@eyedeekay
&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN
+RN_
+T3s|4
+dr|z3d
+eche|off
+hagen
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+snex
+weko
+wodencafe
Arch
BubbRubb1
Daddy_1
Danny
DeltaOreo
FreeB
FreefallHeavens
HowardPlayzOfAdmin
Irc2PGuest248832
Irc2PGuest43743
Irc2PGuest47444
Irc2PGuest70847
Irc2PGuest92548
NewRO
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Sisyphus
Sleepy
T3s|4_
Teeed
acetone_
ardu
b3t4f4c3__
bak83_
cumlord
death
dr4wd3
eyedeekay_bnc
kaiju1
not_bob_afk
not_human_
nuke1
onon_
poriori
profetikla
r00tobo_BNC
rapidash
shiver_
solidx66_
thetia
u5657
uop23ip
w8rabbit
wew
x74a6
zzz
orignal, re: SSU2, I checked my notes, where I call it a "clone attack"
zzz
eyedeekay told me about it in May, for both SSU2 and NTCP2. I told him to tell you NTCP2 was not affected, and you agreed
zzz
on 6/11 eyedeekay sent me more details. On 6/12 I suggested he ask you to write it up as a proposal
zzz
on 6/25 he replied that you agreed to write it up
zzz
afaik that's where we still are today, and that's still my recommendation
zzz
even if you don't want to put in the work yet to document a solution, starting the proposal with a description of the problem/attack is the best way to start
dr|z3d
Is there any value in reverting the mega segmented netdb patch until it's refactored?
dr|z3d
I mean, it's still early enough in the commit tree to pull it, rework it, and then recommit it when it's fixed, ideally in scoped commits and not one huge "throw everything in and cross fingers" commit.
eyedeekay
You mean the merge commit?
eyedeekay
I'm not against reversing it but erasing the history of the master branch doesn't seem good, if I do it I'll have to find a way to do it without that