Re: [SocialSwarm-D] D-CENT: state of the art - not

P2P Internet-level neteworks are great for some use-cases, not for 
others. For example, the only way to counter sybil attacks on p2p is via 
institutional trust arrangements (i.e. a non-technical solution), of 
which one example is social networks. The so-called "sybil-proof" trust 
frameworks do so by routing via a social network exposing the social 
networks (at least within X hops) of the user. That may work in some 
situations, but then leaks valuable social network metadata. There's 
also latency issues which generally cause most p2p networks to evolve to 
scale-free nets to minimize the number of hops. The Web is technically a 
client-server system due to scalability (see Fielding's REST work). This 
is all very well-known.

In summary, I suspect that the W3C will continue to focus on the Web, at 
least as regards standardization. Building a new Internet etc. is out of 
scope. However, best of luck with all other approaches and keep us up to 
date (particularly when adoption takes off).

    cheers,
       harry



On 02/26/2014 10:27 PM, carlo von lynX wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:33:10PM +0100, Harry Halpin wrote:
>> Given that we want our work to run cross-platform (including on
>> mobile) and p2p networks still all suffer from sybil attacks, the
>> W3C is going to focus on Web.
> The phrase "p2p networks still all suffer from sybil attacks"
> says more about rethoric strategies than about p2p networks.
> Reminds me of climate experts on TV.
>
> Anyway, here is a choice of scientific papers on the topic
> suggesting that sybil attacks can be countered (and GNUnet
> does so, but even Tor: what do you achieve with a sybil
> attack on Tor?). Are you suggesting all these independent
> scientists are wrong and we should in no way dare to use
> evil evil P2P technology?
>
>
> Resnick, P, Sami, R - Sybilproof Transitive Trust Protocols
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1454
>
> Gamiochipi, RLL, Griffin, D, Clegg, RG, Mykoniati, E, Rio, M -
> A Sybilproof Indirect Reciprocity Mechanism for Peer-to-Peer Networks
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1850
>
> Cheng, A, Friedman, E - Sybilproof reputation mechanisms
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1381
>
> Levine, BN, Shields, C, Margolin, BN -
> A Survey of Solutions to the Sybil Attack
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1432
>
> Cholez, T, Chrisment, I, Festor, O -
> Evaluation of Sybil Attacks Protection Schemes in KAD
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1512
>
> Al-Ameen, MN, Wright, M - Persea: A Sybil-resistant Social DHT
> 	https://gnunet.org/persea
>
> Yang, Z, Wilson, C, Wang, X, Gao, T, Zhao, BY, Dai, Y -
> Uncovering social network sybils in the wild
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1748
>
> Yu, H, Kaminsky, M, Gibbons, PB, Flaxman, A -
> SybilGuard: defending against sybil attacks via social networks
> 	https://gnunet.org/node/1466
>
>
> See, GNUnet even runs the vastest bibliography on the topic.
> Guess what, secushare is planning to use its social network
> to further decrease risks of sybil attacks for GNUnet. Now
> please point me to the papers that explain how all P2P networks
> suffer from sybil attacks.
>
>> We are happy to see other approaches, and do keep us in touch, but
>> any non-Web solution is out of scope in general for W3C Working
>> Groups.  Good luck with GNUnet and other approaches!
> That is a short-sighted point of view considering that these
> platforms are already offering higher security web services than
> the W3C web currently can offer. Public-key based routing is
> safer than X.509 and any of .i2p, .onion or .gnu offer that kind
> of superior security compared to https. It is no surprise more
> and more websites are going light.. to where authenticity and
> confidentiality is actually provided. Not to mention the shift
> from the ancient client/mainframe model to the new P2P share
> and distribute models, which I expect to take place next. In
> that context the web is just a bunch of HTML+CSS files traveling
> the Internet free from ties to GoogleEtagServices.com and the like.
> HTTP's share of network traffic will decrease.
>
> There's a revolution going on, not only in Ukraine.
>
>

Received on Thursday, 27 February 2014 10:17:04 UTC