Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

WinMX Today

Discussion about the WinMX program/network
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

Postby ..Ñøßߥ.. » Thu Oct 05, 2006 4:10 am

The new patch is indeed available on vladds site, its just a case of ensuring all is well before making formal announcements.

I have heard the updater portion of the patch kicked up a warning with one of the AV's, i have personally tested the patch with Panda, Norton and AVG with no problems to report. If users have concerns they can switch off the hosts updater if they wish.

The intention as has been from the word go to use the WmW blocklist with Dazzles consent, this will ensure users have a solid and specific protection and updates will be made every 2 hours to the guarding file, orginally i had suggested 4 hourly updates, but after consultation with Mehere (list maintainer) this was reduced to 2 hours.

The host file is updated every 24 hours to allow for any changes to cache addresses.

There is also an option to allow "Manual update now" this can be used hourly if users wish to.

We felt it important to offer the user choice and transparancy, hence the Hosts update and the blocking updates can be independantly switched off (default is on) this addresses the issue for users who do not wish their hosts file to be touched. Also to ensure everyone can clearly see whats been added to their hosts and guarding, entries for both have been added to the Start > Programs > Pie auto updater, this will allow all user to easily view the files.

This patch is not intended to be a high tech all singing all dancing solution, it simply does not need to be, it does what it says on the tin. It provids solid blocking with regular updates and its targeted for the majority of users, after all you cant please all the people all the time and i dont intend to try.
..Ñøßߥ..
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:18 am
Location: Springfield

pie lie

Postby silversurfer » Thu Oct 05, 2006 8:59 pm

hmm yet again nobby your lieingf to plp
it use s the blocktards block list not wmw
and the so called open src gnu is a home made up version not the propper one
as mx is close source so can not be that
the pg lite is global open surce so can not be that
the caches are close src so yet again can not be that
o sorry pg lite < gobal source > from bluetack
or from http://phoenixlabs.org/pglite/ compleat with src
allso its a viruis for every a/v scanner out there which blocks and deleats the d/l and as for turnning it off to install are you for real
as in testing well i never even tryed to install pass the sign up gnc notice as i totaly disagree with it as its not a propper gnu notice its made up
so yet again your fooling your self and to top it off it dont block the fake files
as to release this viruis to the genal public it just proof that all you wont is to kill off mx
User avatar
silversurfer
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 11:40 am

Postby -KM- » Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:01 pm

When vladd made peer guardian did... oh, hang on, he didn't

starting again...

When vladd made the ho... oh, hang on

/me scratches his head

which part of peer guardian and a modified hosts file is pie again? you know that cost a lot of money and required donations to pay for the cost of going to the peer guardian website and downloading...

did pie make peer guardian? or pay for it to be made?
did pie make that modified text file? or *tries to control laughter* pay for someone to tell them how to modify a simple text file?
or perhaps pie came up with the idea of blocking flooders?

btw, it seems that it was thoroughly tested before release, firstly it will only function on some computers with no firewall or antivirus software installed that are running windows XP (not sure if it runs on all service packs of that even)

and the thorough testing failed to notice that it doesn't actually work, run the installer, start MX, watch the yellow flashing

and if you do finally get it to work, several warnings:
1. it does not fix the issue of unstable connections (something fixed in my patch)
2. it does not fix the problem of slow connections (due to using that same single peer cache that isn't anything to do with vladd or pie or whatever name he goes by now)
3. it allows vladd complete control over any website you visit, as he can block your access to any website he chooses via firstly the peer guardian with HTTP set to block by default (for some reason), or secondly by simply adding it to your hosts file - yes, he can automatically change your system files at will
4. it of course does NOT block the flooders, when you do finally manage to mess about with it and get it blocking anything it blocks plenty of known legitimate users, but not a load of flooders, as it uses a block list which is... well, it has a lot of very old entries from the winmxworld list, a load of random IP Addresses, and not much else
5. and of course pie will still fill your search results with fake files as part of their attempt (in cooperation with macrovision and netsentry) to disrupt the network and any file transfers (they have public policy of trying to destroy file sharing on winmx and turn it in to their private chat client, as was stated by their demands to users to stop sharing files...)
6. well, do i need to go on? those 5 points above are enough for now, because I'm tired and want to go to bed
-KM-
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 5:15 am

Re: pie lie

Postby ..Ñøßߥ.. » Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:01 pm

silversurfer wrote:hmm yet again nobby your lieingf to plp
it use s the blocktards block list not wmw

The updater will shortly be using the WmW list, simply a small delay as Vladd is low on time atm
silversurfer wrote: and the so called open src gnu is a home made up version not the propper one
as mx is close source so can not be that
the pg lite is global open surce so can not be that
the caches are close src so yet again can not be that
o sorry pg lite < gobal source > from bluetack
or from http://phoenixlabs.org/pglite/ compleat with src

