Wouldn't a scattering scheme do the job?

If a malicious node has chosen a target, then move the target.

Maybe the following scheme for scattering would work (condition -> something
is triggered saying "hey, loadsa requests"):
*    duplicate target to two new nodes
*    (perhaps) delete target in current node


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tavin Cole" <[email protected]>
To: <devl at freenetproject.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] Freenet DOS defense strategy???


> On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 12:52:00PM -0700, coderman wrote:
> > Tavin Cole wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 10:09:18AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 12:52:37PM -0400, Tavin Cole wrote:
> > > > > I have a new suggestion for this: just count the number of hits on
each key
> > > > > and call that P, and whenever P reaches a certain limit, delete
the key.
> > > >
> > > > Er - I am probably misunderstanding you, but wouldn't this create a
> > > > trivial attack for removing particular keys from Freenet? Simply
hammer
> > > > nodes with requests until they drop the key you are requesting...
> > >
> > > The idea is that once every several hundred or several thousand
requests,
> > > the node will pass the request upstream, but the chances of 2 nodes
dropping
> > > it at the same time will be very small.
> >
> >
> > Once it is passed upstream the node will no longer be queried (at least
from that
> > direction) right?  So if you delete a datum after so many requests, it
is trivial for a
> > specific node to force that data out of the data store.  It simply
progresses from one
> > node to the next, until it is gone completely (i.e. the malicious node
is assumed to have
> > this upstream copy, when in fact, it has been performing the requests to
force the data
> > out of store).
> >
> > Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but this would appear to be a major
vulnerability.
>
> No, there is no reason why the first node wouldn't continue servicing
requests
> for the key.  It wouldn't drop out one-by-one up a chain, instead each
node in the
> chain would periodically drop and regain it at a different frequency.
>
> --
>
> # tavin cole
> #
> # "Technology is a way of organizing the universe so that
> # man doesn't have to experience it."
> #
> #        - Max Frisch
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl


_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to