[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Path-spec - fast circuits

     On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:16:28 -0500 Flamsmark <flamsmark@xxxxxxxxx>
>On 14 February 2010 03:15, Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >But one big problem is that you have no guarantee whatsoever that I'm
>> >telling you the truth about my measurements.  See for example Kevin
>> >Bauer et al's "Low Resource Routing Attacks Against Tor."
>>      Yes, I've understood that from the outset, but I haven't seen any
>> evidence that such abuse is actually happening.
>Tor isn't just designed to be resilient to attacks that are actually being
>employed. It is designed to be resistant to theoretical attacks too - as
>well it should be. Indeed: complaining that we're protecting against
>attacks, but nobody is using them is like saying `I bought this expensive
>umbrella, but then I didn't even get wet.':
     That wasn't my point at all.  What I was complaining about was the
introduction of a new, *actual* problem as the cure for a disease we had
no sign of suffering from.  Of course, a clear avenue of attack should be
blocked, but let's pick a way of doing it that embodies the "first, do no
harm" concept.  The method that the developers have employed in this case
simply adds to the misallocation problems that were already bogging tor

                                  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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/