Author Topic: clafirication on official winmxworld policy (Read 33616 times)

Mizz · « **Reply #20 on:** August 10, 2007, 09:43:30 am »

no offence to Silicon here coze i would have done the very same in her case yet keep in mind it has now been moved from public view and KM as you all know just as well as i do will not be pleased !

and that is THE understatement of the century...he needs this to be public for some masochistic reason....but thats how i see it...i could be wrong

again Silicon

no offence to you at all hun....

GhostShip · « **Reply #21 on:** August 10, 2007, 10:51:55 am »

I prefer to deal with KM,s point head on rather than his state of mind or personality, If he addresses the question I have posed 3 times now then the matter can be settled rapidly, no one doubts his skill in programming but I do doubt KM was himself last night.

Lets hope a decent nights rest and a bit more discussion is the order of the day, we are after all trying only to pick up the peices of the effort we all back in keeping the network operating and with no flooders.

¯`°¤F£¥ Gí®£ 69¤°´¯ · « **Reply #22 on:** August 10, 2007, 01:48:55 pm »

and on that note ........... then why the constant battle between the different patch creators! I see no need for diversion some unity would be good but I think everyone has already sided up where they stand unfortunately. We are all here for one main reason and want to keep on focus......... KEEP WINMX alive ! Am I right or wrong and if anyone hasnt seen the slowness in the rooms as of lately your just not very observant! These wars are keeping people away and the new patches and forwarding ports some are just sick of it and havent returned. I dunno it all and would never ever claim to but as an avid user of winmx for nearly 8 years ( omg i am old) it kills me to see what it was to what it has become.

and as far as KM he must have had off nights forever ..........? He has always come acrossed like he is full of himself and better then best. I seen him slag off the winmxworld help room slag off people and complain about helping people just too name a few things. All I have to say with fame comes problems and if u cant handle the heat perhaps u should have never entered the kitchen ?? because once your in your in for life and there isnt any turning back.............

Bearded Blunder · « **Reply #23 on:** August 10, 2007, 02:47:05 pm »

this reminds me of vladd44 forum, the key difference being THEIR dumping ground was PUBLIC you could at least read debate in the cesspool..

THIS SWEEPING OF EVERY INCONVENIENT THREAD OUT OF SIGHT TO "MODERATORS" SECTION MUST STOP!
editing posts & wholesale deletions next?

* Bearded Blunder is seriously considering if he can continue his association with good conscience here

and that's quite apart from the danger pointed out of giving children matches & petrol to play with (open sourcing patch)

where's the honesty in hiding a clear warning?

this is the EXACT sort of crap that drove me from vlad44's forum..

it's not bright to give out src code to stuff with the security implications that hijacking a program (which is what a connection patch for winmx does) and hijacking internet explorer into the bargain (if it doesn't rely on hosts for update bar), any more than it would have been bright for microsoft to publish the command-line switches they use to automate fdisk in dos/win9x setup, something THEY had the sense not to publish obviously even if others have these switches posted elsewhere.....

ñòóKýçrÕôK · « **Reply #24 on:** August 10, 2007, 03:06:32 pm »

I am afraid that I have to stand with Merlin on this one. Moving this thread to this section of the forum only offers up validity and the appearance of truth to KM's claims. Something of which cannot be afforded or allowed in this case. This thread needs to be returned to it's origin. I am not in favor of giving out the src code to the patch because I believe that what KM and Merlin have emphasized to be true. Locks are what keeps an honest man honest in most general cases. However this is NOT your general case and you're not offering the src to a Mickey Mouse game. My only goal in anything to do with this thread is for KM to show his proof of our wrongdoing. Which on our part I believe there is none. The truth is what I seek here. Please return this thread to it's origin so that this matter can be resolved propperly and openly. KM may be a blowhard but he has made allegations of wrongdoing by some means by individuals of this group and I do not believe it true. Let's put it back and let the proof be in the pudding. Not in the trash. We are a good honest group and it is time we showed everyone this so that there is no doubt whatsoever.

TheMacDaddy · « **Reply #25 on:** August 10, 2007, 03:16:27 pm »

I would have to fully agree with Merlin and Nooky here theres no way this should of been moved....all it has done by being moved here is added one hell of alot of more fuel to the fire.
Put it back where it belongs and stop the moving of so many threads out of the public eye just because we feel it might make just a lil to much of a ripple in the pond.

