diff options
| author | Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> | 2011-08-05 01:52:05 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2011-08-05 05:52:12 +0000 |
| commit | d59b52ca28e84e4a6ae03a8881f32ea2dfefeaf5 (patch) | |
| tree | 1f17d7dba7c1897e539c1f9660632f5b01d1be21 /3f/18c8d88ea403a0fe83ac59c9bc363f61c11349 | |
| parent | 0f34052a55c57dae82f5f6dc105c00aec478f24d (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-d59b52ca28e84e4a6ae03a8881f32ea2dfefeaf5.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-d59b52ca28e84e4a6ae03a8881f32ea2dfefeaf5.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Blitcoin? (Black Hat 2011)
Diffstat (limited to '3f/18c8d88ea403a0fe83ac59c9bc363f61c11349')
| -rw-r--r-- | 3f/18c8d88ea403a0fe83ac59c9bc363f61c11349 | 102 |
1 files changed, 102 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/3f/18c8d88ea403a0fe83ac59c9bc363f61c11349 b/3f/18c8d88ea403a0fe83ac59c9bc363f61c11349 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..31114bd2c --- /dev/null +++ b/3f/18c8d88ea403a0fe83ac59c9bc363f61c11349 @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <jgarzik@exmulti.com>) id 1QpDKO-0005VW-4U + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 05 Aug 2011 05:52:12 +0000 +X-ACL-Warn: +Received: from mail-iy0-f171.google.com ([209.85.210.171]) + by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1QpDKN-0003i8-Az + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 05 Aug 2011 05:52:12 +0000 +Received: by iyf13 with SMTP id 13so4123316iyf.30 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Thu, 04 Aug 2011 22:52:05 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.42.166.74 with SMTP id n10mr1753074icy.67.1312523525572; Thu, + 04 Aug 2011 22:52:05 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.42.19.65 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 22:52:05 -0700 (PDT) +X-Originating-IP: [99.173.148.118] +In-Reply-To: <CAJNQ0stRrv4Yqf9ENszoXJE8+FpzwXZaGVDP=stZi27x4BRmmg@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CAJNQ0svWgFwZrra0gQFpxNLOPXk4RbKygeMUNPEA=k-Wqwa-ZA@mail.gmail.com> + <201108041038.47396.luke@dashjr.org> + <CABsx9T2tAeOp6RAb+Zb5zmzdSePZV90Uu=r4mzFc44d6ndbcnQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CAJNQ0stRrv4Yqf9ENszoXJE8+FpzwXZaGVDP=stZi27x4BRmmg@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 01:52:05 -0400 +Message-ID: <CA+8xBpd0ud0Jn7Xxfw3C-WCH12WuB7k_W5x00Mj2EidemGoYpQ@mail.gmail.com> +From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com> +To: John Smith <witchspace81@gmail.com> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. +X-Headers-End: 1QpDKN-0003i8-Az +Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Blitcoin? (Black Hat 2011) +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 05:52:12 -0000 + +On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:37 AM, John Smith <witchspace81@gmail.com> wrote: +> Well it's good that the bitcoin network is seeing some security testing. + +Yep. + +> 1) A DDoS possibility=A0 (if this is really the cause of the network +> connectivity problems) + +Unfortunately the nodes accepting incoming connections are small +enough in number (7000?) that you can shut down a lot by attacking +those nodes. + +This was part of the motivation of turning on upnp by default in the +GUI version, but maybe we need to go further than that... + +> 3) The recipient re-broadcasts transactions (is Theymos right here?), +> allowing both the sender and recipient to be found + +Yes, that is correct. Bitcoin resends wallet transactions with zero +confirmations, and both sent and received transactions fall within the +"wallet tx" superset. + +TBH I had forgotten about the resend on the receiver side, though. +It, of course, makes plenty of sense in the context of importing +transactions from foreign sources, e.g. receiving transactions via a +USB flash drive. + +> Drawok's suggestion about using UDP packets with spoofed sender addresses= + is +> interesting, as UDP has another advantage; you can open up an "inbound" U= +DP +> port on almost any NAT router without any UPNP magic: just send out an UD= +P +> packet, the router will wait a certain time for answers (on a mapped port +> number) and relay these back. +> +> It also has some potential issues; the client needs special privileges to +> spoof sender addresses, and some ISPs might filter out packets with +> non-matching sender addriess (unsure how common this is). + +Well, it -is- possible to implement TCP over UDP <grin> The TCP +connection sequence over UDP helps to work against spoofing, while UDP +helps to open an inbound UDP port as you describe. + +Not that I'm endorsing a bitcoin-internal TCP stack... just sayin' :) + +--=20 +Jeff Garzik +exMULTI, Inc. +jgarzik@exmulti.com + + |