On Wednesday 02 Jan 2013 18:54:45 Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Friday 28 Dec 2012 13:34:26 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> > Am Montag, 24. Dezember 2012, 21:11:55 schrieb Robert Hailey:
> > > With that being said, the scarce resource (in theory) would be location
> > > (detectable by network address), because an attacker simulating many nodes
> > > would likely have them in a very confined space (like a server closet or a
> > > few buildings here-and-there), and could not spoof a wildly different
> > > location because it would interfere with routing.
> > 
> > Except if he just bought some time on one of the million-computer botnets 
> > for 
> > doing the attack.
> 
> Yes, I'm putting that sort of thing in the "expensive attacks" box.
> > 
> > But aside that: If we can marry your idea with transport plugins, that 
> > might 
> > be an option to create scarcity at least for some transports. Freenet could 
> > then prefer scarce transports over abundant transports - if available.
> 
> Maybe.
> 
> Even without rewiring the internet, we have several resources we can use that 
> provide at least some level of scarcity that we can maybe throttle by:
> - CAPTCHAs
> - IP addresses
> - ASN lookup of IP addresses.
> 
I have lots of detailed ideas on this, will post shortly when I can get them 
together in a usable form. The limiting factor is it's hard to distinguish 
between "attacker creates 5000 nodes on a single AS" versus "slashdot causes 
lots of newbies on a single AS". We can still improve a lot on the status quo 
though.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to