SamSeeSam · « **Reply #26 on:** August 10, 2007, 04:02:19 pm »

I stand for moving it back too.....
This is not flaming or indecent. Please move it back as soon as possible
I not doing it unless there is a desision by ghost or Me Here as I'm too out of touch for all this...

Cheers

GhostShip · « **Reply #27 on:** August 10, 2007, 04:38:58 pm »

A quick read of this thread will show you who moved it and why, their reasons for moving it are based on solid enough ground but for the sake of a those who seem to lack trust in openeness I,ll shall count Merlins words as a group vote for its return which along with my own and Me_Heres makes for a majority to return it it back to its original spot, as I have said I would rather it was left there to demonstrate our openness when faced with potentially community damaging subject matter that so far is not based on any factual basis.

Merlin and the rest of you guys, I have now to ask you what specifically you think a connection patch is likely to do that will cause havok as your seeming to claim, I,m not interested in scaremongering, just facts so feel free to make clear what problems you believe are likely and I,ll reply to you all.

Discussion is healthy and welcome.

Bearded Blunder · « **Reply #28 on:** August 10, 2007, 05:13:50 pm »

it's a set of instructions in <whatever programminhg language used> which may as well be labelled "how to hijack a program and internet explorer" releasing that is in & of itself irresponsible i need no other justification than that to know it's daft.

you can't know what uses the code could be twisted into until SICK minds have looked it over & subverted it, you & i don't think that way.. it's rather like pandora's box, not easy to close again once opened

i won't support playing russian roulette with winmx, nor will i EVER forgive you if you release code which is subsequently abused

GhostShip · « **Reply #29 on:** August 10, 2007, 05:35:50 pm »

Very sharp and to the point eh Merlin

As you may or may not not know programs such as the patch exist in other forms and you yourself use them, namely Bendmx, MCMA, RCMS etc all theses operate the same way and as the guy who wrote the installer software you know for yourself the only aspect of internet explorer hijacking as you yourself wrote the script for it.
Its merely and entry in the host file, any open src winmx patch will have no need to hijack explorer internally as your reasoning would have folks believe.

Can you perhaps be more specific in what your actually claiming as I can give many more examples of either posts by km or tech info to demonstrate the reason why there is no danger in the design of the patch as it stands and I,m sure any coders here will agree that if somethings not in the patch the chances of it being exploited are next to nothing in reality.

TheMacDaddy · « **Reply #30 on:** August 10, 2007, 05:41:45 pm »

My personal reason for wishing this post to be restored to where it should be was not because i am worried about weather the patch is made open scr or not is not of concern to me for the simple reason i dont claim to know what damage could be caused if it was made open scr (i am not a tech in that area and i wont claim to ever be)
My main reason is a simple one
I came here when WinMx was shut down by front code 2 years ago and saw that between Winmxworld and V44 that Winmxworld was by far more open and honest with EVERYONE (no matter who) who posted here!!!!!!
Thats why i stayed here and have stayed here ever since then.
I am not in the fore front of things as yourself Ghost or even Me-Here
I always ask about something on the site and get confirmation from either of you as to if something needs moving or even correcting on site before i do anything.
The reason i want this thread left in the open eye is for one simple reason...
I want to see if the proof of anything bad coming from making the fix open scr is shown here or not and i want the whole world (or users here) to see we all at Winmxworld will not and have nothing to hide.

ñòóKýçrÕôK · « **Reply #31 on:** August 10, 2007, 05:42:42 pm »

I'm not a programmer. I do however know that Merlin knows his business and KM also more than knows his business. If both of them say that there is a danger, then I believe in what they say on the matter. I wouldn't do harm with the information that could be gained from releasing the src, nor do I believe any member of the WMW would. But I know for a fact there are people with a whole lot crueler intentions than you or I who would not hesitate for 1 second to search the src and find a vulnerability in it and use it against individuals on the net. I am not able to do it but there are those I'm sure are. It's a dangerous thing to do. Faith can only go so far as in hoping noone would when you know deep down that someone will.

