[RC5] RC5-72 Clarity?
Danie van Heerden
danievh at csnet.co.za
Wed Jun 6 08:34:30 EDT 2007
Yes, we have have switched to OGR-P2 two days ago. But with it going to be
completed, all our clients will be going to the abyss and it would have been
cool to when we reload our clients, to implement a client that can at least
update itself with the required core.
Additionally, if we could do updates from our own servers, we could keep the
config so that they keep on flushing to our servers and save bandwidth for
Maybe someone can write a small app (that is updateble as well) to run as a
service to install the current client, check for updates, and if a newer is
found, stop the service, download the client and install it and then start
the service again. The process is pretty straightforward and the best about
it is that it will be able to update the .ini file as well.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fuzzy Logic" <fuzzymo at gmail.com>
To: "D.net Discussion" <rc5 at lists.distributed.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: [RC5] RC5-72 Clarity?
> While RC5-72 is still up in the air, I think that eventually we will
> kill the project. I has no significant scientific contribution, while
> OGR-P2 and others waiting in the wings still do have value. Some
> people joined just for the stats, but most just wanted to do something
> cool, and being able to claim you had a part in something that made
> even a small difference is certainly cooler than brute-forcing a key
> in 20-30 years time.
> As for your suggestion of automatic core updates: I find it
> interesting, but completely impossible without a first-step manual
> effort to replace all existing clients out there one time. The way the
> current distributed.new clients work is to retrieve work units, none
> of which are executable. They don't have the capability to ask for
> anything else or for dnet to push anything else to them. Also, as
> several people have mentioned, it is a possible security hole. I work
> in cryptography, so I know it can be done, but setting up the
> infrastructure to safely and securely distribute automatic updates to
> clients is not a small amount of work, and if the private key used to
> sign downloads was ever compromised, you would have a large pool of
> bots available to you unless the clients were implemented just right.
> I hope that answers your questions, at least from my point of view.
> On 6/6/07, Danie van Heerden <danievh at csnet.co.za> wrote:
>> I do apologise for my reply. When you deal with so many members like we
>> and ask a simple question, somebody like Martin comes along and starts
>> something completely offbeat from what I asked and you never get a proper
>> Any PROPER answers to my questions?
> rc5 mailing list
> rc5 at lists.distributed.net
More information about the rc5