Author Topic: How is the new patch coming along? (Read 21951 times)

Trestor · « **on:** November 29, 2007, 05:30:06 pm »

It has been some months since the mx patch was taken offline. As I understand it, there were plans to write a new patch, but I can't find anything new about its progress. Can someone in-the-know tell us how it is coming along? Thanks.

White Stripes · « **Reply #1 on:** November 30, 2007, 09:24:50 am »

im curious about this as well

GhostShip · « **Reply #2 on:** December 01, 2007, 08:56:23 am »

I will make a report on this subject this weekend as there is not enough time in my weekday slots to bring you all up to speed with matters, thanks in advance for your patience

bu44er · « **Reply #3 on:** December 01, 2007, 07:47:15 pm »

I also have been dieing to ask how the patch is coming along. I Hope you are going to bring us some cool features and upgrades.

..Ñøßß¥.. · « **Reply #4 on:** December 05, 2007, 07:13:12 am »

Just blocking, flitering, connecting and open source would be just fine, lets hope its gonna be a happy Winmx christmas!!!

bu44er · « **Reply #5 on:** December 05, 2007, 10:35:30 am »

I have no doubt that WinMx World will surprise all of us at christmas. Everyone is working hard even the WinMx World Elves are and that a real shock to me because last year they constantly got drunk and nothing got done.

jj007 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 09, 2007, 02:24:53 pm »

I got the latest patch, I think (originally issued this summer I believe?). found it on some other website via a search. I'm up and running now at any rate.

I found a few different items for download, besides the patch, there was a fully patched 3.45 version (something like that). My question is, is that latest/newest version compatible with Windows Vista, will it work fine on my new Vista Home Premium laptop?

Also, does that mean this latest full version is updated for all the old patches that were issued, like the old 2.6 Pie Patch for instance? Can I now throw that old patch away and not install it on my new machine after I install the latest "fully patched" WinMX download?

]-[êll.Ôñ.ËÀR'][']-[. · « **Reply #7 on:** December 09, 2007, 03:19:01 pm »

The latest updated patches are avalable from here

https://patch.winmxconex.com/

The install you was refering to was the 354 beta 4
In answer to your question yes it will work with vista.... although a few people have had some issues with it but nothing that couldnt be sorted with a few tweaks..... if you have a problem with it take a look at the section below its got all the answers you will need for vista installs

https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?board=45.0

The 2.6 Pie Patch is nothing to do with the above patches or this site & will cause problems if on your system together so throw it away BEFORE installing the Install for Multi-versions Patched and you should have no problems as this has all you need built in

Any more questions feel free to post back jj007

jj007 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 09, 2007, 04:06:22 pm »

Thanx for the quick reply re. the 3.54 Beta multi-version patched WinMX program I plan to install on my new Vista machine (yup, that's the baby I was referring to!). I assume that is the best choice at this time btw....yes?

Gonna go check out that link right now so I know what snags I might encounter BEFOREhand and am informed about how to resolve them.

Cool -- jj007

Trestor · « **Reply #9 on:** December 09, 2007, 05:27:55 pm »

Thank you for telling us about this patch, but can someone join the dots for me? Is this patch a different version to the one that King Macro claimed as his own? Are we safe from him interfering with the use of this patch?

]-[êll.Ôñ.ËÀR'][']-[. · « **Reply #10 on:** December 09, 2007, 08:58:47 pm »

This is the patch updated as of july 07 by people from this site so you will be safe to use it

~~patch~~ · « **Reply #11 on:** December 11, 2007, 07:15:25 am »

that is the patch made by KM, anyone claiming otherwise is lying

GhostShip · « **Reply #12 on:** December 11, 2007, 10:18:14 am »

I didnt hear anyone claim otherwise Patch, although the patch has been modified slightly to use different caches and indexers to avoid a repeat of having a single site shutdown affect all the patch users.

I suppose now would be a good time to finish reporting on the progress or rather lack of progress on a replacement.

I shall explain the situation here fully and if any of you wish to offer help or an idea that fits the requirements please feel free to offer it in this thread.

