On Wednesday 29 October 2003 04:41 pm, Tom Kaitchuck wrote: > On Wednesday 29 October 2003 12:11 pm, Toad wrote: > > > So to limit this and other flooding biased attacks, I think we should > > > create a node blacklist, where your node will simply disconnect from, > > > and for a time, ban any node that demonstraights significantly deviant > > > behavior. One must also take care that anything that puts a node on a > > > black list is not propagated down any single request line so you don't > > > end up banned yourself. > > > > No use. Node identity is free. Web of positive trust is the only way to > > make it non-free, and not only is that a big implementation issue, it's > > a huge social problem. > > Humm, perhaps make noderefs contain some sort of complex calculation biased > on the IP and then have somesort of system where nodes can insert > references of misbehaving nodes and if a sufficient number of nodes voted > one as bad nobody could connect to it. Of course all this is fraught with > problems. Surely someone can come up with a better solution.
WAIT. I've got it! Add another level of hashing. So the content is encrypted with it's hash, and it is stored in the hash of the hash of the hash, and attached to the request is the hash of the hash. This way they the attack is impossible to target. They would have to go through hashing values until they found ones that falls in the aria they are trying to attack. To make this more CPU intensive we could use a different hash algorithm, one with enough bit depth that trying to create even a limited lookup table based on it would be very impractical. This would break network compatability and require total datastore reset, so lets throughly discuss this and/or other solutions before implementing it. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
