Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Saturday, June 6, 2020 1:28 PM, Karl <gmk...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 though i gave a fair response. i understand you say that many computers can be infected of malware by a single individual who is creating an attacking botnet. An I said such botnet must be bigger than the network to succeed. The security of USPS depends on the number of nodes, the bigger the best. > I also see no reason a malware marketplace would not spread worldwide. no technical reason, obviously it is flat internet. But people operate in cultures, I mean that a malware disguised say for instance inside a pirate copy of photoshop will only be spread across those who use photoshop who are not caring about malware, not all possible computers. > Really struggling to communicate here. I understand you need to know your > software is given a fair trial to actually run, is that correct? Sorry about that if that's my fault. I try to respond with what I think about the attack vector you describe. I am try to honestly persuade you guys to try USPS if you're really interested in it as a next-gen cryptocurrency system. My interest is to gain users that can explore every corner of it, in order to find gaps, failures, etc. Just helping me in its development. >
