On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Greg Troxel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'd say write up a plan and send it to the list. > > Yay! > > > 1) Decide if we are going to trust storage nodes to express the > variables that are correlated honestly. I think it's at least near > impossible not to trust them and make progress. > > You could have a text file containing each storage server's furl and > its properties in some flat textual format, and put that into your > gateway's node directory (~/.tahoe). Then that gateway would believe > the contents of that file when choosing which shares to upload to > which servers. > > As a bonus, this automatically solves the Sybil Attack, in which > someone sets up a large number of storage servers so that by chance > your gateway uses only all or mostly storage servers controlled by > them. Having a locally-controlled file describing storage servers > means that the gateway could have a requirement like "make sure at > least K servers that I upload to appear on this list". > > Therefore, I don't think there is any need for the gateway to receive > a description about a storage server directly from that storage server > and then rely on that description. At least as a first cut, it would > seem better to rely on the gateway's system administrator for that. > > (I'm sure this will turn out to be inadequate for some uses, but it > seems like a good starting point.) > > Regards, > > Zooko > _______________________________________________ > tahoe-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev > I believe wiretapped has implemented this. Cheers, Zancas -- ظ "Who ordered it? Who ordered the saxogram?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaoLU6zKaws <http://allmydata.org>
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
