Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

GJS protocol

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 1:29

Hello, dear citizens of /prog/. As you might have noticed, a terrible(!) plague has set itself upon our beautiful board, lowering the median intelligence of the posts to a level difficult to describe. During the past years, we have endured and endured, waiting for these painful months of the year to pass; some of us have given up, maybe even tried finding refuge in other programmer communities, only to realize the depth of the hole /prog/ had left behind in their hearts.

I don't know about you, but personally, I've had enough.

As it is a widely-known fact that we cannot rely on moderator power to push away the hordes of intruders, we must find another way to cleanse our magnificent community of the line noise that is ruining it.

What makes us special, /prog/? What is it that differentiates us from all the other boards? We can program. Let us use this to our advantage.

I thereby propose, as the final solution against the recent shitpostfest, the creation and implementation of the GJS protocol.

This protocol has but one goal: to give /prog/riders a way of recognizing each other's posts, and by extension, a way of ignoring all other posts.

/prog/riders are encouraged to devise message authentication/signing algorithms and post the corresponding textual description to /prog/, with absolutely no sample implementation whatsoever. Other /prog/riders who are willing to identify themselves as ``legitimate citizens'' will be able to do so by signing their own posts with one of the aforementioned algorithms; of course, they will be required to implement the algorithm of their choice themselves - perhaps easy and entertaining for them, but a veritable brick-wall for the intruders. As a result, /prog/riders will have no difficulty in recognizing posts written by a fellow compatriot (and automatically ignoring everyone else's).


Implementation:

The GJS protocol specifies two post formats: posts describing signing algorithms and signed posts.

The message-signing algorithms shall take a variable-length string as their input and return a variable-length string as their output. The message authentication code shall be defined as the lowercase hexadecimal-encoded MD5 hash of the output of the message-signing algorithm.

Note: BBCode and its associated HTML formatting must be ignored. Users of the GJS protocol are therefore encouraged to wrap the message header in text size-reducing tags, i.e. [sup] or [sub]. <br> tags (or whatever newlines are represented as) shall be interpreted as "\n".

Message signing algorithms will be uniquely identified by the FIPS-180-2 SHA-256 hash of their textual description.


Format of a post describing a signing algorithm:

:GJS1A <Message signing algorithm ID: hexadecimal sha256sum of the message describing the algorithm, i.e. of the base64-decoded Payload><newline>
:<Message authentication code (as defined above) using the algorithm itself of the message describing the algorithm, i.e. of the base64-decoded Payload><newline>
<Payload: base64-encoded message describing the algorithm, line-wrap is recommended>


Sample post describing a signing algorithm:

:GJS1A b824e263caedb4eb97689b25d14ab4217f229687b35ede63872c184b455b372e
:3fcee1ea342699e1bf18973b242f9b65
VGhpcyBpcyBhIHNhbXBsZSBtZXNzYWdlIHNpZ25pbmcgYWxnb3JpdGhtIGRlc2NyaXB0b3IgcG9z
dC4gTm9ybWFsbHksIGl0IHdvdWxkIGJlIGZpbGxlZCB3aXRoIHRoZSB0ZXh0dWFsIGRlc2NyaXB0
aW9uIG9mIGEgcmF0aGVyIGNvbXBsZXggc2lnbmluZyBhbGdvcml0aG0sIGJ1dCBmb3IgdGhlIHNh
a2Ugb2Ygc2ltcGxpY2l0eSwgbGV0J3Mgc2F5IHRoZSBhbGdvcml0aG0gaXMgcmVhbGx5IGp1c3Q6
CgpSZXR1cm4gdGhlIHN1bSBvZiBhbGwgdGhlIHZhbHVlcyBvZiB0aGUgYnl0ZXMgaW4gdGhlIGlu
cHV0IHN0cmluZyBtb2R1bG8gNjU1MzYsIGluIGRlY2ltYWwuCg==



Format of a signed post:

:GJS1M <Message signing algorithm ID: hexadecimal sha256sum of the message describing the algorithm><newline>
:<Length: length in bytes of Payload, in decimal> <Message authentication code of the Payload><newline>
<Payload: string of Length bytes>

Recommendation: As a preventive measure against false positives (posts not written by true /prog/riders recognized as authentic), the first line of the payload should have the following format (note: if the post is a thread starter, 0 must be used as Thread ID):

:<Thread ID in which post is located, in decimal> <Unix time at the time of signing, in decimal>



Sample signed post:

:GJS1M b824e263caedb4eb97689b25d14ab4217f229687b35ede63872c184b455b372e
:63 ac2e084d679d6de0a60f75fca6e63589
:0 1277094869
This message was written by an EXPERT PROGRAMMER.



