Re: [freenet-dev] Mitigate the Pitch Black attack (the simulation works)

2016-04-22 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Matthew Toseland writes: > On 22/04/16 21:31, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: >> Matthew Toseland writes: >>> On 09/02/16 08:58, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: We can’t keep nodes from leaving, but we can keep swapping which spans large parts of the keyspace from making parts of the

[freenet-dev] FCP interface for Freemail?

2016-04-22 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Hi, Is there an FCP interface for Freemail? I looked for it in the source, but only saw methods Freemail uses to interface with the node. Did I just overlook it? For using Freemail from an application, I’d need a way to setup Freemail for a given WoT identity and set an SMTP password. This is

Re: [freenet-dev] Mitigate the Pitch Black attack (the simulation works)

2016-04-22 Thread Matthew Toseland
On 22/04/16 21:31, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Matthew Toseland writes: > >> On 09/02/16 08:58, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: >>> Because in normal swapping, as soon as the network settled a bit, the >>> changes in location should be small (though my nodestats look different: >>> too large

Re: [freenet-dev] Mitigate the Pitch Black attack (the simulation works)

2016-04-22 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Matthew Toseland writes: > On 09/02/16 08:58, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: >> Because in normal swapping, as soon as the network settled a bit, the >> changes in location should be small (though my nodestats look different: >> too large changes in location for my taste…). So the node data should

Re: [freenet-dev] Mitigate the Pitch Black attack (the simulation works)

2016-04-22 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Hi Stef, I am sure that the algorithm still has issues. I would not claim that it is perfect. However the Pitch Black Attack is so serious, that stopping it is a very important step forward (and one we should have done years ago, but we had a too big disconnect between those who did theory and