Ok first of all many people may not know this but KM,s patch architecture is not perfect in that it cannot filter at the secondary level, to work around this KM introduced a lock in method that ensures only secondary dll patch users can connect to dll primaries, any other clients trying to do so will fail the connection test.

As many of you now this is far from ideal on a multiple patch network but works fine if the majority of the WPN traffic is dll user based this was becoming the case until KM pulled the rug and many people jumped ship to other connection methods, this then creates further problems for us all in that its not great for network usability if certain client groups are in conflict with other groups on a technical level, odd problems that seemed small beer now become major headaches.

You have all seen how KM lost his temper and decided that he would attack us at this site for not blindly following his lead on certain matters, this lead to his demandng that we remove his patch and he issued a demand we take down the modified patch,this then was the start of the independent patch project.

Many months ago around the July mark I asked a small group of coders who are commited winmx users to construct a new patch and asked they try to ensure it was possible to filter at the secondary level independently of the primary, this would then ensure full harmony with pie and other patches in the wild, and further would have allowed us to hold a vote on whether to offer the source code to the entire community, in a remarkably short time a basic dll blocking patch was produced, this was then about the time we spoke to pie asking if they would like to offer the final release if it was successful, the reply was positive and in short things where looking good.

We now reach the point of where we have been sitting for some months now,adding the filtering, it soon became clear why KM had not used this method himself to filter at the secondary client level, it seems that utilising this architectural model the search result traffic swamps the handling capacity of the patch, many variation of this scheme have been tried and the basic problem remains the same.

Not wanting to drive our coding staff (a remaining two folks) into a brick wall for an extended amount of time I told them to halt the work, there are two reasons behind this decision and I shall now explain them, the first one is simply that to recreate KM's patch using the same method he is using is hardly gaining us anything in terms of moving forward and of course if it involved primary traffic adjustment could never be open sourced or released without a major chance of problems arising from that release in terms of furthering our enemies legal authority to attack us, what many forget is that the DMCA applies to companies like Macrovision/MediaDefender and they are bound by law to do no research on breaking Winmx Technologies "digital locks" , instead they rely on openly published information to gather useful snippets of information that can be used to disrupt the network.

So as you may have guessed we can copy KM's method and filter, but the goal of moving the entire community forward would be lost as well as meaning no code could be released, this is the real reason then that I halted the patch program, those involved have kept their word in ensuring no code has leaked out into the wild and I thanked them for many months of work they put in as you would all expect.

So this is the current position and I share your disapointment and frustration in not being able to deliver on this project but looking long term on matters such as KM's recent meddling with the primary protocol, I believe that making a client and fixing the holes that have currently been causing troubles to all uses of all patchs is the longer term and more substantive way forward, any system improvements could then be made rapidly and of course we would no longer be a single client network (my apologies to the WinZo creator for this liberal interpretation

) or need to worry about openly publishing a safe and reworked network protocol architecture.

In short we can patch and patch and patch but it seems if we are building our work on sand we must expect those undermining our foundations to do their best and we should endeavour to do ours in constructing whats necessary to counter them, be it KM or MediaDefender, building an open sourced client is a sensible long term move.

Ok big speech over folks, lets hear what you all think and once again I share your disappointment with the failure of this particular project but the situation as I see it means we cannot deliver on what was asked of us without losing sight of the projects original goals and I for one was always clear what those goals where.

..Ñøßß¥.. · « **Reply #13 on:** December 11, 2007, 11:13:50 am »

Ok GS, thanks for the update, can you clear something up for me please, what exactly can be produced at this time? I mean what features could be produced at this time on an open source platform?

Seems to me rather than constantly focusing on what cant be done we focus on what we can, right now a wmw/pie patch all rolled into 1 with blocking and some level of filtering would serve a mighty big goal. Such a patch would ensure accurate blocking is taking place, it would also ensure KM's patch is steadily phased out, it would also ensure Wmw can actually host the patch without fear of "take down" notices etc. Updates and improvements can be added as and when the coders come up with a plan.

