At Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:59:05 -0500, jiangxingfeng 36340 wrote: > > > I don't in principle have a problem with a separate non-normative > > document containing security analysis of P2PSIP systems. > > > > However, I believe all of the security features need to be part of the > > core protocol and the core document, which is why we built them > > into RELOAD. > > > > > With regard to security, IMHO, the most difficult part is how the > system deal with the mailicious behavior. Although some papers show > that if a large amount of peers are malicious, the system is > impossible to be a safe one. But does it mean the malicious behavior > need not be taken into account while design the core protocol? I > don't think so.
Nor do I. That's why RELOAD goes to quite a bit of effort to provide correct functioning to the extent possible in the face of malicious peers (at least in certificate mode). -Ekr _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
