-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Natanael wrote:
Den 17 feb 2015 07:56 skrev str4d st...@i2pmail.org:
Other than that, there is no difference. Non-honest Tahoe-LAFS
nodes are perfectly capable of joining a standard Tahoe-LAFS
network and sending fake replies. So any Sybil
Den 17 feb 2015 13:51 skrev str4d st...@i2pmail.org:
I2P is an anonymous analogue of the Internet, so it is disingenuous to
compare it to a user's home network. If you have a private network
that you have full control over and that can be isolated from the
outside, then you have no need of
are asking for. They can send fake replies, and even though your
software will know the replies are wrong it will have to spend a lot of
effort on searching for the correct data. So a Sybil attack can be used for
censorship.
But if you know of honest nodes, and the honest nodes are well connected
Hi,
I'm reading your documentation and has Tahoe-LAFS any sybil attack
protection? or does it really matter? Can be implemented some solution?
Thanks for answer
Cheers!
Adonay Sanz
___
tahoe-dev mailing list
tahoe-dev@tahoe-lafs.org
https://tahoe
Den 16 feb 2015 11:42 skrev Adonay Sanz adonay.s...@gmail.com:
Hi,
I'm reading your documentation and has Tahoe-LAFS any sybil attack
protection? or does it really matter? Can be implemented some solution?
Tahoe-LAFS in the default configuration don't rely on unknown nodes, so
there Sybil
Natanael natanae...@gmail.com:
Den 16 feb 2015 11:42 skrev Adonay Sanz adonay.s...@gmail.com:
Hi,
I'm reading your documentation and has Tahoe-LAFS any sybil attack
protection? or does it really matter? Can be implemented some solution?
Tahoe-LAFS in the default configuration don't rely
