Hi,
First, thanks to everybody that worked on that i2p security issue.
> * if I2P folks or anyone are ready to put quite some energy into
> implementing a good security design for I2P-in-Tails, say, in time
> for Tails 1.2, then it would be sad to drop I2P entirely for Tails
> 1.1.1. We could change things so that I2P is functional only if
> some option is passed on the kernel command-line; most potential
> deeper counter-measures would probably be too invasive for
> a point-release, but perhaps a few baby-steps can be walked in
> time for the freeze (August 12);
>
> * otherwise, then I think we should seriously consider applying your
> patch that entirely removes I2P.
>
I agree with that proposal.
Cheers
