> On 2012-07-17 8:48 AM, nir izraeli wrote: > > "spam" in the sense of extra unwanted "tags"? > > I can't see how this can't already be done with current DHT > implementations. > > one who can add "tags" could also add "files" spam. > > One thousand people trying to take over other people's computers issue > one thousand trojans Each of them then issues ten million search terms > to point to his trojan, for a total of ten billion tags. (That is > roughly the problem faced by the Pirate Bay)
I'm out of my depth here, but I don't see why its so difficult to defend against denial of service attacks. You listen for certain things on certain ports, each has an appropriate sized buffer and when that's full you block the port. Can't a simple buffer full, block port routine be run at a level that is secure from Trojans? PR
_______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
