So for RSA without padding, a threat actor could request lots of tokens (without getting rate-limited?), and use that as information to more precisely focus efforts to brute-force the key, and thereby reducing the number of operations required to do so? Or am I misunderstanding it?
And how exactly do you plan on curbing addressing through cryptographic hashes, instead of IP addresses directly, where client and server are separated through intermediary nodes? If the site exists on an anonymizing network (like I2P or TOR), it becomes a lot harder to identify the IP address of centralized services, and impossible where decentralized. Well, unless you go fully authoritarian, and only allow weakened encryption standards: exploited by authorities, and others aware of ways to exploit the weaknesses.
But I suppose this further disincentivizes ordinary, less tech-savvy, would-be “pirates”, that need the clear-web for torrent links… Which we should make our responsibility, to enrich the knowledge of said persons, so that they can bypass regulations of governments, that fundamentally act against their best interests. It’s time for people to rediscover torrenting, like many households did in the 2000’s, instead of giving away their freedoms to subscriptions, purely for the sake of short-term convenience.
Western governments should look in the mirror, instead of solely putting the blame at information-campaigns from foreign actors. The whole reason why these theories seem plausible to your own citizens, is because they have no faith in you; because you have a track record of acting against their best interests. An increasing number of people are sick of hearing one-sided, fearmongering, and escalating narratives, where anything that challenges that, be it truthful or not, may resonate with this group. And good luck discerning disinformation from misinformation, where the only difference is intent; which will be challenging to substantiate.