On Friday 22 May 2009 08:17:55 bbac...@googlemail.com wrote: > Is'nt his point that the users just won't maintain the trust lists? > I thought that is the problem that he meant.... how can Advogato help us here?
Advogato with only positive trust introduces a different tradeoff, which is still a major PITA to maintain, but maybe less of one: - Spammers only disappear when YOU mark them as spammers, or ALL the people you trust do. Right now they disappear when the majority, from the point of view of your position on the WoT, mark them as spammers (more or less). - If you mark a spammer as positive because he posts useful content on one board, and you don't read the boards he spams you are likely to get marked as a spammer yourself. - If a spammer doesn't spam himself, but gains trust through posting useful content on various boards and then spends this trust by trusting spam identities, it will be necessary to give him zero message list trust. Again this has serious issues with collateral damage, depending on how trigger-happy people are and how much of a problem it is for newbies to see spam. Technologically, this requires: - Changing WoT to only support positive trust. This is more or less a one line change. - Making sure that my local ratings always override those given by others, so I can mark an identity as spam and never see it again. Dunno if this is currently implemented. - Making CAPTCHA announcement provide some form of short-lived trust, so if the newly introduced identity doesn't get some trust it goes away. This may also be implemented. - Limits on identity churn in any trust list (1 new identity per day averaged over a week or something), to ensure that an attacker who has trust cannot constantly add new identities. It probably also requires: - Some indication of which trusted identities trust a spammer when you mark an identity as a spammer. - Sending an ultimatum to the trusted identity that trusts more than one spammer: stop trusting spammers or we'll stop trusting you. This would have to be answered in a reasonable time, hence is a problem for those not constantly at their nodes. evanbd has argued that the latter two measures are unnecessary, and that the limited number of spam identities that any one identity can introduce will make the problem manageable. An attacker who just introduces via a CAPTCHA will presumably only get short-lived trust, and if he only posts spam he won't get any positive trust. An attacker who contributes to boards to gain trust to create spamming sub-identities with has to do manual work to gain and maintain reputation among some sub-community. A newbie will not see old captcha-based spammers, only new ones, and those spam identities that the attacker's main, positive identity links to. He will have to manually block each such identity, because somebody is bound to have positive trust for the spammer parent identity. In terms of UI, if evanbd is right, all we need is a button to mark the poster of a message as a spammer (and get rid of all messages from them), and a small amount of automatic trust when answering a message (part of the UI so it can be disabled). Only those users who know how, and care enough, would actually change the trust for the spammer-parent, and in any case doing so would only affect them and contribute nothing to the community. But if he is wrong, or if an attacker is sufficiently determined, we will also need some way to detect spam-parents, and send them ultimatums. > > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 05:51, Evan Daniel <eva...@gmail.com> wrote: > > It's not all that interesting. It has been discussed to death many > > times. The Advogato algorithm (or something like it) solves this > > problem (not perfectly, but far, far better than the current FMS / WoT > > alchemy), as I have explained in great detail. > > > > Evan Daniel > > > > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 12:57 PM, <gu...@gmx.org> wrote: > >> Interesting discussion from Frost, especially the last post at the bottom. Its about WoTs in general and why they won't work. > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- hahaha...@yle3zhs5lkiwe3fdjyqlcf5+rka ----- 2009.04.05 - 02:28:11GMT ----- > >> > >> I had to forward this one here. > >> > >> ------- jezreel℺X~GLTTHo9aaYtIpGT6OOyBMMFwl3b8LwFu6TUw9Q82E sent via FMS on 2009-04-05 at 01:31:54GMT ------- > >> > >> Probably not an amazing subject, but FMS is so dead lately so what the > >> hell. Falafel, why do some of the folks posting to Frost hate you so > >> much? In particular Luke771 and VolodyA. You generally seem like a > >> nice identity so I'm just curious. > >> -- > >> jezr...@pbxwgrdegrigwuteoz3tc6cfla2xu3trmi2tgr2enfrvi4bxkzlectshfvyw2wcxkrffslccijku4z2om5gtoojrpzdfcolkovtdawjuifigkrcqjbevsvrnla2xotcdpfvw6lkmkzzsyqkrifbucqkf.freemail > >> > >> ;)) > >> > >> ----- VolodyA! V a...@r0pa7z7ja1haf2xttt7aklre+yw ----- 2009.04.11 - 12:11:26GMT ----- > >> > >> I should point out i do not hate falafel, i do not know him. I do hate what he is doing to Freenet, however. If he was to stop supporting intruduction of censorship on Freenet i would not say anything bad about him. > >> > >> In fact i tend to agree with much of what he has to say on other subjects. > >> > >> -- > >> May all the sentient beings benefit from our conversation. > >> > >> ----- denmin...@dlkkaikia79j4ovpbgfk4znh25y ----- 2009.04.14 - 16:13:07GMT ----- > >> > >> Falafel is doing nothing. If a single guy can make the protocol not work, then the protocol is shitty from the start and we need to write a new one. > >> > >> ----- Anonymous ----- 2009.04.14 - 20:46:59GMT ----- > >> > >> The only shit around here is spewing from the mouths of those who don't understand how it works. No one can stop you from seeing what you want to see. Anyone who tells you otherwise is spreading misinformation. > >> > >> ----- luke...@ch4jcmdc27eeqm9cw_wvju+coim ----- 2009.05.04 - 01:01:46GMT ----- > >> > >> > >> No one can really censor FMS alright, BUT there IS a problem with those 'censored trust lists' anyway. > >> The existance of censored trust lists forces users to actively maintain their own trust lists, the WoT wont work 'on its own' as it would if everyone used it the way it's supposed to. > >> > >> Let me try to explain: if everyone used wot to block flood attacks and nothing else, new users wouldnt need to try and find out which trust lists are 'good', they wouldnt need to work on thir trust lists for hours every day, try to spot censors or "guys who wont block pedos", they could simply use FMS and occasianlly set a high trust for someone they actually trust, or lower the trust for someone they caught spamming > >> > >> But the current situation makes FMS a pain in the ass. Users have to work on your trust lists regularly, and new users risk (and probably do) to have some of the content blocked by some censor because the guy posted one message on a board that the censor found 'immoral'. > >> > >> It may take time until the new user figures out which trust lists to use, and there's a very real risk that he would think that it isnt worth the hassle and give up on FMS completely. > >> I did that, others did that, and more will. > >> > >> THAT is the real problem with the Little Brothers, not their non-existent ability to censor content. they cant censor anything and they know it. But they can and do make FMS a pain in the ass to use. > >> > >> Another problem is that, assuming that the fms community will survive (which i dontthink it will), it my end up split into a number of closed sub-communities that refuse to talk to each other. But this is only a guess, so far. We'll have to see how it turns out. > >> > >> In the meantime, making FMS into a PITa has been done already, that is why FMS is as good as dead, and that's why I think that invesiting develpers' time and effort into WoT and Freetalk is a huge waste: FMS failed because of human stupidity and arrogance, and so will Freetalk/WoT, and I really cant understand why the devs cant see the obvious (or refuse to admit it) > >> > >> BTW, I dont hate Falafel. Hate costs energy. A lot of it. > >> -- > >> FAFS - the Freenet Applications FreeSite > >> u...@ugb~uuscsidmi-ze8laze~o3buib3s50i25riwdh99m,9T20t3xoG-dQfMO94LGOl9AxRTkaz~TykFY-voqaTQI,AQACAAE/FAFS/47/ > >> > >> -Don't think out of the box: destroy it!-
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
