Live data from Hacker News

“Pest” vs. 0xFE

loper-os.org

1–10 of 35 posts

Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE

#3
> 1.1. What is Pest?

> 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

#6

Title 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

#7
Very neat:

> 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

#8
post #6

Title 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.

Looks like the versions count down toward zero. Pest v. 0xFF is an older article by several days.

Re: “Pest” vs. 0xFE

#10
I'm not seeing much detail about the crypto (other than serpent and HMAC-512).

Also: 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?

Post reply on HN