On Thursday 07 May 2009 11:23:51 Evan Daniel wrote:
>
> >
> > Why exactly? Your post is nice but I do not see how it answers my
> > question. The general problem my post is about: New identities are
> > obtained by taking them from trust lists of known identities. An attacker
> > therefore could put 1000000 identities in his trust list to fill up your
> > database and slow down WoT. Therefore, an decision has to be made when to
> > NOT import new identities from someone's trust list. In the current
> > implementation, it is when he has a negative score.
> >
[...]
>
> I have not examined the WoT code.  However, the Advogato metric has
> two attributes that I don't think the current WoT method has: no
> negative trust behavior (if there is a trust rating Bob can assign to
> Carol such that Alice will trust Carol less than if Bob had not
> assigned a rating, that's a negative trust behavior), and a
> mathematical proof as to the upper limit on the quantity of spammer
> nodes that get trusted.
>
> The Advogato metric is *specifically* designed to handle the case of
> the attacker creating millions of accounts.  In that case, his success
> is bounded (linear with modest constant) by the number of confused
> nodes -- that is, legitimate nodes that have (incorrectly) marked his
> accounts as legitimate.  If you look at the flow computation, it
> follows that for nodes for which the computed trust value is zero, you
> don't have to bother downloading their trust lists, so the number of
> such lists you download is similarly well controlled.

I have read your messages again and all your new messages and you are so 
convinced about advogato that I'd like to ask you more questions about how it 
would work, I don't want you to feel like everyone is ignoring you :) 
(- I am more of a programmer right now than a designer of algorithms, I 
concentrate on spending most available time on *implementing* WoT/FT because 
nobody else is doing it and it needs to get done... so I have not talked much 
in this discussion)

Consider the following case, using advogato and not the current FMS/WoT 
alchemy:

1. Identity X is an occasional and trustworthy poster. X has received many 
positive trust values from hundreds of identities because it has posted 
hundreds of messages over the months, so it has a high score and capacity to 
give trust values, and all newbies will know about the identity and it's high 
score because it is well-integrated into the trust graph. 

2. Now a spammer gets a single identity Y onto the trust list of X by solving 
a captcha, his score is very low because he has only solved a captcha but the 
score is there. Therefore, any newbie will see Y because X is well-integrated 
into the WoT

3. X is gone for quite some time due to inactivity, during that time Y creates 
500 spam identities on his trust list and starts to spam all boards. X will 
not remove Y from his trust list because he is *away* for weeks.

4. Newbies will see the 500 spam identities and their spam because everyone 
trusts X, and X trusts Y. Newbies will NOT know how to block anything because 
they are newbies.

5. Now the *core* task of the WoT is in question: How can we as the community 
make the spam-identities introduced by Y disappear with advogato trust 
metrics, without negative trust?? 

- As you've said, we cannot take away the trust which Y receives from X 
because that is THE attribute of non-negative-trust-metrics.
- Further, we cannot cause EVERYONE who has trusted X to remove the trust 
value because X is in way too many trust lists of idle people, etc.
- So what can we do with advogato, if we are the community and want to mark Y 
as the root of evil?

xor

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090526/1c06303c/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to