3 ms·

>You don't accidentally exceed your bandwidth and suddenly have to pay out the nose because some application wasn't behaving like you expected. Just think of a

>You don't accidentally exceed your bandwidth and suddenly have to pay out the nose because some application wasn't behaving like you expected. Just think of all the crypto mining out there for example, imagine how many people could accidentally allow crypto mining software to be installed and all of that data being transferred for half a month and then BAM big bill. Or someone makes malware that just transfers junk data purely to rack up data charges for kicks, or worse someone at an ISP does it to boost earnings or because they hate their employer and want them to eventually get 'caught doing it'.

xur17 7y ago
> Just think of all the crypto mining out there for example, imagine how many people could accidentally allow crypto mining software to be installed and all of that data being transferred for half a month and then BAM big bill. Not to deride your point, but crypto mining typically uses very little data since you only need the data contained in the block header, and don't need all of the transactions.
- ryanmercer 7y ago
  True, I suppose I was thinking of running full nodes, even then though it would just be a one time decent data hit for something like bitcoin. Still might be a practical thing for 51% attacks for currencies with smaller blockchains. Fine, change my crypto malware thought to a distributed storage malware. Several years ago there were a handful of distributed peer-to-peer file storage and backup system programs where you'd select how much of your storage you wanted to donate to the pool and that would determine how much you would get to use in the collective cloud for storing stuff. It wouldn't surprise me if someone had malware out there doing this for their own uses, if you had a botnet of 100k computers and took 1 gig from each, and had a 100x redundancy you've got 100 gigabytes of distributed storage for whatever which you might be using for your own backup or for file sharing... Actually I bet you could do this for hosting stuff on the darknet, if you had a decent amount of machines on a botnet, say 10,000 machines, and needed just 100mb for your entire darknet site, you could have all 10,000 machines hosting it and serving it via 10,000 tor connections... interesting. This would be a hell of a plot device or potentially even a practical deployment for espionage use or general criminal activity. Have one machine somewhere under your full control randomly loading 1 or more of the sites at random to load the actual darknet site.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

xur17 7y ago

> Just think of all the crypto mining out there for example, imagine how many people could accidentally allow crypto mining software to be installed and all of that data being transferred for half a month and then BAM big bill. Not to deride your point, but crypto mining typically uses very little data since you only need the data contained in the block header, and don't need all of the transactions.

ryanmercer 7y ago
True, I suppose I was thinking of running full nodes, even then though it would just be a one time decent data hit for something like bitcoin. Still might be a practical thing for 51% attacks for currencies with smaller blockchains. Fine, change my crypto malware thought to a distributed storage malware. Several years ago there were a handful of distributed peer-to-peer file storage and backup system programs where you'd select how much of your storage you wanted to donate to the pool and that would determine how much you would get to use in the collective cloud for storing stuff. It wouldn't surprise me if someone had malware out there doing this for their own uses, if you had a botnet of 100k computers and took 1 gig from each, and had a 100x redundancy you've got 100 gigabytes of distributed storage for whatever which you might be using for your own backup or for file sharing... Actually I bet you could do this for hosting stuff on the darknet, if you had a decent amount of machines on a botnet, say 10,000 machines, and needed just 100mb for your entire darknet site, you could have all 10,000 machines hosting it and serving it via 10,000 tor connections... interesting. This would be a hell of a plot device or potentially even a practical deployment for espionage use or general criminal activity. Have one machine somewhere under your full control randomly loading 1 or more of the sites at random to load the actual darknet site.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]