From: Piete Brooks <Piete.Brooks@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 08:20:32 PDT
To: "P.J. Ponder" <ponder@wane-leon-mail.scri.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: SSL brute/ng
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9508292354.C13222-0100000@wane3.scri.fsu.edu>
Message-ID: <"swan.cl.cam.:068200:950830151949"@cl.cam.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> If anyone is putting together a wish list of features for the next 
> iteration of the distributed brute

Sure am ....

> would they like to consider some sort of mirroring approach for the server
> (at least on stats or updates/software)

Not sure what you mean ....

Currently there are many machines involved ...

sksp		odd & sods.
sksp-ack	just ACKs.
sksp-key	just keyspace allocation
ftp		just FTPs
www		just WWW

stats are WWW only, with updates being done by ACKs machine.

> so that some of that traffic could be reduced?

How ?

> I'm afraid I am one of the guilty trying to log on to check on the stats at
> least once and I probably contributed to choking it just by doing that.

Nah ....

> If a local server

local to whom ?

Using a caching poxy ?

> could have been updated, it would save bandwidth on the server doing real
> work.

No -- different server.
 
> Could a trusted group of segemnt dolers be put together?

As in a hierarchy ?
This is being thought about ...

> I like the idea of running a benchmark type of program so that I could
> multiply keys/sec times the amount of time I had to donate, and only get a
> reasonable for me number of segments.

brloop does that for brutessl attempts ...

> I would hope that statistics be gathered on the number of keys tested, 
> elapsed time, etc. so that we all got some more or less real world 
> insight into key lengths and strengths, effort required to break, that we 
> have all heard so many projections about... especially as the doling gets 
> more sophisticated and the number of participants/cycle pool increases.

Let me know what stats you want ...

> Will there be Hal3?  

Yes.