On Tuesday 26 May 2009 22:02:37 xor wrote:
> On Thursday 07 May 2009 11:23:51 Evan Daniel wrote:
> > > Why exactly? Your post is nice but I do not see how it answers my
> > > question. The general problem my post is about: New identities are
> > > obtained by taking them from trust lists of known identities. An
> > > attacker therefore could put 1000000 identities in his trust list to
> > > fill up your database and slow down WoT. Therefore, an decision has to
> > > be made when to NOT import new identities from someone's trust list. In
> > > the current implementation, it is when he has a negative score.
>
> [...]
>
> > I have not examined the WoT code.  However, the Advogato metric has
> > two attributes that I don't think the current WoT method has: no
> > negative trust behavior (if there is a trust rating Bob can assign to
> > Carol such that Alice will trust Carol less than if Bob had not
> > assigned a rating, that's a negative trust behavior), and a
> > mathematical proof as to the upper limit on the quantity of spammer
> > nodes that get trusted.
> >
> > The Advogato metric is *specifically* designed to handle the case of
> > the attacker creating millions of accounts.  In that case, his success
> > is bounded (linear with modest constant) by the number of confused
> > nodes -- that is, legitimate nodes that have (incorrectly) marked his
> > accounts as legitimate.  If you look at the flow computation, it
> > follows that for nodes for which the computed trust value is zero, you
> > don't have to bother downloading their trust lists, so the number of
> > such lists you download is similarly well controlled.
>
> I have read your messages again and all your new messages and you are so
> convinced about advogato that I'd like to ask you more questions about how
> it would work, I don't want you to feel like everyone is ignoring you :) (-
> I am more of a programmer right now than a designer of algorithms, I
> concentrate on spending most available time on *implementing* WoT/FT
> because nobody else is doing it and it needs to get done... so I have not
> talked much in this discussion)
>
> Consider the following case, using advogato and not the current FMS/WoT
> alchemy:
>
> 1. Identity X is an occasional and trustworthy poster. X has received many
> positive trust values from hundreds of identities because it has posted
> hundreds of messages over the months, so it has a high score and capacity
> to give trust values, and all newbies will know about the identity and it's
> high score because it is well-integrated into the trust graph.
>
> 2. Now a spammer gets a single identity Y onto the trust list of X by
> solving a captcha, his score is very low because he has only solved a
> captcha but the score is there. Therefore, any newbie will see Y because X
> is well-integrated into the WoT
>
> 3. X is gone for quite some time due to inactivity, during that time Y
> creates 500 spam identities on his trust list and starts to spam all
> boards. X will not remove Y from his trust list because he is *away* for
> weeks.

Also consider the case that instead of 500 new identities he just posts 
5000000 messages with his single identity Y. How do we get rid of Y?

> 4. Newbies will see the 500 spam identities and their spam because everyone
> trusts X, and X trusts Y. Newbies will NOT know how to block anything
> because they are newbies.
>
> 5. Now the *core* task of the WoT is in question: How can we as the
> community make the spam-identities introduced by Y disappear with advogato
> trust metrics, without negative trust??
>
> - As you've said, we cannot take away the trust which Y receives from X
> because that is THE attribute of non-negative-trust-metrics.
> - Further, we cannot cause EVERYONE who has trusted X to remove the trust
> value because X is in way too many trust lists of idle people, etc.
> - So what can we do with advogato, if we are the community and want to mark
> Y as the root of evil?
>
> xor

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090526/c6b5869e/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to