“Pest” vs. 0xFE
loper-os.org
“Pest” vs. 0xFE
1–10 of 35 posts
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#2"vs." being an abbreviation for versus carries an entirely different meaning than the intended version.
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#3> Pest is a peer-to-peer network protocol intended for IRC-style chat. It is designed for decentralization of control, resistance to natural and artificial interference, and fits-in-head mechanical simplicity -- in that order.
> Pest explicitly rejects the inherently-centralizing concepts of IRC
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#4Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#5♥
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#6Title should be updated to match the original: "Pest" v. 0xFE "vs." being an abbreviation for versus carries an entirely different meaning than the intended version.
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#7> 1.2.4. Messages are Authenticable, but not Opposable.
> All Pest messages are authenticable -- a station will only process a message if it carries a valid signature from a peer (though in some cases, the message may not have been authored by that peer.)
> However, they are also repudiatable (i.e. non-opposable) -- since all packet signatures are produced with symmetric keys, the recipient of a message cannot, at any point in time, prove to a third party that he was not in fact the author of that message.
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#8Title should be updated to match the original: "Pest" v. 0xFE "vs." being an abbreviation for versus carries an entirely different meaning than the intended version.
FWIW, I would have read "v." the same, as "v." is also an abbreviation--mostly used in legal documents and court cases--for versus.
Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#9Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE
#10Also: there is a claim of being DDOS-proof, but I haven't found an explanation as to how.
Also: is there actual implementation or even a mock?