On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:31 PM, VolodyA! V Anarhist <volo...@whengendarmesleeps.org> wrote: > Ximin Luo пишет: >> On 12/01/10 19:16, VolodyA! V Anarhist wrote: >>> Basically a KSK can hold any data, in this particular case we are talking >>> about >>> a redirect to a USK. So let's say i want to have a domain iamcool.freenet, >>> then >>> (for example) i would insert my freesite, and then insert >>> k...@iamcool.freenet to >>> redirect to the key for my freesite. I will care less if somebody is >>> 'flooding >>> billions of random files' into other keys, because once i will insert my key >>> chances are it will be found by somebody. Of course there is a chance that >>> somebody will run a dictionary attack and try to 'register' all possible >>> word >>> combinations of domain names, but then people will just have to find the >>> domain >>> that isn't taken... just like they would in the DNS in the www. >> >> I know how KSKs work, but the principle is the same. Someone can repeatedly >> insert the same KSK and make different nodes store different things. A >> government could easily do it, for example. "You can always use an SSK" is >> not >> an argument if 90% of the links on freenet point to KSKs. There is definitely >> potential for a name-resolution service otherwise. >> >> X > > Please propose a *decentralised* solution without reinventing KSK by using > other > key types.
I think you should avoid telling Freenet developers that they don't know how Freenet keys work. If you find yourself tempted, I would guess that it means you misunderstood their point (or they didn't explain it well). Personally, I don't think DNS is a problem that is readily amenable to solution. However, it is blindingly obvious to me that the KSK approach (stick a redirect at k...@example.freenet) is quite different than the WoT approach. The latter would be something along the lines of publish the DNS entry as part of your WoT id, and then for resolution you look through the WoT ids you've downloaded for a match. Conflicts are permitted; in that case, resolution goes to one of them, with tie breaking on some combination of age, computed trust score, etc. This becomes exactly as resistant to spam and censorship as the WoT is in other contexts. However, it has the other problem that scaling issues are harder. (WoT when used by Freetalk needs resources on the order of the number of people posting in boards you read. DNS can't be broken into groups with that level of locality, meaning it will scale roughly as the number of total DNS entries.) Evan Daniel _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