Guidelines for writing a successful signing algorithm:

* Not too simple, but not too complex either. Ask yourself the question: would a person who has been using ``Teach yourself Sepples in 24h'' tutorials be able to write a program that implements your algorithm? If the answer is yes, then it's not complex enough.
* Do not rely upon external libraries; libcrypt is no exception.
* Do not rely upon language-specific features.
* Do not rely upon platform-specific features.
* Your algorithm should not require excessive time and space. Worst-case should be O(n) relative to the input size.
* Make sure the algorithm can be comfortably implemented in Javascript (to facilitate the writing of Greasemonkey extensions that would remove all non-signed posts from view).
* If you're out of inspiration, just use common problems in computer science, e.g. make the algorithm solve small custom knapsack problems generated from bytes of the input.
* Be creative!

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 1:32

>>1
I think you misunderstand the reason people post on /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 1:45

Interesting thought, certainly. I imagine that as soon as a single decent algorithm is devised, everyone will be sticking to that for at least some time.
I'll give it some thought, though I warn you in advance that I will ignore your adjuration to eschew external libraries.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 1:50

>>3
MD5 and SHA256 don't count as external libraries.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 3:02

Good! I always wanted to be identified as "the guy writing shitty Haskell programs" in serious discussion threads!

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 3:06

Looks like >>5 didn't read original post.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 3:07

So we make posts, and when someone questions the post, we feed it to a cipher that's been made publicly available (because WHBT). Genious.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 3:08

>>3
Bad idea. See:
* Make sure the algorithm can be comfortably implemented in Javascript (to facilitate the writing of Greasemonkey extensions that would remove all non-signed posts from view).

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 3:10

OP's ploy is just another way to fill /prog/ with more Xarnss. Why can't we focus on projects that are actually useful, like implementing sexpcode in FF extensions? or discussing official sexpcode with MrVacBob-kun-sama?

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 3:26

>>9
A /prog/ full of Xarns would be pretty awesome, actually. At least it'd have more code in it.
But yeah, I'm still waiting for that SexpCode Greasemonkey script as well. Apparently Bun is working on it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 5:07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

HAX MY GnuPG SIGNING KEY
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEARECAAYFAkwfKukACgkQ6e6UQDq9O1JW6wCgwjoAVLl6gKte/3Y2SHvblMxH
pP0AoN3DMRFkbAl4WREcoXjG3goe1UiA
=AfJV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 5:16

Cute, but that would require most of us to actually spend a little bit of time to code a possibly trivial, possibly non-trivial program just so we could post on /prog/. One of the advantages of posting to BBSes is the low barrier of entry and being hassle-free. I don't see myself having problem following the protocol, but I don't think more than a few individuals would even bother, and I'm too busy right now to bother writing such a program.

would a person who has been using ``Teach yourself Sepples in 24h'' tutorials
It's possible, if he isn't stupid to begin with. Sadly a lot of your examples are also trivial for PHP programmers as the language comes with most functions you required built-in. I'll be sitting on the side-lines for this one and might decide to join in if it actually becomes popular, which I doubt.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 6:52

Here's a better idea: http://pastebin.ca/1887614
I no longer use Firefox. You have 3 months before it expires.

Name: >>1 2010-06-21 8:54

Going to post a real signing algorithm soon.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 9:11

>>12
Cute, but that would require most of us to actually spend a little bit of time to code
THIS IS MADNESS

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 12:18

signing their own posts with one of the aforementioned algorithms
So you mean everybody will have their own algorithm? Why can't we just pick one?

Name: 17 2010-06-21 12:50

I doubt this will catch on. Of course we could make a program to make the post given the text, but it wouldn't be to hard for someone given a bit of time to make their own, even if they aren't expert programmers.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 13:21

>>15
THIS IS /PROG///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 13:59

Why don't we all start tripfagging (like Xarn) and gain reputation the responsible way?

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 14:03

>>16
No, it's just that some imageboard kiddie will eventually manage to implement it and post it to their favourite imageboard (or maybe to /prog itself), thereby rendering it useless. The GJS protocol allows for multiple signing algorithms so that when one of them is broken, we can just switch to another one with no problem.

Also, I'm almost done writing my own.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 14:07

>>19
I am ok with this. I say we start a thread in which we post tripcoded wildcard programs. If you see a program that looks worthy to you, consider that person a /prog/rider. If you see one that doesn't, don't bother reading their posts ever again, or simply script them out of existence.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 14:24

This is a sample message signing algorithm descriptor post. Normally, it would be filled with the textual description of a rather complex signing algorithm, but for the sake of simplicity, let's say the algorithm is really just:

Return the sum of all the values of the bytes in the input string modulo 65536, in decimal.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 14:35

Perhaps a signed post can point to the thread/post ID combination of the descriptor post defining the algorithm used in signing the post.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 14:39

OP is clearly a newcomer, despite his fondness for bbcode.  A large influx of shit posts is nothing out the ordinary.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 15:02

