Experienced and Passionate Computer Scientist and Free Software Developer Looking for New Challenges
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Analysis of Bittorrent Protocol and Its Effect on the Network ENSC 427: Final Project Report Spring 2011
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Analysis of BitTorrent Protocol and Its Effect on the Network ENSC 427: Final Project Report Spring 2011 Group 11 www.sfu.ca/~kna5/ensc427 Ken Kyoungwoo Nam 301046747 Kna5 @sfu.ca Yu Jie Xu 301083552 Xya14 @ sfu.ca Abstract The first version of the peer-to-peer file sharing protocol was invented in 1999, called Napster protocol. From then on, the application of peer-to-peer protocol has been widely spread in the internet. The advantage of the network with p2p protocol is that it needs much less server bandwidth compare to the basic client and server network. Moreover, in the p2p network, the client itself is the server, so they can communicate with each other without the central sever. Nowadays, there are two primary peer-to-peer file sharing protocol that dominate in the network: the Gnutella protocol and BitTorrent Protocol. In our project, we will focus on BitTorrent Protocol. To do this, we will create three different networks in OPNET, and investigate the network performance with and without BitTorrent nodes. 2 Table of contents 1. Introduction…………..……………………………………………………………......4 2. Theory……………...………………………………………………………………......4 2.1 Terminology and Definition…………………………………………………......5 2.2 Peer-to-Peer Protocol…………………………………………………………….5 2.3 BitTorrent Protocol………………………………………………………………6 2.4 BitTorrent Tracker………………………………………………………………7 2.5 Rarest Algorithm…………………………………………………………………8 2.6 Choke Algorithm…………………………………………………………………9 3. Implementation…...…………………………………………………………..……...10 3.1 Packet Formats………………………………………………………………….11 3.2 Normal Client and Server Node Models………………………………………11 3.3 Plain Peer-to-Peer Node Model……………………………………..…………12 3.4 BitTorrent Node Model……………………………………………………...…13 3.5 Building the Small Network……………………………………………………14 3.6 Building the Large Network…………………………………………………...15 4. -
Cisco SCA BB Protocol Reference Guide
Cisco Service Control Application for Broadband Protocol Reference Guide Protocol Pack #60 August 02, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc. www.cisco.com Cisco has more than 200 offices worldwide. Addresses, phone numbers, and fax numbers are listed on the Cisco website at www.cisco.com/go/offices. THE SPECIFICATIONS AND INFORMATION REGARDING THE PRODUCTS IN THIS MANUAL ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. ALL STATEMENTS, INFORMATION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS MANUAL ARE BELIEVED TO BE ACCURATE BUT ARE PRESENTED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. USERS MUST TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR APPLICATION OF ANY PRODUCTS. THE SOFTWARE LICENSE AND LIMITED WARRANTY FOR THE ACCOMPANYING PRODUCT ARE SET FORTH IN THE INFORMATION PACKET THAT SHIPPED WITH THE PRODUCT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY THIS REFERENCE. IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO LOCATE THE SOFTWARE LICENSE OR LIMITED WARRANTY, CONTACT YOUR CISCO REPRESENTATIVE FOR A COPY. The Cisco implementation of TCP header compression is an adaptation of a program developed by the University of California, Berkeley (UCB) as part of UCB’s public domain version of the UNIX operating system. All rights reserved. Copyright © 1981, Regents of the University of California. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER WARRANTY HEREIN, ALL DOCUMENT FILES AND SOFTWARE OF THESE SUPPLIERS ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” WITH ALL FAULTS. CISCO AND THE ABOVE-NAMED SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT OR ARISING FROM A COURSE OF DEALING, USAGE, OR TRADE PRACTICE. IN NO EVENT SHALL CISCO OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS OR LOSS OR DAMAGE TO DATA ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THIS MANUAL, EVEN IF CISCO OR ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. -
ARK Whitepaper
ARK Whitepaper A Platform for Consumer Adoption v.1.0.3 The ARK Crew ARK Whitepaper v.1.0.3 Table Of Contents Overview………………………………………………………………...……………………………….……………….………………………………………………………….….3 Purpose of this Whitepaper………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….……….3 Why?…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………….…………..4 ARK…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………….…………………………………………………………………..5 ARK IS………………………………………………………………………………………………....……………….………………………………………………………………..5 ARK: Technical Details……………………………………….…….…..…………………………...……………….………………...…………………………...6 - Delegated Proof of Stake…………………………….……………...………………………….……………………………………….………...…...6 - Hierarchical Deterministic (HD) Wallets (BIP32)…………………………………………………….....…………………..…..8 - Fees……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………….…...………………………………..……...8 - ARK Delegates and Delegate Voting.…………………………………………………………………………………...………………….9 - Bridged Blockchains (SmartBridges)....................………………………………………………………………….………...…….10 - POST ARK-TEC Token Distribution …………………..…………………………………….………………….………..……..…..……….11 - Testnet Release……………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………….………...….....12 And Beyond?…………………………………………………………………….………...……………………………………….………………………...……….…12 Addendum 1: ARK IS…(Cont.)...……..……..…………....…..………...………………………………………...………………………......……12 -
