| ▲ | spencerflem 3 hours ago |
| I love the vision, but I do wonder how the parallel internet will deal with DDoS levels of bot traffic. I hear ‘web of trust’ pretty often and I like the idea but that’s not anonymous or accessible either |
|
| ▲ | donmcronald an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| > I love the vision, but I do wonder how the parallel internet will deal with DDoS levels of bot traffic. Something that makes it expensive to initiate a connection and cheap (relatively) to accept or reject would probably help. I think that’s a hard problem though. |
|
| ▲ | SV_BubbleTime 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Well, how does Tor or other services do it now? |
| |
| ▲ | spencerflem 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | They get blocked by Recaptcha, I think. I’m not talking about the network itself but the servers on the other end. I guess my point is that while Google is definitely malicious, I don’t think every site using recaptcha is and if we expect them not to use that tool there should probably be an alternative. | | |
| ▲ | 986aignan an hour ago | parent [-] | | > They get blocked by Recaptcha, I think. I think SV was asking what onion services, which can't really use recaptcha, do to prevent the DDoS storm. And I would imagine the answer is obscurity, since the dark web isn't nearly as well-mapped as the public web. That and some Anubis or other PoW would probably go far. | | |
| ▲ | SV_BubbleTime 17 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Proof of work I get, but isn’t that like step2? If I’m hosting at some IP, I still need Anubis or something to serve up the challenge, so doesn’t that become the attack point? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | chadgpt2 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [dead] |