>>24
The fact that it's nothing out of the ordinary doesn't mean we have to put up with it without resistance. When FV was around, we also responded by hiding him with that Greasemonkey script; technological solutions are a /prog/ tradition.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 15:08

>>1
Well that's an interesting idea, but part of the charm of /Prague/ is being able to converse with people of various skill levels, so that you can both admire some and feel superior to some.
Now if we only had actual mods, who would delete any "[b][i]HAX MY %s[/i][/b]" posts. This protocol wouldn't help because I'm fairly sure that the people who post those are actual /prog/riders.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 15:16

>>25
I didn't hide him; I found his posts entertaining.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 15:44

>>27
You're a liar or a moron.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 16:00

>>28
And you're a prejudiced jerk.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 16:16

>>23
If you can't use google or /prog/scrape you don't deserve to use the GJS protocol.

OP here, almost done with my own algorithm draft.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 20:17

          test     

    test     


  test   




        test

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 21:18

THE JSB-1 ALGORITHM

:GJS1A 67dcbdbce4a0b67c4b48e86a6ae29205a95e4b83024a9d947213d1231800e8d9
:ee6226daf2d2958a2c212e94783edd61
ClRIRSBKU0ItMSBBTEdPUklUSE0KCgoqIE5vdGVzOgoKVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBpcyBiZXN0IHZpZXdlZCBpbiBhIG1vbm9zcGFjZSBmb250LgoKQWxsIGZ1cnRoZXIgcm
VmZXJlbmNlcyB0byB0aGUgaGFzaGVkIHZhbHVlIG9mIGEgc3RyaW5nIHNoYWxsIGJlIGludGVycHJldGVkIGJ5IGRlZmF1bHQgYXMgcmVmZXJlbmNlcyB0byB0aGUgYmlu
YXJ5IHJlcHJlc2VudGF0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBoYXNoZWQgdmFsdWUgb2YgdGhlIHN0cmluZyAoYW5kIE5PVCB0aGUgaGV4YWRlY2ltYWwgcmVwcmVzZW50YXRpb24pLgoKVG
hyb3VnaG91dCB0aGUgd2hvbGUgZG9jdW1lbnQsIHRoZSBtZWFuaW5nIG9mIGBgbmV3bGluZScnIHNoYWxsIGJlIGludGVycHJldGVkIGFzICJcbiIgKGJ5dGUgMTApLgoK
CiogQWxnb3JpdGhtOgoKVGhlIFNIQS01MTIgaGFzaCBvZiB0aGUgaW5wdXQgc3RyaW5nIGlzIGludGVycHJldGVkIGFzIGEgOHg4IGRpc3RhbmNlIG1hdHJpeCB3aGVyZS
BldmVyeSBieXRlIHJlcHJlc2VudHMgYSB2YWx1ZSBmcm9tIDAgdG8gMjU1OyB0aGUgbGF5b3V0IG9mIHRoZSBtYXRyaXggaXMgdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZzoKCnNbMF0gc1sx
XSAuIC4gLgpzWzhdIHNbOV0gLiAuIC4KIC4gICAgLiAgIC4KIC4gICAgLiAgICAgLgogLiAgICAuICAgICAgIC4KClRoZXJlZm9yZSwgTSh4LHkpIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRzIH
RvIHMoeCt5KjgpLgoKRmluZCB0aGUgc2hvcnRlc3QgcG9zc2libGUgcm91dGUgdGhhdCB2aXNpdHMgOCBwb2ludHMsIG51bWJlcmVkIGZyb20gMCB0byA3LCBleGFjdGx5
IG9uY2UgYW5kIGdvZXMgYmFjayB0byB0aGUgc3RhcnRpbmcgcG9pbnQ7IHRoZSBjb3N0IG9mIGdvaW5nIGZyb20gcG9pbnQgQSB0byBwb2ludCBCIGlzIGdpdmVuIGJ5IE
0oQSxCKS4gQ2FsY3VsYXRlIHRoZSB0b3RhbCBsZW5ndGggb2YgdGhlIHNob3J0ZXN0IHBvc3NpYmxlIHJvdXRlLiBSZXZlcnNlIHRoZSBiaXRzIGluIHRoZSAxNi1iaXQg
dW5zaWduZWQgaW50ZWdlciByZXByZXNlbnRpbmcgdGhlIHRvdGFsIGxlbmd0aCBvZiB0aGUgc2hvcnRlc3QgcG9zc2libGUgcm91dGUgKGUuZy4gbXNiIDwtPiBsc2IpLC
B0aGVuIGNvbnZlcnQgdGhlIGFmb3JlbWVudGlvbmVkIGxlbmd0aCB0byAxNi1iaXQgYmluYXJ5IEdyYXkgY29kZS4gUHJpbnQgdGhlIHJlc3VsdGluZyBudW1iZXIgYXMg
YSAxNi1jaGFyYWN0ZXIgbG9uZyBzdHJlYW0gb2YgMSdzIGFuZCAwJ3MsIG1zYiBmaXJzdC4gUHJpbnQgb25lIG5ld2xpbmUgY2hhcmFjdGVyLgoKCgpOb3cgdHJlYXQgdG
hlIFNIQS01MTIgaGFzaCBvZiB0aGUgaW5wdXQgc3RyaW5nIGFzIG9uZSA1MTItYml0IHVuc2lnbmVkIGludGVnZXIgYE4xJyBvZiB3aGljaCB0aGUgTVNCIGNvcnJlc3Bv
bmRzIHRvIHRoZSBmaXJzdCBieXRlIG9mIHRoZSBTSEEtNTEyIGhhc2ggKGkuZS4gaGFzaFswXSA9PSBOMSA+PiA1MDQpLiBSZXZlcnNlIHRoZSBiaXRzIGluIE4xIHRvIG
9idGFpbiBgTjInIChlLmcuIG1zYiA8LT4gbHNiKSwgdGhlbiBjYWxjdWxhdGUgdGhlIEhhbW1pbmcgZGlzdGFuY2UgYmV0d2VlbiBOMSBhbmQgTjIuIFByaW50IG91dCB0
aGUgZGlzdGFuY2UgYXMgYSBkZWNpbWFsIG51bWJlciwgdGhlbiBhIG5ld2xpbmUuCgoKCk5vdyB0YWtlIHRoZSB1bnNpZ25lZCBpbnRlZ2VyIHZhbHVlIG9mIHRoZSBsYX
N0IGJ5dGUgb2YgdGhlIFNIQS01MTIgaGFzaCBvZiB0aGUgaW5wdXQgc3RyaW5nLCBhZGQgNDA0IHRvIGl0IGFuZCBjYWxsIGl0IGBrJy4gTGV0IEYoeCkgYmUgYSBmdW5j
dGlvbiBkZWZpbmVkIGFzOgoKRigwKSA9IE4xICAoYXMgZGVmaW5lZCBhYm92ZSkKCiAgICAgICB7IEYobi0xKSAvIDIsICAgICBpZiBGKG4tMSkgaXMgZXZlbgpGKG4pID
0geyAKICAgICAgIHsgRihuLTEpICogMyArIDEsIG90aGVyd2lzZQoKUHJpbnQgRihrKSwgaW4gZGVjaW1hbCwgdGhlbiBvbmUgbmV3bGluZSBjaGFyYWN0ZXIuCgoKCgpU
aGUgZmluYWwgb3V0cHV0IG9mIHRoaXMgYWxnb3JpdGhtIHNob3VsZCBoYXZlIHRoZSBmb3JtYXQ6Cgo8Z3JheS1lbmNvZGVkIGJpbmFyeS1yZXZlcnNlZCAxNi1iaXQgbG
VuZ3RoIG9mIHNob3J0ZXN0IHJvdXRlPjxuZXdsaW5lPgo8aGFtbWluZyBkaXN0YW5jZSBiZXR3ZWVuIE4xIGFuZCBOMj48bmV3bGluZT4KPEYoayk+PG5ld2xpbmU+Cgo=