Asynchronous Covert Communication Using Bittorrent Trackers Mathieu Cunche, Mohamed Ali Kaafar, Roksana Boreli
Asynchronous Covert Communication Using BitTorrent Trackers Mathieu Cunche, Mohamed Ali Kaafar, Roksana Boreli To cite this version: Mathieu Cunche, Mohamed Ali Kaafar, Roksana Boreli. Asynchronous Covert Communication Using BitTorrent Trackers. International Symposium on Cyberspace Safety and Security (CSS), Aug 2014, Paris, France. hal-01053147 HAL Id: hal-01053147 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01053147 Submitted on 29 Jul 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Asynchronous Covert Communication Using BitTorrent Trackers Mathieu Cunche∗†, Mohamed-Ali Kaafar†‡, Roksana Boreli‡ †Inria, France ∗INSA-Lyon CITI, France ‡National ICT Australia fi[email protected] fi[email protected] Abstract—Covert channels enable communicating parties to in a swarm (set of peers downloading and/or sharing a given exchange messages without being detected by an external ob- content). Our contributions are as follows. server. We propose a novel covert channel mechanism based We present a communication scheme that enables two on BitTorrent trackers. The proposed mechanism uses common HTTP commands, thus having the appearance of genuine web parties to perform a hidden exchange of information through traffic and consists of communications that are both indirect and the centralized BitTorrent tracker. -
Antifragile White Paper Draft 3.Pages
Piracy as an Antifragile System tech WP 01/2015 July 2015 Executive Summary Attacks on the piracy economy have thus far been unsuccessful. The piracy community has not only shown resilience to these attacks, but has also become more sophisticated and resilient as a result of them. Systems that show this characteristic response to ex- ternal stressors are defined as antifragile. Traditional centralized attacks are not only ineffective against such systems, but are counter-productive. These systems are not impervious to attacks, however. Decentralized attacks that warp the connections between nodes destroy the system from within. Some system-based attacks on piracy have been attempted, but lacked the technology required to be effec- tive. A new technology, CustosTech, built on the Bitcoin blockchain, attacks the system by turning pirates against each other. The technology enables and incentivizes anyone in the world to anonymously act as an informant, disclosing the identity of the first in- fringer – the pirate uploader. This internal decentralized attack breaks the incentive structures governing the uploader-downloader relationship, and thus provides a sus- tainable deterrent to piracy. Table of Contents Introduction to Antifragility 1 Features of Antifragile Systems 1 Piracy as an Antifragile System 2 Sophisticated Pirates 3 Popcorn Time 5 Attacking 5 Antifragile Systems 5 Attacking Piracy 5 Current Approaches 6 New Tools 6 How it Works 7 Conclusion 7 White paper 01/2015 Introduction to Antifragility Antifragility refers to a system that becomes bet- ter, or stronger, in response to shocks or attacks. Nassim Taleb developed the term1 to explain sys- tems that were not only resilient, but also thrived under stress. -
Downloading Copyrighted Materials
What you need to know before... Downloading Copyrighted Materials Including movies, TV shows, music, digital books, software and interactive games The Facts and Consequences Who monitors peer-to-peer file sharing? What are the consequences at UAF The Motion Picture Association of America for violators of this policy? (MPAA), Home Box Office, and other copyright Student Services at UAF takes the following holders monitor file-sharing on the Internet minimum actions when the policy is violated: for the illegal distribution of their copyrighted 1st Offense: contents. Once identified they issue DMCA Loss of Internet access until issue is resolved. (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) take-down 2nd Offense: notices to the ISP (Internet Service Provider), in Loss of Internet access pending which the University of Alaska is considered as resolution and a $100 fee assessment. one, requesting the infringement be stopped. If 3rd Offense: not stopped, lawsuit against the user is possible. Loss of Internet access pending resolution and a $250 fee assessment. What is UAF’s responsibility? 4th, 5th, 6th Offense: Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and Loss of Internet access pending resolution and Higher Education Opportunity Act, university a $500 fee assessment. administrators are obligated to track these infractions and preserve relevent logs in your What are the Federal consequences student record. This means that if your case goes for violators? to court, your record may be subpoenaed as The MPAA, HBO and similar organizations are evidence. Since illegal file sharing also drains becoming more and more aggressive in finding bandwidth, costing schools money and slowing and prosecuting alleged offenders in criminal Internet connections, for students trying to use court. -
