On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 17:00, Salah Coronya wrote:
> Try build 6205, it seems to work better - non-local FCP connection no
> longer hang and actually get data.
Beee-yoodiful - no more lockups.
Thanks! :)
Cheers
David
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROT
I probably shouldn't do this again, but I've made a build available on
my webserver which is from the latest CVS at the time of this writing.
That means it is 6205 + Blacklisting of bad node connections + No long
locking on lru in OCM thanks to Edward.
http://lostlogicx.com/transfer/freenet-6205.3
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 23:45, Brandon Low wrote:
> I get a build error on this:
> [javac] /home/lostlogic/freenet/src/freenet/DSAIdentity.java:64:
> variable hashed might already have been assigned
> [javac] hashed = makeHashCode();
>
> --Brandon
>
Sorry about th
David McNab wrote:
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 11:17, Toad wrote:
What build number?
Oops - sorry - 5028
Try build 6205, it seems to work better - non-local FCP connection no
longer hang and actually get data.
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http:
Good work on that... seems to make a noticible performance improvement
to my node... Definitely reduces the computational cost of connections.
--Brandon
On Tue, 09/23/03 at 21:49:53 -0400, Edward J. Huff wrote:
> Zlatin Balevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted a stack dump.
> I looked at it, and wonde
Update of /cvsroot/freenet/freenet/src/freenet
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv16563
Modified Files:
DSAIdentity.java
Log Message:
Minor fix for Edward's stuff... (can't make hash code twice...)
Index: DSAIdentity.java
===
I get a build error on this:
[javac] /home/lostlogic/freenet/src/freenet/DSAIdentity.java:64:
variable hashed might already have been assigned
[javac] hashed = makeHashCode();
--Brandon
On Tue, 09/23/03 at 18:21:34 -0700, Edward J. Huff wrote:
> Update of /cvsr
Ok, that one was fairly easy to figure out once you get the
hang of it. I see 40 threads waiting on <0x45678030>
(a freenet.diagnostics.Binomial), and the thread which
has the lock is reversing the elements of a doubly linked
list.
"QThread-93870" prio=1 tid=0x0x59478ab0 nid=0x5fe4
runnable [5
On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 21:49, Edward J. Huff wrote:
> Zlatin Balevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted a stack dump.
> I looked at it, and wondered, "how did he do that?"
>
> So I googled "java stack dump" and found out:
> kill -QUIT `cat freenet.pid`
>
> Shortly thereafter, my node became compute bou
Zlatin Balevsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted a stack dump.
I looked at it, and wondered, "how did he do that?"
So I googled "java stack dump" and found out:
kill -QUIT `cat freenet.pid`
Shortly thereafter, my node became compute bound.
Sun recommends for compute bound tasks, you should take
seve
With the ever popular talk of revokable keys, I'd like to propose an
alternative as a thought experiment. It's got holes yet but does
address some problems revokable keys have.
It's rather rough because I had just finished first-drafting it when I
got called away on a server crash, so I'm sending
Update of /cvsroot/freenet/freenet/src/freenet
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv23607
Modified Files:
DSAIdentity.java
Log Message:
Compute hash code only once and save it in object.
Index: DSAIdentity.java
===
RCS file
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Tracy R Reed wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:20:50AM +0200, Some Guy spake thusly:
> > What trust issues? It should be impossible to
> > download a faulty build from such a freesite, since
> > the whole site would be certified by the private key.
>
> And if the key is c
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> On 2003-09-23 at 10:50, pineapple wrote:
>
> > So far my node seems to be working ok as well as my web server, mail
> > server and ftp server. I didn't consider that these messages could
> > impact my network. What outside ICMP traffic would you NOT b
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, pineapple wrote:
> Ah, I could have been more clear about this, but I
> meant I blocked all the ICMP traffic my firewall
> allows. I'm running Tiny Firewall on a WinXP Home
> install (strangely, I couldn't get Tiny to work with
> PRO) and all traffic is blocked unless it's
>
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Toad wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 03:02:42PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 10:41:04PM +0100, Toad wrote:
> > > From time to time, reimplementing TCP, or using UDP, has been suggested
> > > for Freenet. I will now show that Freenet's future security r
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Tom Kaitchuck wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 September 2003 12:22 am, Todd Walton wrote:
> > > If there are other nodes on the network that you trust, you could
> > > exchange this information with them, and have a much better idea of their
> > > specialization. Also this could also p
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Toad wrote:
> Yeah, reimplementing Mojo Nation will solve all our problems! Repeat
> after me the mantra "there's no problem on earth a market cannot
> solve... lalalalalalalalalala"...
Markets and NGRouting.
-todd
___
Devl mailing
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:23:52PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:09:40AM +0100, Toad spake thusly:
> > Wrong. Total bullshit. A 12 year old kiddie can DoS an address IF HE HAS
> > OR CAN ACQUIRE MORE BANDWIDTH THAN THE TARGET. Otherwise the internet
> > would have been com
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 11:17, Toad wrote:
> What build number?
Oops - sorry - 5028
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:37:31PM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've seen more appearances of the FCP socket freeze-up problem.
> >
> > It seems this bug only affects FCP communications, and only
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:23:52PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:09:40AM +0100, Toad spake thusly:
> > Wrong. Total bullshit. A 12 year old kiddie can DoS an address IF HE HAS
> > OR CAN ACQUIRE MORE BANDWIDTH THAN THE TARGET. Otherwise the internet
> > would have been com
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:09:40AM +0100, Toad spake thusly:
> Wrong. Total bullshit. A 12 year old kiddie can DoS an address IF HE HAS
> OR CAN ACQUIRE MORE BANDWIDTH THAN THE TARGET. Otherwise the internet
> would have been completely destroyed aeons ago.
