Phase 2 Plan — Extended Attack Simulation Suite & Interop Integration (Follow-up to PR #950 · Based on Discussions #929 & #960)

[Fatumayattani]

Hi everyone 👋

Building on the roadmap from [Discussion #929 — Plan for Network Attack Simulation (#57)] and the results in [Discussion #960 — Eclipse Attack Simulation Results: Comprehensive Security Analysis], this post outlines the coordinated plan for Phase 2 of the Network Attack Simulation module.

This phase continues the work started in [PR #950] and focuses on expanding the attack suite, unifying the simulation framework, and integrating it with libp2p/interop for cross-implementation testing.

---

🎯 Objectives

1. Integrate the new attack modules introduced in Eclipse Attack Simulation Results: Comprehensive Security Analysis (#950) #960 (Sybil, Flooding, Connection Exhaustion, Protocol-level).
2. Introduce a unified runner to manage all attack types with shared configuration and metrics handling.
3. Refine the metrics collector for deeper analysis of network recovery and resilience.
4. Integrate the attack simulation framework into libp2p/interop** to enable reproducible cross-implementation testing.

---

📦 Scope of Work

Area	Description	Lead
Attack Modules & Implementation	Finalize and stabilize the new attacks (Sybil, Flooding, Connection Exhaustion, Protocol-level) and align them with the structure used in the Eclipse attack module.	@yashksaini-coder
Framework Architecture & Unified Runner	Build a unified runner to manage all attack types, configurations, and metrics collection, ensuring consistent execution and reporting.	@Fatumayattani
Metrics Enhancements & Analysis	Jointly refine the existing metrics collector to provide consistent outputs across all attacks, maintaining the metrics defined in #960 (resilience, lookup success, contamination, recovery time, resource usage).	@Fatumayattani + @yashksaini-coder
Interop Integration	Integrate the simulation framework into libp2p/interop; align configuration, test structure, and results output with interop standards; verify cross-implementation compatibility.	@Fatumayattani + @yashksaini-coder
Documentation & Visualization	Update README and developer docs to include Phase 2 attacks, directory structure, interop testing instructions, and result summaries from #960.	@yashksaini-coder
Quality Assurance & Review	Maintain ≥ 95 % test coverage, verify consistency of results across scenarios, and coordinate review feedback with maintainers.	@Fatumayattani

---

🧪 Testing Goals

• All extended attack modules and interop tests pass successfully (≈ 60 tests total).
• Runtime ≤ 12 seconds for complete suite.
• Results consistent with Eclipse baseline metrics from Eclipse Attack Simulation Results: Comprehensive Security Analysis (#950) #960.
• Full reproducibility using the existing pytest-trio test flow.

---

🧠 Future Work (Post-Phase 2)

• Develop benchmarking standards across Python, Go, and Rust libp2p implementations.
• Create automated regression tests for recurring attack scenarios.
• Publish summarized security best practices derived from simulation outcomes.

---

💬 Next Steps

1. Confirm and finalize the responsibilities and scope above.
2. Adjust if needed based on maintainer feedback.
3. Begin Phase 2 implementation and track progress here.
4. Post periodic updates and metrics summaries in this thread.

Huge thanks to @seetadev, @acul71, and @pacrob for the continued guidance, and to @yashksaini-coder for the great collaboration throughout Phase 1 and Phase 2.
Excited to continue strengthening py-libp2p’s security together.

[yashksaini-coder]

@Fatumayattani Thanks for the opportunity, I got to learn about network attacks, which was the main highlight for me working on this PR.

[Fatumayattani]

You worked like a pro, proud to be working with you.. @yashksaini-coder

[yashksaini-coder]

My pleasure 👍🏼