A Study of Peer-To-Peer Systems
A Study of Peer-to-Peer Systems JIA, Lu A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Philosophy in Information Engineering The Chinese University of Hong Kong August 2009 Abstract of thesis entitled: A Study of Peer-to-Peer Systems Submitted by JIA, Lu for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The Chinese University of Hong Kong in June 2009 Peer-to-peer (P2P) systems have evolved rapidly and become immensely popular in Internet. Users in P2P systems can share resources with each other and in this way the server loading is reduced. P2P systems' good performance and scalability attract a lot of interest in the research community as well as in industry. Yet, P2P systems are very complicated systems. Building a P2P system requires carefully and repeatedly thinking and ex- amining architectural design issues. Instead of setting foot in all aspects of designing a P2P system, this thesis focuses on two things: analyzing reliability and performance of different tracker designs and studying a large-scale P2P file sharing system, Xun- lei. The "tracker" of a P2P system is used to lookup which peers hold (or partially hold) a given object. There are various designs for the tracker function, from a single-server tracker, to DHT- based (distributed hash table) serverless systems. In the first part of this thesis, we classify the different tracker designs, dis- cuss the different considerations for these designs, and provide simple models to evaluate the reliability of these designs. Xunlei is a new proprietary P2P file sharing protocol that has become very popular in China. -
Predicting Software Piracy Rates, Bittorrent Tracker Hosting, and P2P File Sharing Client Downloads Between Countries
Kigerl - Infringing Nations: Predicting Software Piracy Rates, BitTorrent Tracker Hosting, and P2P File Sharing Client Downloads Between Countries Copyright © 2013 International Journal of Cyber Criminology (IJCC) ISSN: 0974 – 2891 January – June 2013, Vol 7 (1): 62–80 This is an Open Access paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non- Commercial-Share Alike License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This license does not permit commercial exploitation or the creation of derivative works without specific permission. Infringing Nations: Predicting Software Piracy Rates, BitTorrent Tracker Hosting, and P2P File Sharing Client Downloads Between Countries Alex C. Kigerl1 Washington State University, United States of America Abstract This study sought to investigate the predictors of digital piracy at the national level. The bulk of previous research on this subject has relied almost exclusively on measures of piracy taken from reports created by copyright industry representatives, which may not be objective sources. For this research, two new measures of piracy related activity in addition to the usual software piracy rate and software piracy cost measures were used. The number of BitTorrent tracking servers and the number of peer- to-peer file sharing client downloads per country were measured. It was determined that these new measures tended to have predictors that were different than the standard software piracy rates. Additionally, it appeared that measuring piracy as a rate relative to legal purchases had the opposite effect than when measuring piracy in absolute terms (such as the absolute number of BitTorrent trackers and absolute dollar amount lost due to piracy). -
Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling Matthew As G
Loyola University Chicago, School of Law LAW eCommons Faculty Publications & Other Works 2018 Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling Matthew aS g Jake Haskell Follow this and additional works at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/facpubs Part of the Civil Procedure Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons Defense Against the Dark Arts of Copyright Trolling Matthew Sag &Jake Haskell * ABSTRACT: In this Article, we offer both a legal and a pragmaticframework for defending against copyright trolls. Lawsuits alleging online copyright infringement by John Doe defendants have accounted for roughly half of all copyright casesfiled in the United States over the past threeyears. In the typical case, the plaintiffs claims of infringement rely on a poorly substantiatedform pleading and are targeted indiscriminately at noninfringers as well as infringers. This practice is a subset of the broaderproblem of opportunistic litigation, but it persists due to certain unique features of copyright law and the technical complexity of Internet technology. The plaintiffs bringing these cases target hundreds or thousands of defendants nationwide and seek quick settlements pricedjust low enough that it is less expensive for the defendant to pay rather than to defend the claim, regardless of the claim's merits. We report new empirical data on the continued growth of this form of copyright trolling in the United States. We also undertake a detailed analysis of the legal andfactual underpinnings of these cases. Despite theirunderlying weakness, plaintiffs have exploited information asymmetries, the high cost of federal court litigation, and the extravagant threat of statutory damages for copyright infringement to leverage settlementsfrom the guilty and the innocent alike. -