I think you are coming on just a bit too
What build number?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:37:31PM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've seen more appearances of the FCP socket freeze-up problem.
>
> It seems this bug only affects FCP communications, and only when more
> than one data chunk is sent.
>
> For me, I'm only seeing the bug
It would not help at all because the insertor would need all the keys,
and if it is compromized, it is the insertor that is compromized.
The solution is "revocable SSKs". Basically, you have a list of SSKs to
check before allowing access to the site, and if any of them have been
inserted, you flag
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 03:02:42PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 10:41:04PM +0100, Toad wrote:
> > From time to time, reimplementing TCP, or using UDP, has been suggested
> > for Freenet. I will now show that Freenet's future security requires it.
> > An attacker who can observ
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:51:31PM -0400, Edward J. Huff wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 20:18, David McNab wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 10:24, Bogdan Butnaru wrote:
> > > I write this message because I noticed there is a clash between the
> > > Amphetadesk (sourceforge.net/projects/amphetadesk
Yeah, reimplementing Mojo Nation will solve all our problems! Repeat
after me the mantra "there's no problem on earth a market cannot
solve... lalalalalalalalalala"...
--
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is im
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 11:55:22PM +0200, Niklas Bergh wrote:
> >On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 06:06:24PM +0200, Niklas Bergh wrote:
> >> This shouldn't happen, should it? Is that 200 ms wait necessary anymore
> >> (wasn't it fixed with the LD_ASSUME_KERNELXX workaround)?
>
> >I don't think so. And even
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 12:22 am, Todd Walton wrote:
> > If there are other nodes on the network that you trust, you could
> > exchange this information with them, and have a much better idea of their
> > specialization. Also this could also provide a basis for a
> > non-alchemistic gage for w
When I started 6205 about 14 hours ago, the upstream bandwidth was
consistently near the limit of 10,000 bytes/sec. Now it's consistently
low at around 1,000 bytes/sec. Also, my CPU usage is consistently
around 90-98%.
I'm running Windows XP Pro with Java 1.4.2-b28.
Here's some more info you
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:16:58 -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 10:05:20PM +0100, Toad wrote:
>> Did you compile fred from source?
>> You NEED to ant clean before you ant.
>
> What would be the cost of just removing all final variables from Fred so
> that this time-consuming reco
Hi,
I've written a lightweight HTTP proxy interface to Freenet, that uses
FCP to retrieve pages.
http://www.freenet.org.nz/python/pyFreenet
Seems to be working well enough to at least try out.
Works much faster than FProxy.
However, at this stage there is no content filtering implemented. So d
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:59:43AM +0200, Benny Amorsen spake thusly:
> Right now freenet is most commonly downloaded from a non-secure site,
> just authenticated by a non-secure DNS lookup. Most people use the
> precompiled jar file, and even the source-compiled one fetches binary
> stuff to put i
Hi,
I've seen more appearances of the FCP socket freeze-up problem.
It seems this bug only affects FCP communications, and only when more
than one data chunk is sent.
For me, I'm only seeing the bug when connecting from an FCP client on
one machine to a node on another.
With small keys (which d
--- Tracy R Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And if the key is compromised and a trojan build put
> in place?
>
> Those trust issues.
>
> They need revokable keys so that then the compromise
> is detected they can
> prevent people from downloading the bad build. The
> implications of a
> privac
I'm going to reply to a several responses at once.
---Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Reject queries for things outside your
> specialization
> > first.
>
> Terrible idea - specialization should occur
> naturally, it doesn't have
> to be forced artificially, and doing so will be
> harm
On 2003-09-23 at 11:26, Tracy R Reed wrote:
> And if the key is compromised and a trojan build put in place?
>
> Those trust issues.
>
> They need revokable keys so that then the compromise is detected they can
> prevent people from downloading the bad build. The implications of a
> privacy comp
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:20:50AM +0200, Some Guy spake thusly:
> What trust issues? It should be impossible to
> download a faulty build from such a freesite, since
> the whole site would be certified by the private key.
And if the key is compromised and a trojan build put in place?
Those tru
On 2003-09-23 at 10:50, pineapple wrote:
> So far my node seems to be working ok as well as my web server, mail
> server and ftp server. I didn't consider that these messages could
> impact my network. What outside ICMP traffic would you NOT block
> (besides PMTU as you said)?
I have not been a
> Could the project create and maintain a freesite?
> It would be a vanilla
> freesite with information about recent builds,
> freenet clients and
> perhaps some open-source news of general interest.
> Since there are
> trust issues with providing builds for download it
> may be a better idea
Dicho por pineapple:
> Ah, I could have been more clear about this, but I
> meant I blocked all the ICMP traffic my firewall
> allows. I'm running Tiny Firewall on a WinXP Home
> install (strangely, I couldn't get Tiny to work with
> PRO) and all traffic is blocked unless it's
> specifically allow
Ah, I could have been more clear about this, but I
meant I blocked all the ICMP traffic my firewall
allows. I'm running Tiny Firewall on a WinXP Home
install (strangely, I couldn't get Tiny to work with
PRO) and all traffic is blocked unless it's
specifically allowed. So far my node seems to be
w
On 2003-09-23 at 06:02, pineapple wrote:
> Actually, I saw someone attempt this in my firewall's
> logfile. Of course, I block ALL outside ICMP traffic
> to my network.
Congratulations. You have just broken TCP. (Hint: PMTU discovery, for
one thing).
/Benny
_
Puhh.. latest unstable code is s much more CPU friendly.. it is
like it was at about 6194 which was about the point where the latest
unstable started permanently using up 100% CPU. Unfortunately I cannot tell
the exact build but it certainly was around there...
Another difference (poss
44 matches
Mail list logo
