1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1Rs36a-0002QQ-Cc
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:05:56 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.53 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.53; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ww0-f53.google.com;
Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Rs36Z-0007DV-Le
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:05:56 +0000
Received: by wgbdr12 with SMTP id dr12so5416079wgb.10
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:05:49 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.82.5 with SMTP id e5mr520750wiy.18.1327975549450; Mon, 30
Jan 2012 18:05:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.223.112.199 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:05:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAFHuXub52Lu4T0mCWoPoCrHGhCXyLpmEpSWn32_PZPjaRGL2LQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBjNTS3n8Q3XzZi5GpBL6k_-4AxRKr0BkWa=-AAVgqS=2Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFHuXub52Lu4T0mCWoPoCrHGhCXyLpmEpSWn32_PZPjaRGL2LQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:05:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CABsx9T0avsrL3134WaA3boG-cdx2NcgEH1mQG7Cef78ZV5UNkw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Michael Hendricks <michael@ndrix.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.4 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1Rs36Z-0007DV-Le
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] CAddrMan: Stochastic IP address manager
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: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:05:56 -0000
> Cool design. =A0It seems resilient to many attacks. =A0A Sybil attack
> coming from a large botnet (which controls addresses in many ranges)
> can still fill all buckets in both tables, I think. =A0As far as I can
> tell, that wasn't possible with the old design.
Given the randomness in Pieter's design, that seems extremely unlikely
/ difficult to do. Is it possible to do a back-of-the-envelope
calculation to figure out what percentage of nodes on the network an
attacker would have to control to have a (say) 1% chance of a
successful Sybil attack?
I like this change; I'd like to pull it for the 0.6 release.
I've also been wondering if it is time to remove the IRC bootstrapping
mechanism; it would remove a fair bit of code and we'd stop getting
reports that various ISPs tag bitcoin as malware. When testing the
list of built-in bootstrapping IP addresses I always connect fairly
quickly, and the DNS seeding hosts seems to be working nicely, too.
--=20
--
Gavin Andresen
|
