Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

[CHALLENGE] Useful challenge [DistBB]

Name: the distbb guy 2013-11-10 19:29

Hi. I have not forgotten about you. I have, however, been drowning in work (and I still am).

I've realized that the design of DistBB allows an attacker with low to moderate resources to track down the exact node that posts something, simply by polling every node at short intervals and seeing where the node appears first. If nodes are hidden services (Tor or I2P or otherwise), the attacker doesn't immediately find out the poster's identity, but can accumulate a large number of posts coming from their node and figure out your identity from that. Unless, of course, the poster slips up at any point. This is a definite privacy leak.

So far every solution for true anonymous posting I've come up with involves either reimplementing a whole web-of-trust scheme (and using that as a remailer system), a proof-of-work system, or a CAPTCHA. The obvious constraint is preventing spammers from posting far faster than moderators can keep up with.

Web-of-trust sounds, and is, fairly complicated. It would definitely stray away from the goal of simplicity of the project.

Proof-of-work may work out to be sufficiently simple. The main problem is then that users with low resources will be penalized. The system may also not be entirely effective against spammers with large amounts of resources.

Finally, offering both textual and visual CAPTCHAs should be a viable solution, at the cost of some simplicity.

My proposal is as follows: Keep the anonymous posting part separate from ``the'' DistBB protocol, and specify a separate anonymous posting protocol with proof-of-work and CAPTCHA methods.

If you have better ideas I want to hear them.

Otherwise, the actual challenge is in designing a simple yet effective textual (and maybe visual) CAPTCHA system.

Name: the distbb guy 2013-11-11 4:40

>>12
>>11 isn't me.

>>2-13
Thank you for all your replies.
To clarify, the main problem is not moderation of regular posts, it's about how to stop a single person from spam posting so fast that all of king's horses and all of king's men wouldn't sift through all of that crap again.

>>11
computationally expensive pseudonyms
Not a bad idea (i.e. it is effective against spammers), the problem is that all of your posts become tied with that pseudonym. If you wanted to truly remain anonymous you would have to be generating new pseudonyms all the time. The same problem applies if instead of being computationally expensive, the pseudonym 'authentication' is done via CAPTCHA on a per-node basis.

Spam proof and anonymous might not really be possible from a design.
Spam proof means you are preventing a user from posting at very high rates. It is difficult to do that when the user is unidentifiable (anonymous), hence this thread.

>>9
That works fine if the shit/spam posts are at a slow enough rate that they can be 'handled' by the community.

Sorry, I'd write some more but I'm on a few deadlines.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List