> On 30 Jun 2019, at 15:07, Erich Eckner via Gnupg-users 
> <gnupg-users@gnupg.org> wrote:
> 
> maybe I don't get the original idea - but I thought, it was to block 
> *uploads/updates* which would poisson a certificate - not to blackhole them 
> after they got poissoned?

Hm, that’s not how I read it, although I could be wrong. It is possible to 
prevent submission of bad keys, but this just leads to new problems:

1. We would have to ensure that all keyservers block the same uploads. One 
permissive keyserver is a backdoor into the entire system. We can’t block bad 
keys at reconciliation time for the same reasons that have been hashed to death 
already. 

2. Although it may be possible to block an individual upload of tens of 
thousands of key packets, it will not in general be possible to prevent an 
attacker from incrementally increasing the number of packets attached to a key 
over time. If we impose a reasonable limit on the cumulative number of packets 
attached to a key, that key may never become undownloadable, but it will at 
some point become unmodifiable - so we have just transformed one DOS vector 
into a different one.

A 

_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Reply via email to