On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 09:05:47AM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote: > Even this doesn't completely solve the problem, since we must assume that > an attacker will be able to monitor network traffic, and could easily > notice that no corresponding message left the node after our reply arrived > (with or without the simulated delay). > > Of course, I also don't like the idea that we will artificially be making > Freenet slower to respond to requests than it already is. Well, the slowness is easy as well. Allow fcp requests from localhost to dodge any artificial probabalistic slowing.
-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20020208/51de582d/attachment.pgp>
