> > Since it's impossible to prevent hostile nodes from > > messing with HTL, freenet doesn't call this an attack. Instead, it > > documents it as a permissible part of the protocol, making proofs of > > identity much more difficult. > > well, my reviewed question is: is that true that if your node recieve a > [MAX_HTL] request it can be reasonably (80% or more) sure that the > neightbour is the initial requester?
I don't think so. Max HTL is configurable in freenet.conf, so if you get a request that has YOUR max HTL, that doesn't say anything about the node that asked you. Example: Node A has a max HTL of 50 Node B has a max HTL of 50 Node C has a max HTL of 25 A originates a request at HTL 27, decrements to 26 and passes it to B. B gets it at 26, decrements and passes it to node C. C gets it at 25, which is C's max HTL. Can C conclude that B was the originator of the request? Given that nodes have a default max HTL and most people don't change it, you might be able to draw a conclusion like what you're getting at, but I wouldn't want to assign a probability to it. Besides, I think most of freenet doesn't give you ironclad 100% foolproof anonymity, but strives for plausible deniability. If the chances that a given node X originated a request are 70%, that doesn't really tell you anything. _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
