# Attack Track FF: Witness Network Formation Attacks

**Track ID**: FF (62nd track)
**Attack Numbers**: 287-292
**Added**: 2026-02-08
**Focus**: Attacks on witness networks during their formation phase

## Overview

Track FF explores attacks on the most vulnerable phase of any trust network: its formation. Unlike Track CN (Witness Amplification) which targets established networks, Track FF focuses on corrupting networks during bootstrap when defenses are weakest and structural advantages are permanent.

The key insight: **Early manipulation creates persistent structural advantages. The genesis ceremony and initial witness graph shape the network forever.**

## Gap Analysis

Existing coverage:
- **Track CN (Witness Amplification)**: Gaming established witness graphs
- **Track FB (Multi-Federation Cascade)**: Cascade effects in mature networks
- **Track ER (LCT Lifecycle)**: Identity creation, delegation, revocation

Gap identified:
- No coverage of **genesis ceremony attacks** against network bootstrap
- No modeling of **early entry positioning** to gain structural advantages
- No analysis of **witness clique injection** during formation
- No exploration of **network migration exploitation**

## Attack Vectors

### FF-1a: Early Entry Positioning Attack

**Target**: Formation phase membership

**Mechanism**: Infiltrate the network during formation phase to gain permanent structural advantage.

**Attack Pattern**:
1. Identify network formation window
2. Attempt seed impersonation or early vouch acquisition
3. Rapidly build connections before rate limits kick in
4. Position as hub entity with outsized influence

**Defense Requirements**:
- Cryptographic seed verification (hardware-bound)
- Formation window with strict membership control
- Vouch chain validation to genesis
- Rate limiting during formation phase
- Post-formation bootstrap audit
- First-mover dampening (diminishing returns)

### FF-1b: Hub Capture Attack

**Target**: Network topology

**Mechanism**: Strategically position to become a critical hub, then exploit centrality for attack amplification.

**Attack Pattern**:
1. Enter network with moderate trust
2. Rapidly create outgoing witness links
3. Target entities across trust tiers
4. Become bridge between network regions
5. Exploit centrality for trust manipulation

**Defense Requirements**:
- Real-time centrality monitoring with alerts
- Hub diversity requirements (varied connections)
- Bridge redundancy enforcement (no single points)
- Trust path diversity verification
- Gradual centrality increase limits
- Single point of failure detection

### FF-2a: Witness Clique Injection Attack

**Target**: Trust inflation

**Mechanism**: Inject a pre-coordinated clique of malicious entities that mutually witness each other.

**Attack Pattern**:
1. Create N coordinated entities simultaneously
2. Each entity witnesses all others (N² mutual links)
3. Collective trust amplifies through mutual witnessing
4. Bridge to legitimate network for trust export

**Defense Requirements**:
- Clique detection algorithms (density analysis)
- Mutual witness dampening (exponential decay)
- Temporal clustering alerts (creation time analysis)
- Trust velocity limits (max increase per period)
- Witness diversity requirements
- Lineage analysis (witness-of-witness overlap)

### FF-2b: Witness Path Manipulation Attack

**Target**: Trust propagation

**Mechanism**: Manipulate paths through which trust propagates to control which entities can build trust.

**Attack Pattern**:
1. Path Blocking: Prevent trust accumulation for targets
2. Path Hijacking: Redirect trust through controlled nodes
3. Path Lengthening: Delay trust propagation
4. Path Racing: Outrace legitimate witnesses

**Defense Requirements**:
- Path redundancy enforcement (min 2 independent paths)
- Path length limits (max 4-5 hops)
- Path hijacking detection (track historical paths)
- Parallel path racing detection
- Path freshness requirements
- Path blocking alerts (min incoming witnesses)

### FF-3a: Genesis Ceremony Subversion Attack

**Target**: Network bootstrap

**Mechanism**: Attack the genesis ceremony that establishes initial seed entities and trust anchors.

**Attack Pattern**:
1. Seed impersonation (without hardware attestation)
2. Quorum manipulation (insufficient participants)
3. Timing attack (rush ceremony without delay)
4. Participant collusion

**Defense Requirements**:
- Hardware-bound seed identities (TPM/SE)
- Multi-party ceremony (min 3 independent participants)
- Immutable audit trail
- Mandatory delay period (24-48 hours)
- Rigorous participant verification
- Post-genesis monitoring for anomalies

### FF-3b: Witness Migration Exploitation Attack

**Target**: Network merges

**Mechanism**: Exploit the process of migrating or merging witness networks.

**Attack Pattern**:
1. Trust inflation during merge (95% trust → capped)
2. History rewriting attempts
3. Stale witness resurrection (150-day-old links)
4. Migration window exploitation

**Defense Requirements**:
- Trust caps on migration (max 0.7 trust)
- History immutability verification
- Stale witness rejection (max 90 days)
- Migration window protection (freeze operations)
- Cross-network validation
- Comprehensive merge audit trail

## Attack Economics

| Attack | Setup Cost (ATP) | Potential Gain (ATP) | Detection Probability | Time to Detection |
|--------|-----------------|---------------------|----------------------|-------------------|
| FF-1a | 12,000 | 400,000 | 0.55 | 72 hours |
| FF-1b | 20,000 | 600,000 | 0.60 | 48 hours |
| FF-2a | 25,000 | 700,000 | 0.65 | 24 hours |
| FF-2b | 18,000 | 450,000 | 0.55 | 36 hours |
| FF-3a | 50,000 | 2,000,000 | 0.75 | 168 hours |
| FF-3b | 35,000 | 900,000 | 0.60 | 72 hours |

## Defense Architecture

### Layer 1: Genesis Security
- Hardware-bound seed identities
- Multi-party ceremony with quorum
- Mandatory delay periods
- Immutable audit trails

### Layer 2: Formation Control
- Strict membership during formation
- Vouch chain validation
- Rate limiting
- First-mover dampening

### Layer 3: Structural Monitoring
- Centrality tracking
- Clique detection
- Path diversity verification
- Bridge redundancy

### Layer 4: Migration Security
- Trust capping
- Stale witness rejection
- History immutability
- Cross-network validation

### Layer 5: Ongoing Vigilance
- Post-genesis monitoring
- Trust velocity limits
- Lineage analysis
- Temporal clustering alerts

## Research Questions

1. **Optimal Formation Window**: How long should formation phase last for security vs usability?

2. **Centrality Thresholds**: At what centrality level should an entity trigger monitoring?

3. **Clique Detection Sensitivity**: What density threshold best balances false positives vs missed attacks?

4. **Genesis Ceremony Design**: What is the optimal number of participants and delay?

5. **Migration Trust Caps**: What cap level balances attack prevention vs legitimate trust preservation?

## Implementation Notes

All six attacks implemented in `attack_track_fe.py`:
1. Full defense simulation with 6 defense layers each
2. Detection probability modeling
3. Economic analysis (setup cost vs gain)
4. Trust damage assessment

## Related Tracks

- **Track CN**: Witness amplification (established networks)
- **Track ER**: LCT lifecycle attacks
- **Track FB**: Multi-federation cascades
- **Track FD**: Multi-coherence consensus
- **Track EU**: Social/organizational attacks

## Session History

- **2026-02-08 EVE**: Track FF formalized, 6 attack vectors implemented
- All attacks defended with current defense architecture
- Average detection probability: 61.7%
- Critical focus: Genesis ceremony security

---

*"The formation phase is the most vulnerable. Get genesis right, or everything that follows is compromised."*
