What will happen is that politicians will see this as another reason to push for everyone having their ID associated with their Internet traffic.
Yes, because like or not that’s the only possible solution. If all traffic was required to be signed and the signatures were tied to an entity then you could refuse unsigned traffic and if signed traffic was causing problems you’d know who it was and have recourse.
I don’t like this solution but it’s the only way forward that I can see.
Unsigned traffic = drop. Signed traffic that becomes an annoyance = drop. If signed traffic becomes more than an annoyance then you know who to report to the authorities and even in Brazil there’s authorities.
Yes, because like or not that’s the only possible solution. If all traffic was required to be signed and the signatures were tied to an entity then you could refuse unsigned traffic and if signed traffic was causing problems you’d know who it was and have recourse.
I don’t like this solution but it’s the only way forward that I can see.
How do you have more recourse countering a random third world IP vs a random third world person when both are outside your juridiction?
Unsigned traffic = drop. Signed traffic that becomes an annoyance = drop. If signed traffic becomes more than an annoyance then you know who to report to the authorities and even in Brazil there’s authorities.
is it? Someone mentioned proof of work being effective for Tor.