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 21:21

:GJS1M 67dcbdbce4a0b67c4b48e86a6ae29205a95e4b83024a9d947213d1231800e8d9
:87 e49af89cb2d30bb3f6871d301b5c0a79
:1277098146 1277169650

Now I wonder how long it will take /prog/riders to implement it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 21:40

>>32
as one 512-bit unsigned integer `N1' of which the MSB corresponds to the first byte
Couldn't you just have said to interpret it as a big-endian unsigned integer?

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 21:46

>>34
I could've referred to the other things by their real names too, but let's keep it obscure.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 21:53

>>35
OK. Sorry. We good?

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 21:57

:GJS1M 67dcbdbce4a0b67c4b48e86a6ae29205a95e4b83024a9d947213d1231800e8d9
:40 2dea4aeda93ce3a0d5217feb894ea328
:1277098146 1277171826

>>36
We sure are.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 22:00

Fuck, implementing >>32's shit in Javascript is a pain in the ass.

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 22:08

I'm having trouble with the third line (recommendation) of the signed post header. It's supposed to be a reference to the original posting of the signing algorithm, right? Why not include the post id as well the thread id? And why include the UNIX time of the signing at all?

Name: Anonymous 2010-06-21 22:17

>>39
I'm not sure if I quite understand it either. It's supposed to be part of the payload, right? So the signing program should automatically add that line to the message, and then authenticate the result? And I suppose that the UNIX time (together with the thread id) function as a form of salt?

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List