Re: Answer by perfect-privacy.com Re: perfect-privacy.com, Family specifications, etc.

[Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

     On Thu, 20 May 2010 12:31:17 +0200 Moritz Bartl <tor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>On 20.05.2010 06:25, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>> The trouble here is that if we make family declarations one-sided, then
>> I can tell everybody that I'm in blutmagie's family (and X's family and
>> Y's family and Z's family and ...), and suddenly I'm influencing the
>> path selection of other clients in a way I shouldn't be able to.
>
>Maybe it is a misunderstanding on my side, but I agree with Scott. How
>could this influence the network in a way that one can speak of an
>"attack"? My idea was that by stating a family, I say that *my node*
>musn't be used in a circuit together with other members of that family,
>no more, no less.
>So, by misconfiguring the family on my side, I cannot hurt the network
>more than (in the extreme) by running no node at all.
>
     Exactly.  Thank you, Moritz.  Roger just didn't read what Bruce wrote.


                                  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/