MXlinx
LINK
MXlinx
MXlinx is a small multi-purpose tool for WinMX client.
Its features are divided into four main parts:
Queue Watcher, which keeps leeches out of your queue, opens new slots when upload speed is not sufficient, starts your friends immediately
SpeedUp, which finds new sources more frequently than WinMX does
OpenNap Servers List Updater, which can update your OpenNap Servers List
HASH Engime, which can start downloads in your WinMX client with one mouse click, generates HASH codes for your private files, and much more...
This App Will Help With Your WinMX Needs
MXHashish
And if you Want to test out another useful APP TRY MXHashish
LINK
MxHashish
[Description]
MxHashish is a utility to deal with WinMX hashes; both in showing the
hashes for a file, as well as parsing out WinMX's library.dat file.
MXlinx [WinMx Addons File help]
Moderator: CricketMX Forum Moderators
-
KM
- Know-It-All
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 9:42 pm
- Location: in front of a computer, as usual
- Contact:
compare these 2 sentances:TheHawks wrote:SpeedUp, which finds new sources more frequently than WinMX does
"i dont give a damn if i kill 50 people on my way to work, as long as i get there 5 minutes sooner"
"i dont give a damn if i destroy the network and make it impossible for anyone else to get files, as long as i get files a few k/s faster"
can you see any difference? I can't...
WinMX World.com - The new help website dedicated completely to WinMX. If you cant find help there, you cant find it anywhere!
-
quicksilver
- Helpful Hands
- Posts: 1926
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:12 am
I dont actually think Hawks uses this prog KM, he was just bringing it to our attention as it contains hash tools which where of interest on Vladds a few days back.
Lets not hang the poor guy ...yet
Unfortunately it is a fact ,as KM mentioned folks that any Speedup tools are bad for the network, pity as the tool looked ideal.
I have done research on this application and its not to stable either, so maybe its best left to sit on its home site, rather than waste your time bothering with it.
Lets not hang the poor guy ...yet
Unfortunately it is a fact ,as KM mentioned folks that any Speedup tools are bad for the network, pity as the tool looked ideal.
I have done research on this application and its not to stable either, so maybe its best left to sit on its home site, rather than waste your time bothering with it.
Krzystof and colleagues are working on a new version of mxlinx, or so I hear. It may be interesting to see if they've done anything to address the network-stessing issues in their program.
EDIT: Just been and looked. mxlinx 2 is a totally new version, started from scratch... but... it still has the 'speed up' feature. It's still in development but here is a link: http://www.sharepoint.boo.pl/main.php?m ... mx_mxlinx2
EDIT: Just been and looked. mxlinx 2 is a totally new version, started from scratch... but... it still has the 'speed up' feature. It's still in development but here is a link: http://www.sharepoint.boo.pl/main.php?m ... mx_mxlinx2
The Real Focus should of Bin On MXHashish
HASH WinMX's library.dat file And Send it To a HashDataBase
KM IF YOU could Make A program that hashes your files and Stops duplicated files that are hash from being sent to the DataBase dose a
Auto Send to The hash database and blocks BAD IP's from Sending
Spoof Hashes to the Hash DataBase.
would that be great.....
Do 100% Of The work...
you get all of the credit...
HASH WinMX's library.dat file And Send it To a HashDataBase
KM IF YOU could Make A program that hashes your files and Stops duplicated files that are hash from being sent to the DataBase dose a
Auto Send to The hash database and blocks BAD IP's from Sending
Spoof Hashes to the Hash DataBase.
would that be great.....
Do 100% Of The work...
you get all of the credit...
yeah,
i was playing hashish earlier today. Wouldnt be hard to build a database with it. and the right motivation. Could be a way to further trivialize the oppositions efforts.
i was playing hashish earlier today. Wouldnt be hard to build a database with it. and the right motivation. Could be a way to further trivialize the oppositions efforts.
The avalanche has already started, it is to late for the pebbles to vote. - Kosh
-
quicksilver
- Helpful Hands
- Posts: 1926
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:12 am
Hmm , I did look at it myself a few days ago , but there is only one useful peice of data missing with it , how secure is the hash algorithm ?
If its md5 its not secure enough for our plans, as this has been shown to be a an unsafe system.
For the hash plugin idea to work requires at least the Sha -1 to be in use and even thats under attack (although it shoud be good for the next 5 years before a true "crack" emerges).
Anyone a member of Smittys Tavern ?
Some answer to what he uses would be reassuring
If its md5 its not secure enough for our plans, as this has been shown to be a an unsafe system.
For the hash plugin idea to work requires at least the Sha -1 to be in use and even thats under attack (although it shoud be good for the next 5 years before a true "crack" emerges).
Anyone a member of Smittys Tavern ?
Some answer to what he uses would be reassuring
I have as of yet not seen evidence of anyone being able to flood a hash search with anything other than legit responses.....yet.
For the time being, a searchable database collecting legit hash info using mxhash could start to counter their efforts.
I am willing pay for bw and build dbase. Already talked to 2 webhosts, either one should be adequate.
Ok, now after deleting those 4 paragraphs.... ....
Music channels could easily provide a more than adequate basis for new music hashes. It requires some effort to use mxhashish, but not much. A lot less than endless searcing with multiple downloads of nothing.
For the time being, a searchable database collecting legit hash info using mxhash could start to counter their efforts.
I am willing pay for bw and build dbase. Already talked to 2 webhosts, either one should be adequate.
Ok, now after deleting those 4 paragraphs.... ....
Music channels could easily provide a more than adequate basis for new music hashes. It requires some effort to use mxhashish, but not much. A lot less than endless searcing with multiple downloads of nothing.
The avalanche has already started, it is to late for the pebbles to vote. - Kosh
-
quicksilver
- Helpful Hands
- Posts: 1926
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:12 am
Very true Vladd but the integrity of the database rests on those hases, so they will need to be collected by the old hands and trusted users who have folk who can vouch for them.
I have researched the md5 hash and its a convenient size but it is not a secure permanant solution.
SHA-1 was NSA developed and is used by the federal goverment but a 160 digit size is the off putting factor,
So we are going with md5 , I hope thats what hashish uses as anything less is crackable, and would be one great waste of time.
I cite all these facts from my well thumbed copy of Bruce Schneiers - Applied Cryptography.(2nd ed)
I have researched the md5 hash and its a convenient size but it is not a secure permanant solution.
SHA-1 was NSA developed and is used by the federal goverment but a 160 digit size is the off putting factor,
So we are going with md5 , I hope thats what hashish uses as anything less is crackable, and would be one great waste of time.
I cite all these facts from my well thumbed copy of Bruce Schneiers - Applied Cryptography.(2nd ed)
-
quicksilver
- Helpful Hands
- Posts: 1926
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:12 am
Rat I,m sorry to disagree with you but I think in terms of ultimate protection against vunerability that statement applies but as the team where unable to recover any info from the algorithm except for a magnitude s worth of rounds ,and this from knowing the end result anyway,(known plaintext), is not really that worrying to me.
It has certainly not been cracked to the extent that folks are suggesting , just that one of the design criteria has been breached , I beleive it will be ok for at least five years , any worried folk would use a bigger key SHA (256,512) , but I cant agree in practice it has been cracked.
It has certainly not been cracked to the extent that folks are suggesting , just that one of the design criteria has been breached , I beleive it will be ok for at least five years , any worried folk would use a bigger key SHA (256,512) , but I cant agree in practice it has been cracked.