Frequently Asked Questions
Copyright & File-Sharing FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS WHAT IS COPYRIGHT? BUT I BOUGHT IT. WHY CAN’T I SHARE IT? WHAT CAN I DO TO AVOID COPYRIGHT Copyright refers to the legal rights creators have There is a difference between using and distributing INFRINGEMENT? over the use, distribution, and reproduction of copyrighted materials. Purchasing songs, movies, or Download content from legitimate sources and do original work (music, movies, software, etc.). software from legitimate sources does not give you the not share copyrighted materials online. Uninstall Copyright infringement is the unlawful use of any right to share these materials over the Internet or make P2P applications (e.g., Popcorn Time, BitTorrent, material protected under copyright law. Common copies for others. When you purchase a Peer-to-Peer Vuze), which may be sharing your files without violations include downloading ‘pirated’ copies of (P2P) program (e.g., Frostwire, BitTorrent, Vuze), you your knowledge. Do not share your NetID and copyrighted materials or sharing files not intended only buy the software, not any files you download or password with anyone. Keep your computer for you to distribute. share using this software. up-to-date with the latest security patches and anti-virus software. HOW DO I KNOW IT’S COPYRIGHTED? DOES UMASS IT MONITOR MY INTERNET Assume all materials are copyright-protected CONNECTION? HOW CAN I LEGALLY DOWNLOAD CONTENT? unless you created them or you have received the No. We do not monitor the contents of your computer Services like Amazon, iTunes, and eMusic offer author’s explicit permission to distribute them. All or issue copyright complaints. -
An Architecture for Client Virtualization: a Case Study
Computer Networks 100 (2016) 75–89 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Computer Networks journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comnet An architecture for client virtualization: A case study ∗ Syed Arefinul Haque a, Salekul Islam a, , Md. Jahidul Islam a, Jean-Charles Grégoire b a United International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh b INRS-EMT, Montréal, Canada a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: As edge clouds become more widespread, it is important to study their impact on tradi- Received 30 November 2015 tional application architectures, most importantly the separation of the data and control Revised 17 February 2016 planes of traditional clients. We explore such impact using the virtualization of a Peer- Accepted 18 February 2016 to-Peer (P2P) client as a case study. In this model, an end user accesses and controls the Available online 26 February 2016 virtual P2P client application using a web browser and all P2P application-related control Keywords: messages originate and terminate from the virtual P2P client deployed inside the remote Edge cloud server. The web browser running on the user device only manages download and upload of P2P the P2P data packets. BitTorrent, as it is the most widely deployed P2P platform, is used to BitTorrent validate the feasibility and study the performance of our approach. We introduce a proto- Virtual client type that has been deployed in public cloud infrastructures. We present simulation results Cloud-based server which show clear improvements in the use of user resources. Based on this experience we Web-RTC derive lessons on the challenges and benefits from such edge cloud-based deployments. -
Convergence-2020.Pdf
A universal architecture to anonymize any application or protocol and turn it into an independent decentralized p2p network inside browsers and servers, with browsers acting as servers CONVERGENCE 1. Description This proposal is a complete redesign of our initial Convergence proposal from 2015 (http://www.peersm.com/Convergence.pdf ) which was intended as a research study for an EU call By “Convergence” in this proposal we don’t refer to a specific network or node but to methods using the Convergence principles 1.1 Background and rationale The initial Convergence proposal was written based on the observation that we must invent one network/system per need if we want to evade big data centralization and protect privacy/anonymity: to browse, to chat, to email, to exchange files, to do social networking or cooperative work, to do crypto currency, to protect the users from their connected objects, to handle peer identities. So it did envision the support of any type of applications and protocols on top of a secure anonymization system, inside browsers and servers The first part is very exactly what IPFS did, including the crypto currency concept in our proposal to sustain the network (Filecoin) But IPFS is not at all designed for privacy, the IPFS team knows that they will have to address the issue but it’s not even part of their roadmap And IPFS adoption is not for all protocols, many other networks will not use it and lack privacy too That’s why we are proposing the Convergence concepts, which are still very up to date, with a major novelty: