[dvanduzer]

Just to be clear, Telehash is a protocol, not an application. The bulk of the documentation is on Github, and so far it's mostly for people implementing the protocol in different languages.

There's no blockchain involved in Telehash. It accomodates various cipher sets, including one suitable for ultra low power devices (there's a partially working implementation for Arduino). And you're correct, it isn't really aimed at enabling anything like trusting a URL from a television commercial.

Telehash is conservative in the sense that it solves useful problems, even within the current DNS infrastructure. No one's currently doing this, but you could easily map a DNS name to a Telehash address. But it also offers global resilience to partitioning, because the logical mesh can operate on any lower level network transport.

I like the multiple notary model of Convergence, but I think any of these trust models still need to separate the "human memorable names" component.

[sarahj]

I was mixing a number of different criticisms of various technologies in my post...I never meant to confer that Telehash has a blockchain.

I guess, I still don't understand the point of Telehash. Even having read through the documentation. "Establishing private communication channels" is definitely a big problem, one with a huge threat model, and the solution is probably multi-faceted - I don't see where a system like Telehash fits in v.s. something like tor or i2p for example - does anonymity fit into the threat model?

Before dragging this thread off the page I will follow up with an email. :)

[dvanduzer]

Hope to hear from you. :)

Telehash's design may simplify the future design of Tor-like protocols, but anonymity is not an intended core feature.

Partition resistance is probably the highest priority. If any possible insecure network path exists, encrypted communication between endpoints should also be possible (and automatic).