Seems to me a few too many are seeing a half empty cup when they should be busy raising a half full cup.....

Lagerlout666 · « **Reply #14 on:** December 11, 2007, 01:23:22 pm »

i would agree a role out of a blocking patch would be a good investment towards winmx. At least if its opensource the major two groups would merge, updates could be roled out and the remaining primarys allowing flooders to still connect could be sourced. I know it would be a step down for this half of the patch users to contend with the list of fake files but as mentioned above at least its the removal of some of the problems. Anyhow i leave it to the powers that choose, an when i get back online i hope we are at least doing something comunity wise.

Merry Christmas Folks if im not back on before crimbo but i imagine i will.

GhostShip · « **Reply #15 on:** December 11, 2007, 01:37:52 pm »

I,m sorry to have given that impression Nobby, what is avaiilable currently is the same option we had some months ago a patch that could be open sourced that block flooders from the network but unfortunately be unable to filter the crap results.

As you may imagine whilst fine for perhaps pie users this is far from ideal for the current crop of dll users used as they are to a fake free network, also I admit to being pre-occupied with the 1.x.x.x. traffic that I see as more of a threat to the network than whether wmw should release a new patch, this is the sand I mentioned, we could all bend over backwards but until we make some strides in ensuring a simple attack like flooding the networks primaries with crap traffic by utilising the node swapping facility built into the WPN protocol is no longer a problem, we are leaving ourselves open to yet more idiocy and disruption.

..Ñøßß¥.. · « **Reply #16 on:** December 11, 2007, 02:08:01 pm »

1. Is there no way to add at least 1 level of primary filtering to bring it up to the current patches standard?
2. Is it not possible to simply block the 1.x.x.x traffic?

bu44er · « **Reply #17 on:** December 11, 2007, 02:19:16 pm »

I do not mean to be negative to anyone, i do not want to down heart anyone who as put alot of work into the new patch. How come Front Code did not get any of these problems the one man we need as eyes watching him everyday (coughs)(Kevin). Surely if the MPAA can not see what IP addresses the users or the caches use we are un-touchable.

While we are on the matter of Peer Caches and Indexers i have been asking now for months for a copy of the Cache Software and help in a matter of i was going to and still may pay a very good coder friend of mine to code what we all need but no one wants to take me seriously.

I have tried helping the best i can but without any help from people who know the network i cant help no more can i.

Please reply MODS

GhostShip · « **Reply #18 on:** December 11, 2007, 07:47:07 pm »

Zero the problems you address are not ones affecting the patch decisions, Kevin did a great job in creating winmx but even he knew it had weaknesses and why he kept it closed src, prior to 2006 there was no fake filtering or blocking at all, things have moved along slowly but surely with the community doing their bit and helping each other where possible.

There has been no rush to hand out peer cache software as atm to do so would be reckless, the peer caches in hand are not toughened against the 1.x.x.x problem and we do not see the need to hand out further sources of potential problems like candies, anyone coding for this network has a steep learning curve, only those who have spent months on working out how it all works have a chance of acheiving anything.

If you have some ideas then please post them for discussion, its not actually clear in your post what you need or want

bu44er · « **Reply #19 on:** December 11, 2007, 10:27:30 pm »

First if all sorry about that post i was angry, secondly i know why you have not given me the Peer Cache software. I asked me here for a copy software so i could see how it all works, i know you have information on this site on how everything works. I will pay coders to help because i am sad enough to have nothing better to spend my money on and think WinMx is worth it.

Over the years i have gave little ideas but as my knowledge is not great about WinMx my ideas have been flawed. I personally know that WinMx still as life left in it but my ideas are hard to explain here without getting mad with the whole situation.

What i think we need and what you can tell me we don't need are as follows
New Peer Caches with filtering at the Server's End not the Patch's End
Patch to obviously patch people into the network
People who we can trust to maintain the above without getting stroppy and killing the network

If you disagree please tell me and ill accept what i want and give more opinion's on what i do not.

If you want to discuss this further please state and i will gladly in private discuss what ever matters are arisen