From 3ee1283bec1a024a5a26db156b538be723eb787a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nick Daly Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 08:26:20 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Clarified evil replies idea. --- ugly_hacks/santiago.rst | 15 ++++++++------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/ugly_hacks/santiago.rst b/ugly_hacks/santiago.rst index 80beb02a6..1074847ba 100644 --- a/ugly_hacks/santiago.rst +++ b/ugly_hacks/santiago.rst @@ -357,14 +357,15 @@ Design Questions Santiago sender sends two messages: "Will X serve Y for Z? Please respond at W.", and "X will (not) serve Y for Z at U." -:Fucking-with-you Replies: During World War II (IIRC), the RAF confused the - German air force by alternating the altitudes of their fighters and bombers - (doing it wrong, flying the fighters *beneath* the bombers). Apparently the - Germans were most confused when the RAF did it wrong once every seven - flights. Perhaps we should do the same? +:Fucking-with-you Replies: An urban legend: During World War II, the RAF + confused the German air force by alternating the altitudes of their fighters + and bombers (doing it wrong, flying the fighters *beneath* the bombers). + Apparently the Germans were most confused when the RAF did it wrong once + every seven flights. Whether or not it's true, it implies a lesson: - Confuse adversaries by intentionally doing it wrong, sometimes. Answer a - request with garbage, irrelevant HTTP codes, or silence. + Confuse adversaries by intentionally doing it wrong, sometimes. We could + answer a bum Santiago request with garbage, irrelevant HTTP codes, or + silence. :Onion Routing: What can we learn from Tor itself? Maybe not a lot. Maybe a bit. That we don't allow untrusted connections is an incredible limitation