On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 10:53:39AM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Monday 02 September 2002 05:10, you wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 02:01:55AM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > <>
> >
> > > So should I fix the filter not to bark on question marks ?
> >
> > I think so.
> I disagree.
> 
> Every 1337 d00d will set the htl of the active links to the content they want 
> to propagate  to ridiculously high values.  This might even be a useful way 
> to probe for who is requesting  what content.  

The fact remains that any link from outside freenet can already do this.
If it is really a problem then we ought to get rid of the htl argument in
the URL altogether, and make it configuration setting.

Personally, I don't think it is a problem. People who click on a link to
find content should find it if it is out there. Claiming that people
would set ridiculously high HTL to propogate data assumes that usually
users don't find the data - how crap are we if we operate from that
assumption? Getting people to click on the link should be enough to
propogate the data, raising the htl should ideally have little effect.
And anyways, people CAN'T set ridiculously high HTL values, that is what
the node maxHTL is for.

> Content authors shouldn't have unchecked control over fproxy paramaters.  It 
> will cause trouble sooner or later.  The fact that we can not prevent WWW 
> pages from making requests to fproxy with rude parameter values is no excuse 
> for not fixing the problem for content originating inside freenet.

Either they are a problem, and they should be removed, or they aren't.
Saying "well, they are a problem but we can filter them sometimes so
we'll whistle and pretend like it's ok" is stupid.

I could be convinced that the HTL should not be provided by the URL and
that we need to remove it. But I cannot be convinced of an illogical
and unreasonable middle ground.

-- 

Oskar Sandberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to