Please translate, i would address your point if i could actually work out what it was?
silversurfer wrote: allso its a viruis for every a/v scanner out there which blocks and deleats the d/l and as for turnning it off to install are you for real


I had np with AVG, Panda and Norton, so you statement is not correct.

silversurfer wrote:
as in testing well i never even tryed to install pass the sign up gnc notice as i totaly disagree with it as its not a propper gnu notice its made up
so yet again your fooling your self and to top it off it dont block the fake files
as to release this viruis to the genal public it just proof that all you wont is to kill off mx



If you dont agree with the license, you shouldnt install the software and as you dont agree and therefore shouldnt have installed it, how can you have tested it? Norton, Panda and avg dont consider it a virus, im happy to go with those over your speculation.
..Ñøßߥ..
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:18 am
Location: Springfield

Postby ..Ñøßߥ.. » Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:19 pm

-KM- wrote:When vladd made peer guardian did... oh, hang on, he didn't

starting again...

When vladd made the ho... oh, hang on

/me scratches his head


He didnt claim to make any of those, he simply paid for the updater that i out sourced, its not hard KM, its just like when you go to the shop, you dont make the vodka you simply purchase it from someone else, the hosts file is ofc free as is pglite, the updater was paid for by vladd.

-KM- wrote:which part of peer guardian and a modified hosts file is pie again? you know that cost a lot of money and required donations to pay for the cost of going to the peer guardian website and downloading...

did pie make peer guardian? or pay for it to be made?
did pie make that modified text file? or *tries to control laughter* pay for someone to tell them how to modify a simple text file?


See above answer.
-KM- wrote:btw, it seems that it was thoroughly tested before release, firstly it will only function on some computers with no firewall or antivirus software installed that are running windows XP (not sure if it runs on all service packs of that even)

and the thorough testing failed to notice that it doesn't actually work, run the installer, start MX, watch the yellow flashing


Works perfectly on the 7 systems i have tried it on, with varying service pack, AV and anti spyare configuations, and even though 1000's have already been installed so far only 1 users has a problem and thats non related, perhaps there is something wrong with your pc km, i would suggest you get some professional help with that.

-KM- wrote:it allows vladd complete control over any website you visit, as he can block your access to any website he chooses via firstly the peer guardian with HTTP set to block by default (for some reason), or secondly by simply adding it to your hosts file - yes, he can automatically change your system files at will


Yep, similar to the control you have KM, one of the first things that occur when installing your patch is the hosts file is overwritten (giving you the chance to add what you wish to folks hosts file). The difference here is users who dont wish to have others control updates to their hosts or blocking list, can switch those functions off, its the users choice, a choice you dont give them.
-KM- wrote:it of course does NOT block the flooders, when you do finally manage to mess about with it and get it blocking anything it blocks plenty of known legitimate users, but not a load of flooders, as it uses a block list which is... well, it has a lot of very old entries from the winmxworld list, a load of random IP Addresses, and not much else

Once over onto the WmW list, the patch will block whats on the current WmW list, lets hope that stays correct.

-KM- wrote:and of course pie will still fill your search results with fake files as part of their attempt (in cooperation with macrovision and netsentry) to disrupt the network and any file transfers (they have public policy of trying to destroy file sharing on winmx and turn it in to their private chat client, as was stated by their demands to users to stop sharing files...)


If the WmW list is correct, as the users begining running the new pie patch, the flooders will be blocked, blocked flooders means theres no need to filter fakes as there wont be any, right km?

-KM- wrote: I'm tired and want to go to bed


I think that would be best.
..Ñøßߥ..
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:18 am
Location: Springfield

Postby MrFredPFL » Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:27 pm

there have been enough personal attacks in this thread. i sincerely hope it stops before the thread gets locked as a result.
User avatar
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 15266
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Postby Dazzle » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:22 pm

Hmm it would be more advantageous to all to stick to technical issues.

I am glad to hear that the list will be updated as without updating the list is mostly useless for blocking the flooders, its good to have that problem resolved.

I dont wish to be a hypocrite so I am not commenting on who paid for what etc, it seems more useful to the whole community to deny the flooders access and they are the main problem as explained many times before, search results in massive quantities equate to DDOS attacks on the searcher and disrupt primary and secondary nodes in the path of the onslaught.

Effective blocking for the host file users is a positive move and anyone working towards a solution that offers it has my thanks and those of the majority of the community, we all win if we stay united in this cause.

