On Thu, 20 May 2010 12:31:17 +0200 Moritz Bartl <t...@wiredwings.com> wrote: >On 20.05.2010 06:25, Roger Dingledine wrote: >> The trouble here is that if we make family declarations one-sided, then >> I can tell everybody that I'm in blutmagie's family (and X's family and >> Y's family and Z's family and ...), and suddenly I'm influencing the >> path selection of other clients in a way I shouldn't be able to. > >Maybe it is a misunderstanding on my side, but I agree with Scott. How >could this influence the network in a way that one can speak of an >"attack"? My idea was that by stating a family, I say that *my node* >musn't be used in a circuit together with other members of that family, >no more, no less. >So, by misconfiguring the family on my side, I cannot hurt the network >more than (in the extreme) by running no node at all. > Exactly. Thank you, Moritz. Roger just didn't read what Bruce wrote.
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ********************************************************************** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * *--------------------------------------------------------------------* * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * * -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * ********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/