Yes, start with IPv6, and perhaps start with bug bounties when developing the protocols, and such.
Make onion routing an inherent part of the protocol, maybe.
This idea already has a name.
There are a lot of pluses to it; but the most important one is probably that it can completely decentralize the infrastructure. This is of course has a few caveats. It relies on the ability to connect all computers; so the routing would need to be able to avoid those who don't know what they are doing. It would also require a very generalized distribution of amateurs that do know what they are doing. It would also require hardware and software solutions for home hosting.
What it really doesn't need is a gateway to commercial networks. This is because commercial networks would want a gateway to it.
This is actually a pretty difficult problem. We're not there yet socially; and we really don't have cost effective home hosting solutions.
This is what I would choose for a public internet; but it's not quite feasible yet.
yeah, a mesh network. Where each node, is connected directly to every node. very secure.
A CPU is actually a mesh network.
Security is an easy job where everyone is satisfied. The difficulties with modern life are the product of incoherence in the system. Almost all security measures treat the symptoms; according to systems theory.
In order to survey what threats to expect, you have to know what the initial social conditions are. What would cause a mesh network to be insecure is not only an unfair or unstable economic system but also a generation of people who have only experienced "plug and play" products. Products are locked down because people (especially young people) are inquisitive. This is a result of a huge mistake that was made by the "guilds of scribes" before the acceptance of the printing press. The copyright is a legal tenant for the "right to copy". It was all about greedy scribes who didn't want to give up their excessive wealth so that everyone could have books. It happened anyway; because everyone wanted books. It also goes back to the advent of the loom and the story of the Luddites. The loom won because everybody wanted decent clothing.
A mesh network isn't just a system for transmitting data; and it's complexity dwarfs that of a processor. It's a decentralized, self-organizing system when you take it in context. The system itself is not insecure; not by a long shot. It's not even as fallible as it's weakest link. It's links are charged with finding security solutions for themselves. It promotes that inquisitive human predisposition and therefor the innovation that the current internet stifles.
Imagine yourself a security threat. Now imagine finding a target in a network that doesn't just give up personal information on a silver platter. Imagine finding a target that has something that you want; without being able to find that information without random distributed hacking that is just as likely to get you busted as it is to get you information about a possible target. Imagine not being able to find a huge database of information in a company that weighs security expenditures against insurance expenditures. Security by obscurity is nothing to sneeze at under the kinds of conditions that such a network might produce.
The problem is that the average person is not being taught how to live in a high tech society. This is happening because the "second industrial revolution" is on the minds of those with the wealth. The "internet of things" is likely to kill internet 2.0 because it in itself is a security issue; along with a tech naive population. There is no choice but to address this issue if our society is to become a high tech society. All of the mistakes that we are making now will become lessons for the engineers that build the next web. I doubt that there will be only one though. There tends to be bifurcations in technologies that result in tech for specific uses. This also might (probably will) be more iterative than I'm appreciating. The next web might be just a little better; but still a hot mess.
We're just not to a point where we can handle the task of a secure internet. It requires a tech savvy populous. It's still going to win though, like the printing press won; and result in general education of the public.
Tim Burners Lee talks about the next web; and asks for data sharing.
I've been thinking about how to pull that off; but I don't know what would keep corporate America from paywalling it (even the publicly funded stuff). That's a huge problem that needs to be solved. I don't even think that UBI after technological unemployment could solve it. The root of the problem is in the jealous guarding of "trade secrets" that has existed since remote antiquity. What is probably required is an economic revolution as opposed to the financial revolution that many call an economic revolution.
What it boils down to is, we are insecure because our economic system is unstable and inefficient. The will to survive does the rest. It's the epitome of a chaotic system; subject to it's initial conditions.
Given the outcome, probably nothing.
I know the state of the internet seems a mess right now but damn it has been incredibly successful getting there. I would not change anything about the interenet, but rather change the laws outside and regarding the internet. THere is far too much meddling from know nothings and people out to just plain harm other through misuse of data.
Leave the internet as is and just change the people...
You couldn't possibly connect every node to every other node. I would limit it to like 10 connections for each node.
And even if. It wouldn't affect the security because we would encrypt the traffic. And only because you are connected to another node, doesn't mean that can see everything that goes through the other connections of that node.
And if encryption is compromised, you'd still be better of without a centralized node.
taken from the first sentence of wikipedia
mesh network is a network topology in which each node relays data for the network
If every node doesn't connect to every node, then you only have a partial mesh network. Networking 101.
The point of a mesh network security is that it is a perfect closed system. You wouldn't need to encrypt anything.
Every node can connect to every other node but not at the same time. There just aren't resources in the individual nodes for that. Each node has a bridged connection.
A mesh network is a distributed system. Each node would still need security measures. There are no closed systems that exist in reality.
Of course you would need encryption. Otherwise anyone who intercepts one of your wires could read all the traffic. A data line that goes through public places should always be considered infected imo.
fair enough, I'll redact that part.