Menu
▾
▴
Re: [opx-devel] IRC
|
From: <cr...@xb...> - 2004-07-05 19:13:16
|
On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 14:28:31 -0400, Mike Valstar wrote: >As far as i remember... it never "fell apart" we were doing good... it >was a little work for those of us actually doing something *cough* but >nothing we couldent handle... then one day the server just wasent >there. hmmm This is true, I remember working w/ Tom W on the linux client ALOT! Then I remember Curry never coming around anymore, and if he was around, he wouldn't answer any msgs that you sent to him. The one day the server just disappeared, so I offered to use one of my servers as a temp server till we got the original one back up, but ofcourse all my systems are WAY to slow for something like this. So in all I was never able to help out w/ the server. I even have a 10mbit and a 100mbit line that I could have put the server on. Just didn't have a powerful enough server for it... > >Mike Tangolics wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Yea...speaking of... anyone still have those logs? >> >> That was a weird few hours. >> >> And yes, I remember the protocol discussion and the options we had. I >> still think with a few obfuscation changes we could've cut the cheating >> down by at least half. And it wasn't too bad to begin with. >> >> Mike T >> >> Tom Wirschell wrote: >> | On Mon, 2004-07-05 at 15:06, Mike Curry wrote: >> | >> |>I spoke of using Encryption, you didn't seem to like that idea, >> because of >> |>your first idea "Open Source". Not very Smart Tom... >> | >> | >> | Like Mike V said, the thing was already open source when I joined up. >> | Not only that, it HAD to be Open Source because you were already using >> | NTL which was a GPL-licenced piece of software. >> | >> | Also note that at the time I joined there was a server with a >> completely >> | open protocol. While I was involved in the project someone, apparently >> | you, did talk about encrypting the protocol, and I was indeed against >> | it, precisely because it was Open Source. >> | >> | We would encrypt the data on the client-side prior to sending, but it >> | would still be the client who came up with a computed amount of blocks. >> | Since everybody has access to the client source, they would be able to >> | figure out at what point the amount of blocks gets encrypted, recode >> the >> | client so that it adds a few zeros to the amount, and VOILA! A fake >> | stats entry over an encrypted protocol. Now, maybe 'most' people aren't >> | sufficiently capable coders to dream up the required alteration, but >> | once the project took off I'm certain there would be plenty of people >> | who were sufficiently capable, and perfectly willing to boot. If >> | choosing not to go via this method qualifies me as being "not very >> | smart", well, so be it. I'd rather see a real fix to the problem, >> rather >> | than only moving it around a little. >> | >> | When we (Mike V or T and me) were talking about changing the >> protocol, I >> | was also planning to keep the networking and key storing parts out of >> | the client sources. It would probably be a violation of the GPL that we >> | were forced to adhere to, but given the context I doubt anybody would >> | disapprove. >> | We never reached the point where we'd have to find out though. >> | >> | Since it turns out you're on this mailing list, maybe you could >> | enlighten us about just what you think happened in those last few days >> | of the project. Kindly start from the point where Microsoft supposedly >> | shut down the site, and put in a little extra detail on your IRC >> session >> | via which you tried to explain what was happening. I'm sure I'm not the >> | only one still wondering about that one. >> | >> | Kind regards, >> | >> | Tom Wirschell >> | >> | >> | >> | >> | ------------------------------------------------------- >> | This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. >> | Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - >> | digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, >> | unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com >> | _______________________________________________ >> | opx-devel mailing list >> | opx...@li... >> | https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opx-devel >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org >> >> iD8DBQFA6ZLH7ntAARlGIUERAjDFAJ9Kxf9nUxWiuppux01N3y0JQmlg9ACdFi+k >> qRE4bGXE3GLCPBxJx14lxdw= >> =abQh >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. >> Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital >> self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched >> networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com >> _______________________________________________ >> opx-devel mailing list >> opx...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opx-devel > > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. >Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - >digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, >unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com >_______________________________________________ >opx-devel mailing list >opx...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opx-devel > |