-networks.html:254
msgid "Others"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:2
msgid "I2P Compared to Tor"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:3
msgid "November 2016"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:9
#, python-format
msgid ""
"Tor and Onion Routing are both anonymizing proxy networks, \n"
"allowing people to tunnel out through their low latency mix \n"
"network. The two primary differences between Tor / \n"
"Onion-Routing and I2P are again related to differences in \n"
"the threat model and the out-proxy design (though Tor\n"
"supports hidden services as well). In addition, Tor\n"
"takes the directory-based approach - providing a \n"
"centralized point to manage the overall 'view' of the \n"
"network, as well as gather and report statistics, as \n"
"opposed to I2P's distributed <a href=\"%(netdb)s\">network \n"
"database</a> and <a href=\"%(peerselection)s\">peer selection</a>."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:23
msgid ""
"The I2P/Tor outproxy functionality does have a few \n"
"substantial weaknesses against certain attackers - \n"
"once the communication leaves the mixnet, global passive\n"
"adversaries can more easily mount traffic analysis. In \n"
"addition, the outproxies have access to the cleartext \n"
"of the data transferred in both directions, and \n"
"outproxies are prone to abuse, along with all of the \n"
"other security issues we've come to know and love with \n"
"normal Internet traffic."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:35
msgid ""
"However, many people don't need to worry about those \n"
"situations, as they are outside their threat model. It\n"
"is, also, outside I2P's (formal) functional scope (if people want\n"
"to build outproxy functionality on top of an anonymous\n"
"communication layer, they can). In fact, some I2P users\n"
"currently take advantage of Tor to outproxy."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:49
msgid "Comparison of Tor and I2P Terminology"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:50
msgid ""
"While Tor and I2P are similar in many ways, much of the terminology is "
"different."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:55
msgid "Cell"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:55
msgid "Message"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:56
msgid "Client"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:56
msgid "Router or Client"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:57
msgid "Circuit"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:57
msgid "Tunnel"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:58
msgid "Directory"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:58
msgid "NetDb"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:59
msgid "Directory Server"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:59
msgid "Floodfill Router"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:60
msgid "Entry Guards"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:60
msgid "Fast Peers"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:61
msgid "Entry Node"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:61
msgid "Inproxy"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:62
msgid "Exit Node"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:62
msgid "Outproxy"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:63
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:68
msgid "Hidden Service"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:63
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:68
msgid "Eepsite or Destination"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:64
msgid "Hidden Service Descriptor"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:64
msgid "LeaseSet"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:65
msgid "Introduction point"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:65
msgid "Inbound Gateway"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:66
msgid "Node"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:66
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:69
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:72
msgid "Router"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:67
msgid "Onion Proxy"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:67
msgid "I2PTunnel Client (more or less)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:68
msgid "Onion Service"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:69
msgid "Relay"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:70
msgid "Rendezvous Point"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:70
msgid "somewhat like Inbound Gateway + Outbound Endpoint"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:71
msgid "Router Descriptor"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:71
msgid "RouterInfo"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:72
msgid "Server"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:75
msgid "Benefits of Tor over I2P"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:78
msgid ""
"Much bigger user base; much more visibility in the academic and hacker "
"communities; benefits from\n"
"formal studies of anonymity, resistance, and performance;\n"
"has a non-anonymous, visible, university-based leader"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:84
msgid "Has already solved some scaling issues I2P has yet to address"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:85
msgid "Has significant funding"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:86
msgid "Has more developers, including several that are funded"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:88
msgid ""
"More resistant to state-level blocking due to TLS transport layer and "
"bridges\n"
"(I2P has proposals for \"full restricted routes\" but these are not yet "
"implemented)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:93
msgid "Big enough that it has had to adapt to blocking and DOS attempts"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:94
msgid "Designed and optimized for exit traffic, with a large number of exit nodes"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:96
msgid ""
"Better documentation, has formal papers and specifications,\n"
"better website, many more translations"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:101
msgid "More efficient with memory usage"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:102
msgid "Tor client nodes have very low bandwidth overhead"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:104
msgid ""
"Centralized control reduces the complexity at each\n"
"node and can efficiently address Sybil attacks"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:110
msgid ""
"A core of high capacity nodes provides higher\n"
"throughput and lower latency"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:115
msgid "C, not Java (ewww)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:118
msgid "Benefits of I2P over Tor"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:120
msgid ""
"Designed and optimized for hidden services, which are much faster than in"
" Tor"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:121
msgid "Fully distributed and self organizing"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:123
msgid ""
"Peers are selected by continuously profiling and ranking performance,\n"
"rather than trusting claimed capacity"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:129
msgid ""
"Floodfill peers (\"directory servers\") are varying and untrusted,\n"
"rather than hardcoded"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:134
msgid "Small enough that it hasn't been blocked or DOSed much, or at all"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:135
msgid "Peer-to-peer friendly"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:136
msgid "Packet switched instead of circuit switched"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:139
msgid ""
"implicit transparent load balancing of messages \n"
"across multiple peers, rather than a single path"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:145
msgid ""
"resilience vs. failures by running multiple \n"
"tunnels in parallel, plus rotating tunnels"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:151
msgid ""
"scale each client's connections at O(1) instead \n"
"of O(N) (Alice has e.g. 2 inbound tunnels that are \n"
"used by all of the peers Alice is talking with, \n"
"rather than a circuit for each)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:161
msgid ""
"Unidirectional tunnels instead of bidirectional\n"
"circuits, doubling the number of nodes a peer has to\n"
"compromise to get the same information."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:166
#, python-format
msgid "Counter-arguments and further discussion <a href=\"%(netdb)s\">here</a>."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:171
msgid ""
"Protection against detecting client activity, even\n"
"when an attacker is participating in the tunnel, as\n"
"tunnels are used for more than simply passing end \n"
"to end messages (e.g. netDb, tunnel management, \n"
"tunnel testing)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:180
msgid ""
"Tunnels in I2P are short lived, decreasing the number\n"
"of samples that an attacker can use to mount an \n"
"active attack with, unlike circuits in Tor, which are\n"
"typically long lived."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:188
msgid ""
"I2P APIs are designed specifically for anonymity and\n"
"security, while SOCKS is designed for functionality."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:193
msgid "Essentially all peers participate in routing for others"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:195
msgid ""
"The bandwidth overhead of being a full peer is low, \n"
"while in Tor, while client nodes don't require much\n"
"bandwidth, they don't fully participate in the mixnet."
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:201
msgid "Integrated automatic update mechanism"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:202
msgid "Both TCP and UDP transports"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:203
msgid "Java, not C (ewww)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:206
msgid "Other potential benefits of I2P but not yet implemented"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:207
msgid "...and may never be implemented, so don't count on them!"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:210
msgid ""
"Defense vs. message count analysis by garlic wrapping \n"
"multiple messages"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:216
msgid ""
"Defense vs. long term intersection by adding delays \n"
"at various hops (where the delays are not discernible\n"
"by other hops)"
msgstr ""
#: i2p2www/pages/site/comparison/tor.html:223
msgid ""
"Various mixing strategies at the tunnel level (e.g.\n"
"create a tunnel that will handle 500 messages / minute,\n"
"where the endpoint will inject dummy messages if there\n"
"are insufficient messages, etc)"
msgstr ""