ñòóKýçrÕôK · « **Reply #32 on:** August 10, 2007, 05:45:30 pm »

Quote from: TheMacDaddy on August 10, 2007, 05:41:45 pm

The reason i want this thread left in the open eye is for one simple reason...
I want to see if the proof of anything bad coming from making the fix open scr is shown here or not and i want the whole world (or users here) to see we all at Winmxworld will not and have nothing to hide.

I COMPLETELY agree

Bearded Blunder · « **Reply #33 on:** August 10, 2007, 05:49:43 pm »

as a security issue there is a difference in kind as well as degree between modifying ther behaviour/appearance & output of a program, & altering where it contacts, the former is not a blueprint for "how to redirect my finance program somewhere else"

how can i point to where winmx specific issues may be in it? i've not seen the code, i doubt i'd understand it if i did, the fact remains a concern was raised by someone who DOES understand it, i choose to take that very seriously

others may call him rude, accuse him of god complex etc. none of which prevents him being RIGHT

self-proclaimed or otherwise i doubt anyone can actually deny he's the formost authority on how winmx works

GhostShip · « **Reply #34 on:** August 10, 2007, 06:07:07 pm »

Heres the problem, KM knows both he and myself have the network protocol that he rightly claims is dangerous in bad hands on this we agree, what we dont agree on it that any patch needs to have information regarding this network protocol or even use it.

I wont be issuing any patch that does have the problem protocol referenced and for KM to even make this problem a public issue speaks more to me of what his intentions are than whether he is an "expert" as experts dont make false claims as he is doing.

I,m willing to call any trusted coder to refute KM,s claims as I refute his claims myself in regard to the threat he said he was concerned over.

It seems to me ignorance is likely to take hold here because I wont be publishing the damaging protocol and KM no doubt will play on this until I do, something that wont be happening, so we reach an impasse, either trust myself or listen to scaremongering, I cant put it any more clearly.

Bearded Blunder · « **Reply #35 on:** August 10, 2007, 06:12:38 pm »

i can't see how you can possibly impliment fake filtering without including how to disrupt searches.. the whole point of it is a specific targetted disruption of them.. i'd rather the real enemy (RIAA/MPAA) didn't have that information handed to them giftwrapped

GhostShip · « **Reply #36 on:** August 10, 2007, 06:30:10 pm »

With regard to your previous post Merlin.

Searches are not affected and wont be affected, search results however are delivered in UDP format as are room listings, KM has outlined no exploit thus far that is not in any and all open src chat servers and well known about with regard to that protocol.

I have gathered as KM mentions much info on the network to help developers build a new client when he said he was not interested, so I,m not talking from ignorance.

ñòóKýçrÕôK · « **Reply #37 on:** August 10, 2007, 06:38:28 pm »

Quote from: Bearded Blunder on August 10, 2007, 06:12:38 pm

i can't see how you can possibly impliment fake filtering without including how to disrupt searches.. the whole point of it is a specific targetted disruption of them.. i'd rather the real enemy (RIAA/MPAA) didn't have that information handed to them giftwrapped

If you open the source of fake blocking to the P2P world do you not also open the door that the RIAA/MPAA have an opportunity to disect it and work their way around it? Wouldn't it be like handing them the keys? If the issue is PIE having access to it's inner workings then as reluctant as I am I say give it to them. I don't however think making it open knowledge to everyone is a good idea. You give yourself away to unforseen issues like that. So far it's technology is one of WinMX's best kept secrets and what protects WinMX users from RIAA/MPAA. Do you give that away now?

GhostShip · « **Reply #38 on:** August 10, 2007, 07:21:51 pm »

Macrovision use information they have gathered on this network to exploit it, its no secret they flood us using a hole that they found in the system, that said the thing that does protect us is the system, they have to follow the protocol like anyone else or MX clients will reject them, and while they follow the protocol we can always stay one step ahead of them as has been shown by patch and blocking team for nearly the last two years.

They cannot do anymore than they are doing without further exposing themselves to a federal charge normally used against hackers.

silicon_toad2000 · « **Reply #39 on:** August 11, 2007, 12:02:08 am »

All I have read so far is discussion of the dangers of releasing this patch as open source.
The validity of those dangers is arguable and is being argued.

If I was in the boardroom and one of my managers wanted to do something and a similar argument broke out, we'd want to be making a f*ckload of money from the idea before I'd even bother trying to decypher who knows what they are talking about and who's being a knob.

Which brings me to the question, what are the benefits of releasing this open source thing?