On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > Huh? If Mediaone (or whatever they're called now) decided to ban
> > 24.131.185.22, they certainly could find me.
>
> And what would they do if you just changed your IP address to
> 24.131.185.23?
My IP is assigned through DHCP, and AFAIK I can't change it at all. Even
if I could, they probably have records generated by their DHCP server
tagging that IP to a unique cable modem identifier. (all speculation)
> > But the ISPs aren't installing anything. They recieve a demand from the
> > copyright holder and a list of infringing users. They could weasel out of
> > it or they could immediately cancel your account. It's up to them.
>
> The point is that:
>
> 1) Cancelling your account may not be as easy as you suggest from a
> legal standpoint
>
> 2) Cancelling your account would be largely pointless in a country like
> the UK where there are several hundred free ISPs which you can
> register with in a matter of minutes giving only a working email
> address (and which, given that they only make pennies from each
> user, they wouldn't have the resources to start cancelling accounts
> left-right-and-center). It would only server to hurt the ISPs.
>
> 3) Cancelling an account may be impossible for cable providers given
> the difficulty in tying an IP address to a customer (and even if
> they could, it would require someone to manually come over and do
> it, a rather expensive proposition when you combine it with the fact
> that they have just deprived themselves of $40/month
All true, but the practical side of this thing doesn't rule it out as a
propaganda machine. They can find an insignificant number of file servers
(Freenet and other) and still quote impressive figures. They don't even
really need to even get any accounts canceled.
> > But a request with HTL 1 does work.
>
> Er, have you *ever* found what you are looking for with a request of
> HTL 1? Unlikely. Further, we will shortly be introducing randomness
> to prevent any attack like this.
Have you ever brute-force searched a massive block of IP addresses for
Freenet nodes? Ever note their IPs and check them hourly for the latest
new content?
Looks like these guys are content with setting the HTL much higher,
anyway, so it's really a moot point.
> > > Er, so let me get this straight. He gets the IP address of a Freenet
> > > node, and requests the information from that node, this process *may*
> > > result in the information being cached on that node BECAUSE of his
> > > request! He then thinks that he has legitimate cause to blame that user
> > > for the content being there, even though it wouldn't be there had he not
> > > requested it. I would love to see him in court trying to explain that
> > > one... :-)
> >
> > What's the defense mechanism against HTL=1 requests again?
>
> Randomness in whether a node decrements the HTL.
Ah, that's what I thought. Good.
--
Mark Roberts
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Freenet-chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-chat
