On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 01:10:51PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote: > IC> This is even a viable attack, since a > IC> node could always set itself as the datasource on all > IC> messages, creating a positive feedback loop (more references > IC> in the datastore lead to still more references in the > IC> datastore). > > And the attack would be... what? That the node is providing your node > with valid data? That's an -attack-? Where does the actually-doing-damage > part come in?
<thinking> This is no defense against such an attack, as I just pointed out you can run an unlimited number of virtual servers on different ports/ip addresses. Still I think nodes should be setup such that no more then %10 of the references should point to any one node for fault tolerence. I've seen nodes go kaboom when the one node they referenced died. -- 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/20010618/1af5cb65/attachment.pgp>
