On Thursday 26 March 2009 05:01:32 Daniel Cheng wrote: > 2009/3/26 Fl?vio Santos <flavio.santos at inf.ufrgs.br>: > > Hello, > > > > I mean by content pollution the action of publishing files with fake > > metadata. > > This could be done to disseminate spam, virus or other malwares. > > Multiple decoy insertions could affect the Freenet network utility. > > > > I have a short paper (2 pages) describing my current work, including a > > description of my strategy to mitigate content pollution: > > http://inf.ufrgs.br/~frsantos/files/funnel_infocom2009-sw.pdf > > To quote your paper: > : Since the value of D can be overestimated by the attackers, > : eventually the condition D < A is false and the mechanism > : denies all subsequent download requests, causing a denial > : of service. However, this seems to be interesting only in the > : scenario where malicious peers try to harm the dissemination > : of an authentic content. > > This is exactly what our attack model is. > Think about the WikiLeak-like site, every malicious peers want to take it down. > > Freenet is designed to protect from censorship.
Ouch, fair point... > > [..] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 835 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090326/7b48f9f0/attachment.pgp>
