sig2dat 3.0.a - all inclusive tool for safe download

[Mowzer]

.

[Mowzer]

.

[indiana_jones]

there is a new version attached 3.1.a

1. removed "\\" from filename at single selection
2. keyboard entry for UUHash added
3. a few "maybe" bugs removed

i just attach it here, you can try it from here.

there is no installation or setup
the info about the shared folder is read from the registry

indy

[indiana_jones]

sorry found something, that makes it incompatible for win95, 98 & probably me for files > 300k

i 'm on a solution - but it should work from nt40-0 up for all files
indy

[indiana_jones]

as far as i tested with win98

sig2dat 3.2.a

can handle now all filesizes with win98 and up, probably also 95.

it takes a lot longer than 3.1.a - a couple of minutes on a 600 MB file

if you have time, please try it , comments are welcome
indy

[Mowzer]

.

[indiana_jones]

hey ethen,
of course it's all right, you can link as you want and also use all information and text from my homepage as you want to. i'm just happy when i see people using it (maybe i find some signatures of quality mp3 rips to download for me).

differences sig2dat 3.1.a 3.2.a:
3.1.a uses a read method(overlapped) which is not supported by win9x/me os but is much faster. so if it works for you, you can use 3.1.a because 3.2.a is much slower but they do the same thing.

concerning sw sharing:
from the calculation of UUHash, i learned that it is not 100% secure - in fact only sample blocks of the files are taken for hash calculation. that is enaugh for identifying the files - but it is not as i believed that every bit counts - this is true only for certain parts of the file.
there are additional security problems for sw - so you could worst case download a faked file from a totally faked client - with some virus inserted underways
for sw sharing, there should be a 'long' and exhaustive signature, which is calculated by sig2dat and published and only used for verification.
i thought of some 256 Byte double md5 Hash, which is calculated from all bytes of the files in the forward and the backward direction including filesize.

indy

[Mowzer]

.

[JohnDoe345]

Ethan,

Your site sounds really good Here are some hashes for anyone who wants to try out indy's program:

File: (smr)the_mothman_prophecies-ts(1of2).avi
Size: 214734.000KB
UUHash: =8x5l8sBREbbkhRDOa3Wy5DOlEcM=

File: (smr)the_mothman_prophecies-ts(2of2).avi
Size: 194036.000KB
UUHash: =mFYJhaAr+EwKeetJ12m3863/+KY=

File: [tmd]a.walk.to.remember.ts.(1of2).avi
Size: 167624.000KB
UUHash: =J5ZOR+sBYA5dvEM8hxEjVGC/opA=

File: [tmd]a.walk.to.remember.ts.(2of2).avi
Size: 93400.000KB
UUHash: =DqYyRMcN4d3B6cXNNAdgnrXoiQg=

File: Collateral Damage (Part 1 Of 2).avi
Size: 141252.000KB
UUHash: =i936czwtxRC+8a6y1YtyZxCbOSc=

File: [tmd]collateral.damage.ts.(2of2).avi
Size: 139184.000KB
UUHash: =9kRbqBl2XdU4GMHE29E4O/AKfWE=

File: [tmd]slackers.cam.(1of2).avi
Size: 114886.000KB
UUHash: =OwvnJhyLr2Olr9h1meHzN+eIYTA=

File: [tmd]slackers.cam.(2of2)(1)(1).avi
Size: 105576.000KB
UUHash: =iFkBm9paUzoi3KxWhst6cIMR3b0=

File: Platoon [dvd-rip - divx].avi
Size: 670267.188KB
UUHash: =dxvtTPXY0CcvpgYsFlDJaivE09M=

[Stoepsel]

Originally posted by indiana_jones
differences sig2dat 3.1.a 3.2.a:
3.1.a uses a read method(overlapped) which is not supported by win9x/me os but is much faster. so if it works for you, you can use 3.1.a because 3.2.a is much slower but they do the same thing.

indy,

I noticed that 3.1.a and 3.2.a calculated the same UUHash, but 3.2.a was WAY slower.

So, now that you confirmed that 3.2.a is 'merely' a version designed for 'backwards compatibility' with Win98, I'll stick to 3.1.a when I'm using Win2K.

If you're bored you can add some kind of Windows version check to sig2dat, so that you use the fast method when possible and otherwise use the slow method. There's an API function to retrieve the Windows version. If you need details on this let me know.

Thanks,
Stoepsel

[meziadin]

Thanks Indy for the reg entrys/ on my sys morpheus is back up / nor just able to upload but I can search and d/l glory be

[JackSpratts]

hi meziadin! welcome to nu. we're gald you're here!

- js.

[Mowzer]

.

[JohnDoe345]

Ethan,

I've been meaning to drop geocites for awhile now, but I never had the time to research others sites besides angelfire. If you are linking to one of my sites you ready should link to the angelfire one. It doesn't look like geo is going to have a long future with me. Thanks for the list of free servers I'll see if I have any time this weekend to check some of them out.

I think the best way we should work together is for you to concentrate on files other then movies. Eventually, I want to also display indy's hash numbers and drop the resolutions and fps. If you want to also do it then that's ok too, but there's no need to repeat ourselves.

Once I see the "preview" of your site then I'll get a better idea of how things might run between us. We all appreciate your efforts Etan I can't wait to see your site.

[Mowzer]

.

[JohnDoe345]

Well, we aren't getting out of the quality business because we provide stars that tell users how good the quality of a movie is. I might end up keeping the resolution and fps because it seems that some users really like these 2 pieces of information. I guess we could just let your website handle all the hash/signatures and just link to you.

Nothing is final. I was just thinking about it.

[Mowzer]

.

[indiana_jones]

i think there are just 2 different things:

• why to select a movie for download
  
  for that all the quality stuff like name, size, fps, all over quality (stars) is very important. as i read from the forums, many users with slow connection spend days to download a movie and it would very useful for them to know a priori what they will get.
  
  
• how to really get the selected movie at last
  
  thats the point where the UUHash starts doing its job.

it's just very important that these two things stay fitting together.

indy

[Mowzer]

.

[JohnDoe345]

Well, like a said before I was thinking about dropping the resolution and fps because we introduced the star ratings a few weeks ago for quality. I just thought it was reduntant to include all 3 pieces of information. Also, I was trying to make less work for my verifiers. I guess I should keep them because it seems that users like all three and might want to have more then just the stars.

So....indy (if you have time) I have a favor to ask you. Can you make a program like your startfile one that gives me the filename, filesize, resolution, and fps? This way my verifiers and myself can quickly cut and paste the information rather then typing it all out. If you don't have time or can't do it then I'll understand.

The way musiccity seems to have shaken things up, I think the moprheus movie page needs to change its name. lol

Morpheus doesn't look to good, in fact it just looks like a rip

I've been meaning to change the name. It's no longer going to have the Morpheus name. I think the site is going to turn into a more general verified movies site for the FastTrack network. Although, I'm sure some of the filesizes work on other p2p programs. I have do a little more research to make sure.