From: Jerry W. <jer...@gm...> - 2006-11-28 05:10:46
|
Talk about a can of worms! Does it really need a full client/server implementation? I'm new here, so I'm ignorant to any discussion of why that method may have been selected to start. I can say that the only things I've seen that can stand up to the hundreds of queries/second that worldwide lists punish servers with are 'rbldnsd' and 'rbldns'. With a message hash it feels a bit like 'square peg/round hole' (hashes and daemons built to do reverse DNS). You guys have experience stress testing tinydns? =) To ask the shorter question, can we setup 'hash.pyzor.something.ext' as a host, and then have a TXT record with the response? Here's what I can tell from just kinda 10,000' overviewing it, please interject any information you may have. The program 'pyzor' connects to the server/port listed in ~/.pyzor/servers (can be updated with 'pyzor discover'). If you tell it to checck ('pyzor check < /tmp/spamfile') it will compute a hash of the message (how?) and then send a HTTPish type command to the server via tcp/cleartext on the other end. A command looks like this: User: anonymous [ static ] Time: 1164688654 [ seconds since the epoch ] Sig: 45aed8ad7d2bd59f339c7e88c0d4e533c1c68b9c [ dunno how it's computed, but it changes based on message content ] Op: check [ specified via command line ] Op-Digest: 0dfe4745346676d78cc6bc11ff71d444546c0544 [ don't now how it's computed, 'echo -n check | md5sum' doesn't come back with this hash... it's static ] Thread: 26283 [ pid ?] PV: 2.0 [ version number i guess; static, ends with \n\n] I haven't been able to get a response, and with my python being rudementary at best, it's going to take me a while to figure out what one looks like. It looks like the Spamassassin parsing code [.../Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/Pyzor.pm] may be more helpful than the server.py. On 11/27/06, Marc G. Fournier <sc...@hu...> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > - --On Monday, November 27, 2006 22:04:30 -0600 Jerry Wilborn > <jer...@gm...> wrote: > > > Please forgive my ignorance of the protocol. Is there a place where I > can > > read about how the actual question/answer is transmitted? Are we > re-inventing > > the wheel? Is it possible to hook this into DNS like the other .*lists > do? > > What do you mean by 'hook this into DNS'? Do you mean like SPF and > such? Or > are you thinking of something different ... > > As for Pyzor protocol ... no idea on whether or not this was ever > published by > the original developer ;( > > > > > > > On 11/27/06, Marc G. Fournier <sc...@hu...> wrote: > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > > > - --On Monday, November 27, 2006 21:31:53 -0500 Robert Praetorius > > <rm...@ii...> > > wrote: > > > >> I've also done some thinking about building a > >> distributed pyzor and agree that it's the obvious > >> next step but don't have "ideas on how to accomplish > >> a distributed pyzor relatively easily"* > > > > Actually, its very simple "in theory" ... all you need is to change the > > communications protocol slightly to distinguish between a server or > client > > packet ... basically, if a client reports to the server, then that > server > > needs > > to then report the same thing to the other servers, but "as a server" > ... > > when > > a server reports to a server, that is the end of the line ... > > > > I was just thinking about it, and the best paradigm, I think, for this > is > > Usenet news ... each server would be a 'registered peer' off of another > one > > ... > > > > Let's say, for instance, that we have a server in NA at Site A ... if I > wanted > > to add a pyzor server onto that system, I would talk to the admin @ Site > A > > about connecting to him ... connection would be a simple as a > servers.txt file > > that contains the hostname of the remote server ... > > > > When Site A receives a report, it auto gets forwarded down to its > 'children' > > ... if my site receives a report, I would forward it up to Site A ... > > > > Now, Site A knows that it received the report from me, so wouldn't send > it > > back > > to me ... > > > > Now, in theory, each server would only need max two connections ... an > > upstream > > and a downstream, but for redundancy, and speed, more then one would be > > preferred ... > > > > So, as an example, let's say we have a single server in: US, Panama (my > > servers), EU, Australia ... at a minimum, you'd want something like: > > > > Australia <-> US <-> EU > > ^ > > | > > v > > Panama > > > > To improve redundancy, you could add links between Australia <-> EU, AU > <-> PA > > and PA <-> EU, but they wouldn't be required ... > > > > EU could then get a link from Africa, while Australia maybe from Korean, > PA > > from Brazil, etc ... > > > > Within US, you could break things down add add regional servers, etc, > etc ... > > > > A large ISP could then run their own Pyzor server, but as part of the > > distributed network ... > > > > Its theory, and simple one at that > > > > - ---- > > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services ( > http://www.hub.org) > > Email . sc...@hu... MSN . > sc...@hu... > > Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) > > > > iD8DBQFFa6li4QvfyHIvDvMRAmVNAKCB3VXTKuWA8a15XxpKHr9VmjB11wCfWbls > > qDm9JHFClR8UBhg7p/CeIkM= > > =EnYO > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jerry Wilborn > > jer...@gm... > > > > - ---- > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org > ) > Email . sc...@hu... MSN . sc...@hu... > Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) > > iD8DBQFFa7sn4QvfyHIvDvMRAo/rAJ46wPrlPAO17t9GTDlI37tanYJdZQCgg2gN > EXtsj+9PTlIYIhydrzF8iyQ= > =Z7rK > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- Jerry Wilborn jer...@gm... |