beetle homemade japanese killer…

I choose only update and developing ones and collected them in the same place.
They are accessible for everybody.
I offer you to acquaint with them ( online investing bookmak http://scuttle.my-place.us/bookmarks.php/boksir124 )
If somebody can supplement my list please publish here your research or bookmark

PS I am sorry if my message out of forum topic or it`s not interesting to community.

Quite a bit actually….

Generating chunks which successfully spoof one of the hashes is one thing, generating chunks which spoof two different hash algorythms simultaneously is quite another.

Would it even be possible in theory to generate a chunk which successfully spoofs two different hashes, which isn’t identical to the genuine chunk? If it was, I’m sure it would be computationally very expensive.

And if it was possible, this arms race would be very much in favor of the P2Pers because it would be much easier to add a third or fourth hash than design an algorthym which can simultaneously spoof multiple hashes.

regardless of if the tech would or not, are they actually going to sit around and make copies of every archive and raw files out there throughout multiple p2p networks??

its so ridiculous that i’m laughing now, imagine the man power it would take to infiltrate the scene and try to keep up with millions of releases

not to mention the hypocrosy of downloading the content themselves just to corrupt it

You’ve heard of sarcasm right….?

You my friend are a 1st rate nob-jockey and need to get yourself a life (maybe try getting laid too, you know, with a female…..intercourse…..Oh of course you’ve only read about such wonders!!)

In practice naming a file by its content hash has far, far less of a chance of collision than naming them by hand. There’s no need to beef up the torrent metafile format just yet.

The rainbow tables stop working, and pretty much results in this product no longer functioning, right?

I am very worried about this, because people who write P2P code are stupid and wouldn’t be able to implement that in a couple hours. God forbid people be required to update their client.[/quote]

Dude, coming up with rainbow tables for just one block size of BT SHA1 hashes would require, um… 2^160 slots, and then a block size’s worth of data for each. There’s not going to be enough mass storage space for that kind of data on the Earth all together for the next, what, fifty years? Make that 150 years to be safe.

Now, there are algorithms out there that can be used to spoof a SHA1 checksum… but most of them rely on being able to add data at the end of the “message”, i.e. that the checksum is computed over a section that is different from the content. Spoofing an arbitrary message with a fixed length is exponential piles harder.

Viralg’s shit was pertinent back in 2002 or so, when naïve P2P protocols used a per-file hash. So you could send null blocks and they’d propagate just like valid blocks. This hasn’t been the case for even ed2k in years.

Even in the company’s youth we got a hearty giggle from their marketing. “Secret virtual algorithm”. That’s conman speak for “we haven’t got anything -algorithm”. But hey, the media companies will pay about anyone for a little “protection”, so why not exploit that… it just pisses me off that they got a state-funded award for that horsecrap.

I think it would be interesting to make a complete P2P webpage server, making an internet, within an internet. (Except each home user could have their own web page, searchable by P2P browsers.)

The rainbow tables stop working, and pretty much results in this product no longer functioning, right?

I am very worried about this, because people who write P2P code are stupid and wouldn’t be able to implement that in a couple hours. God forbid people be required to update their client.

If there are 3 zeros after a period, assume it’s foreign numbering.

Isn’t it time the MPAA took a step back and found another way? It’ll be an industry shakeup, but one is overdue.

Same for the RIAA. Make stuff cheap, and people won’t copy. It’s easy, and you’d make lots on the volumes. Apple have already proven the viability of online selling, but they’re still too expensive especially when format shifting is involved.

The both of you: make stuff cheap and legal and people will buy it.

Maybe because movies can take a long time to download in ed2k, these companies would sabotage the download without first checking to see if it was the actual film they were contracted for. There were a few legitimate downloads that got nuked this way, like whenever someone released an ancient B&W original of a movie at the same time as the ‘hot’ movie comes out (the Fast and the Furious in 2002 comes to mind) since these companies will attack everything they find with a similar-sounding name.

It is possible to find a collision in 2^63 with SHA1, but that means this software is going to have to try every single combination in 2^63, or 1 in 9,223,372,036,854,775,808. You can read more about this at:
http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/node.asp?id=2927

This attack the company is talking about is because older filesharing systems used much weaker hashes. BT just isn’t going to fall victim to this type of attack. Total snake oil.

Also, for a bunch of people going to a site called ‘torrentfreak’ – you could all do yourself a favor and read up on the protocol specification:
http://www.bittorrent.org/protocol.html

Thanks!

There is only one catch..

Toilet Finger!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270146257667

Nahh, they give another example on the auction site:

[quote]
3. If your business is involved in developing and/or selling a P2P program, you can make it better and avoid any problems that this technology can give to your network.
[/quote]

Funny Guys^^

The pieces may be hard to generate, but if you can generate them as claimed by viralg, your client will not be banned by other peers.
It only gets banned when sending pieces whose hash does not match (for which you don’t need these patents :P )

I like your idea for extra hashes though.

Is that a decimal point? the technology has generated over $500?

One can also defend against that by adding hashes for the whole file or for bigger blocks in the file to the torrent (that would require an extension to the .torrent-file specification)
That would make an attack even more difficult, because on has to create a piece of a fixed length wich has a given hash and together with some other given data another given hash.

So even if they can generate fake-pieces the BitTorrent-Hydra can adapt fast :)

-Breeze

If someone was to create a piece with a valid hash and start sending it out, the client would not be able to tell whether it was a valid piece or not.
The only information they have about the piece is its final hash, and as long as that matches what is listed in the torrent file it’s considered valid.

Clients drop connections from peers where the pieces they’re sending do not match that hash. A system aimed at generating fake pieces with valid hashes will have no problems with this at all.