2009/5/13 Matthew Toseland <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org>: > On Wednesday 13 May 2009 01:05:40 you wrote: >> 2009/5/13 Matthew Toseland <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org>: >> > On Tuesday 12 May 2009 09:33:11 you wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Matthew Toseland >> >> <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: >> >> > On Tuesday 12 May 2009 00:45:54 Matthew Toseland wrote: >> >> >> commit f86448d51c2e3248e1dfec513eefde50902aac30 >> >> >> Author: Daniel Cheng (鄭郁邦) <j16s...@freenetproject.org> >> >> >> Date: Fri May 8 21:04:28 2009 +0800 >> >> >> >> >> >> FreenetStore: Simplify code, remove "overwrite" parameter >> >> >> >> >> >> This parameter is always "false". >> >> >> (Except when doing BDB->SaltedHash migration, which does not have > to >> >> >> overwrite) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The reason I introduced the overwrite parameter was that when we send > an >> > SSK >> >> >> insert and get a DataFound with different data, we should not only >> > propagate >> >> >> the data downstream, but also replace our local copy of it. However >> >> >> apparently I never implemented this. Is it a good idea? >> >> >> >> >> > Looks like we do store the collided data for a local insert >> >> > (NodeClientCore.java:XXX we have collided), but not for a remote one. >> > Except >> >> > that a bug prevents the former from working. So we need to fix > getBlock(). >> >> > Ok... >> >> > >> >> >> >> Let's see if these two commit make sense: (this is on my fork, not >> >> committed to the main staging yet) >> >> >> >> >> > > http://github.com/j16sdiz/fred/commit/8e2ef42c286450813dbfa575bcd3f54dc8cb4c83 >> >> >> > > http://github.com/j16sdiz/fred/commit/7e6040ce3359486557bdd832c526e473a4f95577 >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Daniel >> > >> > Does this deal with the case where the request is remote, i.e. came from >> > outside via a SSKInsertHandler? >> > >> >> I think the SSKInsertSender code have handle the remote request case: >> > http://github.com/freenet/fred-staging/commit/6a341ed359a9ef6800a9830685c97072e9845912#diff-3 > > No it doesn't, store(,,false)! If there is a collision we want to > store(,,true).
You means overwrite local SSKBlock with remote one, even if we are not inserting? Should we? What if an attacker try to overwrite an SSK? >> >> If it do not, I have no idea where should I fix it. > _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
