On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 10:42:50PM -0500, Timm Murray wrote: > I'm not quite certian if this attack would work at all, but we were > discussing a while back that caching might be changed to a probablistic > meathod (like there is a 1/3 chance your node won't cache a file). This > would include the node that was inserted directly into (i.e., node at > localhost). This would nulify this attack.
No it wouldn't. That would just force you to repeat the attack more times to average out the 1/3rd chance. -- Need some Linux help or custom C(++) programming? Drop me a line and I'll see what I can do. Resume at http://retep.tripod.com/resume.html GCS d s+:-- a--- C++++ UL++++ P L+++ E W++ N- o K- w-- O- M V- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+++ t 5 X R+ tv-- b+ DI+ D++ G e- h! r-- y-- pete at petertodd.ca http://www.petertodd.ca -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010617/08c15fe5/attachment.pgp>
