A network like Freenet would be more appropriate for a situation like this. Its peer to peer nature is like bittorrent, so the more popular content is, the more it is replicated, and thus becomes easier to access.

It shouldn't be impossible to design a distributed network that has a positive feedback loop that makes a DDOS counterproductive, by actually boosting the targeted materials.

> so the more popular content is, the more it is replicated, and thus becomes easier to access.

Self censorship.

I2P + Tahoe-LAFS, IPFS

Tor is not good enough. That's the reason we see this kind proposals.

The botnet attacking Krebs could in all likelihood take down the entire Tor network.

It was one of early threats I described on the Tor network. NSA et all could easily pay for it to be done. Consistently. Year after year. I think the only reason they haven't is that U.S. and foreign intelligence services themselves find Tor so useful. Can't take down one's own tool for disrupting the competition. ;)

The advertised bandwidth for the whole network is much lower than the 600+GBps that's attacking Kerbs it's a little under 200 GBps.

https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html

Tor has too many friends. I dislike the trend of Tor being used to control botnets, but the upside is that an entire underworld now sees tor as an asset. Any non-state attacking Tor would make some very interesting enemies.

Without the particular bot net/what have you taking credit for it do we generally know who is running a DDOS?

Enemies? Hah, you mean extortion targets!

Tor can obfuscate the origin of https requests (assumedly, if we continue to believe Tor isn't infiltrated and surveiled, which it probably is). It cannot protect against DDoS attacks.