On Sat, Jun 6, 2020, 8:14 AM other.arkitech <other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email. > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Saturday, June 6, 2020 12:00 PM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020, 7:49 AM other.arkitech <other.arkit...@protonmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> >> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email. >> >> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:38 AM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 6, 2020, 7:18 AM other.arkitech < >> other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Secure Email. >>> >>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >>> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:17 AM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020, 7:29 PM other.arkitech < >>> other.arkit...@protonmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > so your system doesn't have a bloated chain, which is nice. The >>>> 'consensus' is handled by voting...based one IP address one vote. But how >>>> robust is relying on IP addresses at the end of the day? >>>> > >>>> >>>> IPv4 provides unique features no other protocol has. address space is >>>> saturated (scarce) and addresses are not cheap. It is a a nice tool for >>>> Sybil control >>>> >>> >>> OA, when you say this people start disregarding what you say because it >>> is false. >>> >>> Any software developer can get thousands of IP addresses by altering a >>> piece of pirated software to include something new of their own design and >>> sharing it in a venue where it hasn't been shared on before. There are >>> many many other ways and people _think_ of them, _use_ them, are _observed_ >>> using them, and things spread and grow. >>> >>> >>> what? any developer geting thousands of public IPv4 addresses by >>> modifying software? >>> Nop. That's not true. >>> (Or I haven't understood well what you say) >>> >> >> People go to places on the internet to download things. Others can >> upload things to those places to download. You can upload something that >> lies about what it is doing, and gives you use of the ip address of the >> downloader's computer when run. Do you understand? >> >> It sounds like this is surprising to you? >> >> >> so you refer to computers running malware, that case is contemplated in >> the design as an 'evil node' >> > > it sounds like you haven't addressed a sybil attack from massively > distributed malware, which is fine nobody can cover everything. not sure > where the design lives. > > > If the malware is distributed in a bigger scale than the honest software, > indeed, the evil network becomes the 'honest' one to the eyes of the > software, that's 51% attack. > > Provided a world distribution of people that can be evil/honest of > 80%-20%, the likeliness of an evil network overtaking the honest one is > lower than the opposite. > > The evil network wont work if many evil nodes run behind same IP, so the > malware must meet the same distribution enforcement applied to the honest > net. Nodes running malware must be geographically distributed, so local > marketplaces spreading malware have less chances to spread worldwide in > order to compromise the network. > I'm not sure you're hearing me when I say that one person is able to distribute malware to thousands (or more) of other people worldwide, producing a sybil attack from an individual. Is this something you're able to repeat back to me? It sounds like you have an expectation around handling this? I also see no reason a malware marketplace would not spread worldwide. Really struggling to communicate here. I understand you need to know your software is given a fair trial to actually run, is that correct?
