On 5/20/10, Moritz Bartl <t...@wiredwings.com> wrote: > On 20.05.2010 06:25, Roger Dingledine wrote: >> The trouble here is that if we make family declarations one-sided, then >> I can tell everybody that I'm in blutmagie's family (and X's family and >> Y's family and Z's family and ...), and suddenly I'm influencing the >> path selection of other clients in a way I shouldn't be able to. > > Maybe it is a misunderstanding on my side, but I agree with Scott. How > could this influence the network in a way that one can speak of an > "attack"? My idea was that by stating a family, I say that *my node* > musn't be used in a circuit together with other members of that family, > no more, no less. > So, by misconfiguring the family on my side, I cannot hurt the network > more than (in the extreme) by running no node at all. I too do not understand this. Already an evil entry node can list all nodes that it does _not_ control in its family option to try to force circuit through the nodes it controls, though it would obviously be a dead give away listing many unrelated nodes as within the family. Is there a check when a node declares itself to be in a family the descriptor of the other family members are checked to confirm?
Regards Oguz *********************************************************************** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
