I'm still concerned about re-request flooding, ie request, unrequest, request, unrequest, request, unrequest.
Since the client doesn't even have to bother downloading the data himself, it would be very easy to stage such an attack, and because you get a more or less deterministically identical patch each time, you could seriously hurt those nodes capacity... On Thu, 18 May 2000, Ian Clarke wrote: > > You would still need to invalidate the message-memory unrequest key after > > processing it, or you could perform a replay attack, by requesting a > > document, then repeatedly unrequesting it. > > I agree entirely. > > Ian. > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev -- Oskar Sandberg md98-osa at nada.kth.se _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
