@eyedeekay
&eche|on
&kytv
+R4SAS
+RN
+acetone
+dr|z3d
+orignal
+postman
+weko
+wodencafe
An0nm0n
Arch
FreefallHeavens
Gid
Irc2PGuest13560
Irc2PGuest1893
Irc2PGuest32938
Irc2PGuest4253
Irc2PGuest8259
Leopold
Minogami
Onn4l7h
Sleepy
Soni
T3s|4_
Teeed
aargh1
admin
anon4
apt0110
b3t4f4c3__
cheddah
eyedeekay_bnc
idk
itsjustme_
j6
limak
not_bob_afk
polistern
poriori_
profetikla
qend-irc2p
rapidash
tbqdrn
theglitch
u5657
user100
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