Hi Mike,
thanks for your assessment.
Please find my replies in-line:
DKIM is hardly a PoW; signing is cheap and gets cheaper all the
time. I used to work in the email business and big bulk mailers all spent
far more CPU time on other aspects of their business, the overhead of
DKIM is
DKIM is hardly a PoW; signing is cheap and gets cheaper all the time. I
used to work in the email business and big bulk mailers all spent far more
CPU time on other aspects of their business, the overhead of DKIM is
irrelevant.
PoW didn't work in the anti spam world because it (amongst other
Hi Mike, hi Ivan, hi all,
Since when? This has been a recognized approach since people called it
hashcash ([1] - before cryptocurrencies were even invented).
I only know of one site that worked the way you propose: TicketMaster, a
long time ago. They used it as a less harsh form of
Hi Mike,
thanks for your assessment.
Please find my replies in-line:
Misbehaving addresses can have their connecting difficulty
scaled up, which should make it uneconomic to try to DoS the usage of
Tor exit nodes for connecting to Bitcoin.
You can't solve DoS by requiring all clients
Since when? This has been a recognized approach since people called it
hashcash ([1] - before cryptocurrencies were even invented).
I only know of one site that worked the way you propose: TicketMaster, a
long time ago. They used it as a less harsh form of blocking for IPs that
they strongly
Hi there,
quote:
[...]
If two distinct transactions (with unrelated bitcoin addresses)
come from the same set of 8 peers, the attacker can conclude that they
originated from the same user. This gives another method (in addition
to transaction graph analysis) for an attacker to link different
Misbehaving addresses can have their connecting difficulty
scaled up, which should make it uneconomic to try to DoS the usage of
Tor exit nodes for connecting to Bitcoin.
You can't solve DoS by requiring all clients to do complicated work, all
that means is that weak clients (like users
7 matches
Mail list logo