I must say though Nobby I also am not in favour of allowing opt outs on known flooding IP,s , its not really fair for anyone to inflict the flooding knowingly on the rest of the network just because "they can", The blocklist is public and has never blocked innocent IP,s by accident, all those on the list are genuine flooders except one research node put on the list as a test for the anti flooder team to use.

I thing its reasonable to ask folks to not pollute the network and have trust in those operating the list, if doubts are raised then please post any IP in question so it can be publicly resolved, this open method is the way I suggest we all move forward, united and looking to the enemy, not taking cheap shots at each other.
Dazzle
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 7:50 pm

Postby ..Ñøßߥ.. » Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:46 am

Dazzle, i agree with much of what you say, however i will NOT force users to block ip's, the block function as per the hosts update function is default set to yes, however if a users feels strongly enough to change that then that is down to that specific user i will NOT take charge of their PC. Its simply up to the community as a whole to promote the blocking culture, this is what i will continue to do. I would suggest we all strive to ensure users that arent or wont use the .dll are using the Pie auto updater, for those that are interested its available here - http://www.vladd44.com/mx/piepatch.php

With a little effort we should be able to clean the network up, after all that is the goal.

As for personal attacks, i am not interested in playing insult tennis on this forum, i merely corrected those who have got the facts blurred somewhat, and if KM wishes to take any further issue with me he has my MSN and Yahoo i suggest he uses that rather than sours this thread further, but thats up to him. :D
..Ñøßߥ..
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:18 am
Location: Springfield

Postby jb » Mon Oct 09, 2006 10:29 am

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Apologies to Cool Hand Luke. I may be unaware of a contest for the longest run-on sentence.

<edit (for the sake of clarity) the post referred to by this post has been removed>

thank you
jb
 
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 11:47 am

Postby Dazzle » Mon Oct 09, 2006 3:55 pm

Its simply up to the community as a whole to promote the blocking culture, this is what i will continue to do.


Cheers Nobby 8)
Dazzle
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 7:50 pm

pie lies

Postby silversurfer » Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:16 am

nobby ill will answer for you on the question you asked
as you are just a pr rep for pie and not a programer ill put it in lammen terms for you
"it doesnt meet any requirement under the GNU license for open source"

thats why i disagreed the installer

as in to av scanners i dont use the free versions you can get likes of avg , norton ect... as there just free for a pc newbi to get started on the net i use " kaspersky pro " which blocked the d/l and deleated it so i think before you try and shame me or any arther person ie

quote ==silversurfer wrote:
and the so called open src gnu is a home made up version not the propper one
as mx is close source so can not be that
the pg lite is global open surce so can not be that
the caches are close src so yet again can not be that
o sorry pg lite < gobal source > from bluetack
or from http://phoenixlabs.org/pglite/ compleat with src

and your answer is quote == Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:01 pm Post subject: Re: pie lie

Please translate, i would address your point if i could actually work out what it was?

like said as your not a programer you have no clue of that answer can show by your atemp of trying to show me up in public < i dont mind as long as you no wot your talking about>
so as a pr rep < for pie >
ill do you a favour and point you to web site with pics so you can see and read wots involved in a GNU license for open source
http://www.benedict.com/Digital/Software/OSLicense.aspx

and allso yes its a great thing that your are moving in the right direction off blocking but i do feel like you have rushed this thro due to the demards of plp asking you " when this patch is release , whens this and when that "
like all projects you have probs ect thats why you debugg em and test things but you allso have to say testing not push it onto plp and cors more probs in the long terms think before you act works
User avatar
silversurfer
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 11:40 am

Postby ..Ñøßߥ.. » Wed Oct 11, 2006 1:50 am

My intention was not to belittle you, i simply am suggesting, the updater worked fine on the many systems it was tested on, was it tested on your specific AV? Im not sure, but either way, many good products upset the odd AV or antispware software along the way, there were several instance of km's .dll doing exactly the same.

As for licenses refering to open source software, although the updater meets many of the criteria it does not meet them all and i can therefore only conclude its not fully open source, but more "source available" This was not originally my intention, i wanted it fully open source but for issues beyond my control, thats not been possible. I would stand by the sensible approach, if you are not satisfied with the license, do not install the software.

BTW, did i win a prize in the longest sentance comp? :wink:
..Ñøßߥ..
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:18 am
Location: Springfield

Postby MrFredPFL » Wed Oct 11, 2006 10:49 am

:lol: sorry nobby, you don't even get an honorable mention for that contest :P

;)
User avatar
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 15266
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Postby ..Ñøßߥ.. » Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:02 am

note to self: try harder :D
..Ñøßߥ..
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:18 am
Location: Springfield

Previous

Return to WinMX

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

© 2001-2008 Slyck.com