Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-08-01 Thread Jack Lloyd
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, A.Melon wrote: > and on the left hand side of the page it says: > > At the moment, we do not support non-Javascript browsers. > > If they are concerned about security, Shouldn't they be avoiding > javascript? Shapiro has a strange love for Javascript. I don't know what

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread A.Melon
Jack Lloyd wrote: >On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Steve Schear wrote: > >> Looks amazingly familiar. Could it be, could be, could it be Mojo >> Nation (now MNet http://mnet.sourceforge.net )? > >Or OpenCM (http://www.opencm.org) > -Jack On the OpenCM webpage, it proclaims on the right hand side:

document popularity estimation / amortizable hashcash (Re: Hollywood Hackers)

2002-07-31 Thread Adam Back
I proposed a construct which could be used for this application: called "amortizable hashcash". http://www.cypherspace.org/hashcash/amortizable.pdf The application I had in mind was also file sharing. (This was sometime in Mar 2000). I described this problem as the "disitrbuted documen

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread James A. Donald
ignatures as > > good or bad. Eugen Leitl > This is completely unnecessary if you address the document with > a cryptohash. An URI like > http://localhost:4711/f70539bb32961f3d7dba42a9c51442c1218a9100 > can only adress a particular document. And then the hollywood hackers flood

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread James A. Donald
-- On 31 Jul 2002 at 11:01, Eugen Leitl wrote: > The issue of node reputation is completely orthogonal to the > document hashes not colliding. Reputation based systems are > useful, because document URI > http://localhost:4711/f70539bb32961f3d7dba42a9c51442c1218a9100 > doesn't say what's in t

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread Jack Lloyd
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Steve Schear wrote: > Looks amazingly familiar. Could it be, could be, could it be Mojo > Nation (now MNet http://mnet.sourceforge.net )? Or OpenCM (http://www.opencm.org) -Jack

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread Steve Schear
At 11:01 AM 7/31/2002 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: >On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, James A. Donald wrote: > > > The plan, already implemented, is to flood file sharing systems with > > bogus files or broken files. The solution, not yet implemented, is to > > attach digital signatures to files, and have the fi

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread Graham Lally
Anonymous wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 20:51:24 -0700, you wrote: > >>When we approve a file, all the people who approved it already get >>added to our trust list, thus helping us select files, and we are >>told that so and so got added to our list of people who recommend >>good files. This give

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-31 Thread Eugen Leitl
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, James A. Donald wrote: > The plan, already implemented, is to flood file sharing systems with > bogus files or broken files. The solution, not yet implemented, is to > attach digital signatures to files, and have the file sharing software > recognize certain signatures as go

Re: Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-30 Thread James A. Donald
-- On 29 Jul 2002 at 14:25, Duncan Frissell wrote: > Congressman Wants to Let Entertainment Industry Get Into Your > Computer > > Rep. Howard L. Berman, D-Calif., formally proposed > legislation that would give the industry unprecedented new > authority to secretly hack

Hollywood Hackers

2002-07-29 Thread Duncan Frissell
Congressman Wants to Let Entertainment Industry Get Into Your Computer Rep. Howard L. Berman, D-Calif., formally proposed legislation that would give the industry unprecedented new authority to secretly hack into consumers' computers or knock them off-line entirely if they