2007-07-14, 13:18 | Link #61 |
makes no files now
Join Date: May 2006
|
Nice find. Looks like it might not take too long before it will have English localization. Even though that's one of the last things that I care about. It'd be much better if the memory leaks were fixed first and the awful CPU usage. -.-
__________________
|
2007-07-14, 13:45 | Link #62 | |
I see what you did there!
Scanlator
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2007-07-14, 18:17 | Link #65 | |
Member
Fansubber
|
Quote:
|
|
2007-07-15, 08:00 | Link #67 |
eyewitness
Join Date: Jan 2007
|
OK, here is a bunch of hopefully not too naive questions from somebody who has never used Winny or its successors.
What exactly is the difference between them and the olde decentralized tools like overnet? What exactly is encrypted? The shared packages? Trying to log and analyze the transmitted raw data on the net is a pretty bad strategy. If you want the IPs of sharers simply take part in the sharing process. And this is something the copyright holder can do by himself, not just the government. I can't see how revealing the IP to the sharing partner can be prevented except if PD uses something like onion routing and even that wouldn't make sense if the network is exclusively created for PD. Furthermore, what does it mean, encryption has been hacked? Standard encryption algortihms cannot simply be "hacked". Finally, why is PD not open source? Security via obscurity?
__________________
|
2007-07-15, 10:14 | Link #70 | |
Excessively jovial fellow
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 37
|
Quote:
Winny/Share/Perfect Dark are all really a kind of giant encrypted shared network drive, sort of. Your client is always downloading things to its cache folder, regardless if you want it or not. I believe the things it downloads are not complete files, just parts of files, Bittorrent style. All transmitted data and all data in the cache is always encrypted, hence you need to "convert" fully downloaded files from your cache into your download folder (they need to be decrypted). When you "upload" files, you aren't uploading them to any specific user; you're uploading them into the network, regardless if other users want them or not - you're forcing other clients to download the file into their cache folders. Old files that noone has downloaded in a long time are automatically purged from the cache, so the network keeps itself clean, so to speak. Furthermore, other peers (or "nodes" in the classical Share/Winny terminology) are never referred to by their IP address; addresses, too, are encrypted (or hashed). The point of all this obscurity is that while you can simply run a netstat on your computer to see what nodes you're connected to, it's impossible to tell who is down- or uploading what, unless you manage to break the encryption to see what is being transmitted to who. You never download one full file from one node to another either; the structure of the network means you're always filtering it through a lot of other nodes' cache folders. Therefore it is very hard to prove any single node (except the one originally uploading the file into the network, but finding him/her is next to impossible) guilty of sharing anything. I hope that answers most of your questions.
__________________
|
|
2007-07-15, 14:19 | Link #73 |
eyewitness
Join Date: Jan 2007
|
Only a few.There must be a function to actually request files instead of waiting until the right packets appear in your cache by chance, or not? And for encrypting IPs, I don't know if it is possible under Windows to establish a connection without letting the OS know (which would definitely be a bug, not a feature) but your network card knows who it is talking to. Put another computer between number one and the internet = problem solved.
Well it does sound a bit like onion routing (plus caching) where every node knows who it is talking to but not what it is transporting and what is the source and final destination. But what you cannot hide is the fact that you're running a Tor node.
__________________
|
2007-07-15, 15:46 | Link #74 | ||
Excessively jovial fellow
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: ISDB-T
Age: 37
|
Quote:
Quote:
Nor is it necessary to do so. As proven in several court cases, the actual P2P technology is not illegal in itself; what is illegal is transmitting copyrighted works without the copyright holder's permission, and that is very hard to prove with something like Share or Perfect Dark.
__________________
|
||
2007-07-15, 19:46 | Link #75 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
|
I've downloaded and tried Perfect Dark, and as others have said it uses up alot of the CPU, at least on my PC. Until that gets fixed I'm going to stay with Share.
I haven't used Winny in literally years, and my nodes don't work anymore :-( Can anyone PM me a working Winny nodes list, or PM me link where to find one? Thanks |
2007-07-16, 05:42 | Link #78 |
Aegisub dev
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Age: 39
|
Indeed an "anti-hack" feature accomplishes two things:
1. No hacked clients on the network, that possibly can breach security. (One can argue that that's security through obscurity, you would have to trust it to me more than that.) 2. Keeps out people who can't (more or less) understand Japanese, "they don't share back" - this is somewhat a shame.
__________________
|
2007-07-16, 10:06 | Link #79 | |
eyewitness
Join Date: Jan 2007
|
Quote:
But all in all I don't see anything in PD that could not be implemented open source. Tor already provides the infrastructure, and also for a lot of things that are 100 percent "ethically correct". A least I now understand that Japan hasn't invented the magic bullet either.
__________________
|
|
2007-07-16, 13:43 | Link #80 |
I see what you did there!
Scanlator
|
I have a theory... Perhaps the protection is nothing more than a simple CRC check... Perhaps I can spoof it or even hex edit it out.
Ironically enough, I come from a fansub group that excels in the art of CRC manipulation.
__________________
Last edited by Starks; 2007-07-16 at 14:34. |
Tags |
p2p, perfect dark |
Thread Tools | |
|
|