Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6147Re: [decentralization] Saaf testimony

Expand Messages
  • coderman
    Oct 2, 2002
      lucas@... wrote:
      > ====
      > Interdiction works by getting in front of potential downloaders when
      > someone is serving pirated content using a P2P network. When
      > MediaDefender's computer's see someone making a copyrighted file available
      > for upload, our computers simply hook into that computer and download the
      > file. The goal is not to absorb all of that user's bandwidth but block
      > connections to potential downloaders. If the P2P program allows ten
      > connections and MediaDefender fills nine, we are blocking 90% of illegal
      > uploading. The beauty of Interdiction is that it does not affect anything
      > on that computer except the ability to upload pirated files on that
      > particular P2P network. The computer user still has full access to e-mail,
      > web, and other file sharing programs.
      > ====
      > This is obviously a denial of service attack, and a fairly stupid one.
      > Any limited number of providers that attempts to DoS an entire megacluster
      > is trying to turn the logic of a DDoS upside down. If that interdiction
      > approach works, then DDoS attacks don't work.

      This type of DDoS is different, in that it is not relying on sheer traffic
      to implement a DoS, but issuing a number of file requests to tie up available
      download slots on peers sharing copyrighted content.

      This is certainly technically feasable, and if they used a distributed network
      themselves to implement the attacks it would be hard to defend against.

      > Ok, so let's say the purpose is not to DoS the whole network, it's to
      > bother an individual user. But the attack only targets user uploads.
      > Assuming that the user is uploading out of generosity or laziness, this is
      > no attack at all. She waits until the attack is over, totally unbothered,
      > and goes back to uploading.

      Yes, but if you are tying up a large number of peers it is going to start
      effecting everyone regardless. It sounds like these attacks are intended to
      be much longer lived than a traditional DoS as well, as the bandwidth required
      is actually very low to simply establish a connection that barely trickles
      data through...

      > But so what -- it doesn't matter whether this attack works. What
      > attacks would work?

      This one would work fairly well if they did it right. Attacking namespaces
      and search domains is also annoying, like the false query hits and bogus
      music / movie files...

      coderman@... http://cubicmetercrystal.com/
      key fingerprint: 9C00 C63E A71D D488 AF17 F406 56FB 71D9 E17D E793
      ( see html source for public key )
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic