[freenet-dev] FCP changes for ULPRs

[Michael Rogers]

Matthew Toseland wrote:
>> "Ultra-lightweight" could actually be a disadvantage here, because if 
>> the peers can easily handle that number of requests they won't throttle 
>> the attacker.
> 
> No, he has to do a real request to get a ULPR subscription. Therefore it is 
> subject to all the normal throttling mechanisms.

But a real request can be, what, 100 bytes? 200? And the attacker only 
needs to send 3 per second to each peer.

Cheers,
Michael