> Date-based or increment KSK updating, doesn't matter. Either way, the > moment your keyindex attracts any attention, the skript kiddies ram it > full of garbage for the next three millennia.
Anonymous and public writeable spaces (e-mail, wiki, in-freenet key indices) cannot be made immune to spam. If you do so then you do so by negating either the anonymous, public, or writable qualities. So everyone should stop point out the spammability of in-freenet key indices since it's an inherent characteristic. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl >From devl-admin at freenetproject.org Sun Apr 8 05:53:49 2001 Return-Path: <devl-admin at freenetproject.org> Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (postfix@[4.18.42.11]) by funky.danky.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA09663 for <danello at danky.com>; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 05:53:47 -0400 Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hawk.freenetproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABDBD580D0; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 02:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: devl at freenetproject.org Received: from moe.cc.utexas.edu (moe.cc.utexas.edu [128.83.42.2]) by hawk.freenetproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CCF157D9C for <devl at freenetproject.org>; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 02:35:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (blanu at localhost) by moe.cc.utexas.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/cc-uts-client-1.11) with ESMTP id EAA25781 for <devl at freenetproject.org>; Sun, 8 Apr 2001 04:30:39 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: moe.cc.utexas.edu: blanu owned process doing -bs From: Brandon <[email protected]> X-Sender: blanu at moe.cc.utexas.edu To: devl at freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] freegle key indices In-Reply-To: <005f01c0bf62$547025f0$0200000a at pete> Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0104080427590.20413-100000 at moe.cc.utexas.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: devl-admin at freenetproject.org Errors-To: devl-admin at freenetproject.org X-BeenThere: devl at freenetproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.3 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org List-Help: <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org?subject=help> List-Post: <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl>, <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org?subject=subscribe> List-Id: Discussion of information related to Freenet development <devl.freenetproject.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl>, <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/> Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 04:30:39 -0500 (CDT) Status: RO Content-Length: 810 Lines: 19 X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 > Whoopie... an idea comes to my mind: The KeyIndexClient could put a bunch of > keys into summary files. It's neat how we reinvent the same thing over and over again. The old index system (fnindex) had this feature. I think the way to do it is that independent people make their own summary indices by trolling the publically writable ones, validating keys, generating a summary, and putting it in a subspace. Then you can go to whatever key index you trust. Sure, distributing the work among inserters is cool, but if you're trying
