Hello Ilshat, Please can you answer the following questions:
1) Why a different socket is needed for poisoned chunks? 2)Malicious peer relay chunks received from splitter. If the sppliter does not send chunks to a malicious peer, What chunk is relayed? 3) crc32 is not suitable as cryptographic hash function. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_hash_function. 4) I do not see the problem with 255. Trusted peer just send information to the sppliter about the chunks received and who send them. Best, Leo El lun, 01-06-2015 a las 00:51 +0500, Ilshat Shakirov escribió: > Hello!, > > > > Here is the post about results of the first week: > http://shakirov-dev.blogspot.ru/2015/05/the-first-week.html > > > > Im currently in progress in preparing the plan of testing, I will > suggest the first version of it by the end of the second week. > > > > Thanks! > > > > 2015-05-25 16:40 GMT+05:00 Ilshat Shakirov <[email protected]>: > > Hello!, > > > > I have just implemented and tested malicous peer, which simply > sends zero chunk to the rest of team. Here it is. > > > Yes, that's the first step, sending poisoned chunk to > the rest. But malicious peer is supposed to be smart, > trying to avoid policies or colluding with others... > In any case, STrPe-DS is more interesting in a real > scenario. > > Ok, so I will try to implement STrPe as soon as possible, and > start to implement STrPe-DS with smart malicious peer. I > think I should implement bad-mouth and selective attacks, is > it enough? > > > I use Linux. > > The problem was solved on its own, so I can test everything in > local team. Thanks =) > > > > > > > 2015-05-25 16:28 GMT+05:00 L.G.Casado <[email protected]>: > > Dear all, > El lun, 25-05-2015 a las 14:13 +0500, Ilshat Shakirov > escribió: > > > Malicious peers will be smart and they can > > perform different types of attacks. > > Keep in main that the goal is to check the > > efficiency of STrPe and STrPe-DS against > > those type of attacks. > > > > The first step is to implement STrPe. I think that > > the malicious peer which will just send poisoned > > chunk (000..00) is enough for evaluating STrPe. (am > > I right?) > > Yes, that's the first step, sending poisoned chunk to > the rest. But malicious peer is supposed to be smart, > trying to avoid policies or colluding with others... > In any case, STrPe-DS is more interesting in a real > scenario. > > > > > > > > We have to agree about what experiments > > (number of malicious peers, type of attacks, > > etc) are needed to check the results and > > your code. > > > > It's ok. I will prepare plan asap. > > Thanks. > > > It is rare the system go down for 5-10 sec. > > What is the environment you are checking > > it? > > > > MacOS (yosemite); I run splitter, monitor and peer. > > When system is going to down, the vlc out the error > > messages like *can't decode timestamp. > > But it occurs from time to time, ie today morning > > all was ok =) And I just check it again, all was > > ok. > > I use Linux. > > Best, > > Leo > > > > > > >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~p2psp Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~p2psp More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
