Poisoners

[notsripted785]

Can shareaza deal with poisoning automatically?
Meaning does Shareaza bans peers that upload bad pieces? Like utorrent and azareus?

[cyko_01]

I know shareaza creates temp bans for some peers, but I'm not sure what criteria it is based on.

[notsripted785]

[ailurophobe]

Wouldn't recognizing in useful time that it is a range of bad peers instead of individual bad peers that happen to be in the same subnet or a single bad peer with dynamic IP require doing a reverse DNS look up? That said, when I add a rule manually I usually use 255.255.255.0 mask because the odds of needing to connect to a legit peer in the same subnet is small enough to ignore.

[siavoshkc]

Generally blocking IPs is not an efficient way to block bad sources. The IP you see (or block) may not be the IP of poisoner but a proxy server or NAT router its using. Blocking a range will make it worse as you may lose big networks. Another reason is many IPs are temporary and the address you block today maybe allocated to another nod tomorrow. If there was a mechanism to block bad sources using their GUID or any unique identifier like a combination of IP address and GUID it would be more efficient.

[ailurophobe]

Connecting to P2P thru a proxy or ISP NAT is fortunately rare. NATs are probably common enough to be an issue if you start blocking them, but I doubt ISPs like people spreading spam and trojans from their NAT any more than we do. Less probably.

The bad news (as you know) is that the GUIDS, being trivial to change, are not useful for blocking, they can however be used for credit systems. They are currently only used for anti-leech, but they could be used to add a reputation system to ranking search results as well. A reputation system would also allow negative rep to results from the same subnet as a known spammer without the problems hard blocks cause.