On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 01:51:36PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
If the ping is not clocked, but is timed (clocked) to a statistically random time within a configured window, the GPA cannot know when to conduct their latency injection attack, and any dropout by me, would be seen by those who failed to receive my ping or received a delayed ping, as nothing but white noise, since every ping is randomly timed anyway.
The ability to hide ping recipients when I and or they are only intermittently connected (i.e., we all live on mobile phones), is in serious doubt.
The reasonable (excepting further analysis) operating mode is to, at least, have a node which is permanently connected - but again, we need consider each use case in due course...
That said, friends expose their friend connections daily these days - sms, text, phone calls, facebook, "likes" and endless more social virtue signalling signals. "You and your friends, who live only on mobile phones" are often connected around the same time. In these circumstances, fixed base rate links provide hiding of whether or not we are chatting, voice talking, or surfing through one another's nodes. This is useful "content, and type of" comms hiding. "Just because we cannot hide who we are communicating with, does not mean we should not exercise our right to hide the content and frequency of our communications." If my phone always connects to the same peer nodes when I turn my phone on, and vice versa, and we always establish certain base rate links, we may not even be communicating and no one would know, assuming we always reserve a minimum base rate load as "chaff or wheat" between our phones, and such that when we accept additional circuit requests, those exist above the private "always reserved" base link. This is the headroom concept, but always chaff filled, and reserved between me and my primary first hop peers.