A proposed US law permitting attacks on peer-to-peer file sharing
networks to disrupt illegal copying could be undermined by research from two
US computer students.
Peer-to-peer networks let thousands of personal computers communicate
with each other so that users can search each other's hard drives for
files.
Some sections of the US entertainment industry are so concerned about
copyright infringement on peer-to-peer networks that they are pushing for
new powers to put a stop to the activity themselves. The plans have outraged
many peer-to-peer network users and civil liberty campaigners.
A US bill proposed in July 2002 would give copyright holders the legal
power to attack the computers of file sharers suspected of piracy. Experts
say it would be relatively easy to log on to a network and deliberately
overload suspected users with fake requests for a file, by misinforming
other "nodes". This is similar to overloading a web site with fake traffic
in a "denial of service" attack.
But Neil Daswani and Hector Garcia-Molina of the Database Research
Department at Stanford University in the US believe it may be possible to
redesign peer-to-peer networks to protect them against such attacks. Daswani
says this may also guard these networks against malicious computer hackers.
He told New Scientist: "We were interested in both protecting the
network from being shut down and protecting individual users."
Flood gates
Daswani and Garcia-Molina mathematically modeled the popular open source
network Gnutella and experimented with different combinations of existing
rules for efficiently sharing file requests across a network. This network
consists of ordinary users, or "nodes" and "supernodes", which have higher
bandwidth. Requests are broadcast between nodes and supernodes with little
discrimination.
Daswani points out that anyone can join a peer-to-peer network, so it
cannot be run on trust. Instead, the researchers gave each node a set of
simple rules to follow when processing requests from other peers. They found
that when requests from ordinary nodes were treated in a different way to
requests from supernodes the damage caused by a flooding attack was
dramatically reduced.
The optimum policy was to refuse second requests from a specific
supernode until all other connected supernodes had also made a request -
showing the request is more likely to be genuine. Favouring requests from
local supernodes was also beneficial. A good overall arrangement was to have
peers communicating normally within small groups and limiting communication
between these groups.
By applying these rules, Daswani says, "you don't end up using up all
your bandwidth if there's a malicious node on the network."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more related stories
search the print edition Archive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peer review
Theodore Hong, an expert in peer-to-peer networks at Imperial College in
the UK says: "They've developed a good model for quantifying the damage
caused by a query flood. Using these policies, you can cut the damage caused
by a flood in half."
But Adam Langley, a UK-based peer-to-peer programmer and contributor to
Peer-to-Peer: Harnessing the Power of Disruptive Technologies is not
convinced that the system would work in the real world. "I wonder about its
practicality," he told New Scientist, as the model assumes an ideal,
uniform network.
Organisations including the Recording Industry Association of America
(RIAA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) are pushing for
better protection of copyrighted music and movies. The P2P Piracy Prevention
Act, proposed by Senator Howard Berman, is currently being redrafted
following severe criticism and is not likely to be introduced in any form
until January 2003 at the earliest.
|