On Feb 15 2008, Matthew Toseland wrote: > Hmm, so what you're saying is that if we reject a request because of > overload we should NOT remember that peer and offer them the data. Fair > point. Fixed in trunk 17940.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that a peer can overflow the ULPR table without being throttled because it only requires 3 requests per second of a few hundred bytes each. By doing so, the attacker can fragment the ULPR trees of other nodes' requests. The attack doesn't require much bandwidth, so an attacker with a fast connection can attack several hundred opennet peers at once. Cheers, Michael
