Re: [Gzz] Hemppah's PEG round 2 comments

[Tuomas Lukka]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 03:38:29PM +0300, Hermanni Hyytiälä wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 14:23, Tuomas Lukka wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 01:49:36PM +0300, Hermanni Hyytiälä wrote:
> > > > Remember also that if we use indices for transclusions, we have a fresh
> > > > problem as it becomes possible to spam...
> > > 
> > > Btw, there is a paper about DHT design, which is designed to be
> > > resilient against spam attacks:
> > > http://iptps03.cs.berkeley.edu/final-papers/simple_fault_tolerant.pdf
> > 
> > You should read these things more carefully: the spam they're talking
> > about is nothing like the spam I'm talking about.
> 
> They are talking about spam generated by a faulty peer(s). They also
> mention that their design could be resilient against spam generated by a
> hostile peer(s) with small design modifications.
> 
> Which spam model are you talking about ? :)

I'm talking about one where you *insert* a lot of values into the DHT.

        Tuomas