Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em

by Anonymous Monk
on Oct 06, 2011 at 21:48 UTC ( #930071=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
in thread to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em

This would give a motivated person a fair chance at getting a network and possibly a geographic fix on a person.

I'm not a cryptographer, but I think that is practically impossible

Four pieces of information are used to calculate hash : salt, sessionid, ip, nodeid

The salt doesn't have to be shared

A fifth piece of secret information could also be used

Only the hash and nodeid are publically accessible information

The salt and the 5th piece can be rotated either randomly or periodically (every other week) --- good luck using crypt breaker on a moving target

And for the biggest shocker :) the hash doesn't even have to be shared! There doesn't even have to be a hash

The whole scheme could , instead of a dynamically computed hash, simply use a randomly assigned number, or color

For the sake of argument, even if it were possible to break crypt and get an IP address -- so what?

Where is the motivation? Perlmonks isn't used for commerce or political or criminal publishing, so where is the attraction to try and reverse engineer an IP out of this hash?

? Some random nefarious perlmonk wants to prove that X post by Anonymous Monk was really posted by mr_mischief, because the IP is the same? in same block? same IPS? So he can say AHA , GOTCHA!?

:D

As BrowserUk says, Gods here can and do use their privilege to see through anonymity sham -- and goverments don't even need to be Gods

So, ip , no ip, I don't think it makes a difference :)


Comment on Re^4: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
Re^5: to distinguish between [Anonymous Monk]s in a thread, brand 'em
by mr_mischief (Monsignor) on Oct 07, 2011 at 02:43 UTC

    I didn't see a random salt per user in the example. There really shouldn't need to be a random salt. The point is anonymity, so leave anything that ties it to the user at all out. There's no need to prevent sensitive information leaking if there's no sensitive information. A crypt on the session ID and the root node ID should be plenty to assure separation of credit for the thread, so why include anything else in a publicly displayed string?

    This all kind of assumes the idea would be picked up anyway, which is not by any means a foregone conclusion. It's all just painting a bike shed that may never be assembled.

    The level of information trusted to the site admins shouldn't by default be trusted to everyone. Don't assume that giving up IP information to the public would be okay with everyone just because it's okay with you. Apparently you're forgetting (or simply not aware, but that's doubtful) of the issues of stalking and harassment other people have had to deal with.

      I didn't see a random salt per user in the example

      That is why I said that it is another thing that could be done -- to alleviate your crypt breaking concerns

      There really shouldn't need to be a random salt. The point is anonymity, so leave anything that ties it to the user at all out. There's no need to prevent sensitive information leaking if there's no sensitive information. A crypt on the session ID and the root node ID should be plenty to assure separation of credit for the thread, so why include anything else in a publicly displayed string?

      Um, yeah, because of everything I already said in this thread -- the actual branding scheme is not that important

      This all kind of assumes the idea would be picked up anyway

      Yes, for purpose of discussion, that assumption has to be made, esp by the suggester, me :)

      The level of information trusted to the site admins shouldn't by default be trusted to everyone. Don't assume that giving up IP information to the public would be okay with everyone just because it's okay with you. Apparently you're forgetting (or simply not aware, but that's doubtful) of the issues of stalking and harassment other people have had to deal with.

      Why assume that IP information is made public? Because it isn't you know.

      And just how would a stalker/harasser know which Anonymous Monk posting is the person they're looking for?

      I get branded, not you mr_mischief, and I am legion, for I am many.

       

      But seriously, I would be more worried about WITCHES than stalker/harasser/goverment/godwin , they got magic :/

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://930071]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others making s'mores by the fire in the courtyard of the Monastery: (3)
As of 2014-09-24 03:51 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (245 votes), past polls