

Tunnels with more hops provide greater anonymity, but result in reduced reliability and throughput, while increasing latency. This allows users to balance anonymity, latency, throughput, and reliability as best serve their own needs.

The length of each user’s Inbound and Outbound Tunnels is under their control.

Which takes us to the concept of a threat model. Whether that can or will happen depends on who that hostile someone is and what resources they are willing to use against you. Getting your information requires someone hostile to you to defeat one of these factors and the willingness to expend the resources to do so. The internal architecture of the system.With coders all around the world reviewing the code and looking for bugs or intentionally-inserted weaknesses, I2P is surely safer to use than most commercial software. Who would you lean on to do something underhanded like put a backdoor into the code?Īdd the fact that the I2P code is FOSS (Free and Open Source Software). On the other hand, this makes it a lot harder to put pressure on the team. And, as far as we can tell, there are no big financial backers. On the one hand, there isn’t some corporation or university to drive the project forward and be held responsible if something goes wrong. The distributed, mostly volunteer, and partially anonymous nature of the team has advantages and disadvantages. You can see the most up-to-date list on the I2P Project Members page. Here is a partial list of the project team as of December 2018: I2P Project Member List As befits an anonymous messaging system, the people who develop and manage I2P are mostly anonymous themselves.
