MaidSafe Dev Update - 7th June 2016

I love the idea of this product, and you are all working very hard on it. But it sounds like there are far too many problems to be close to an MVP. Some clarity regarding the timeline would be appreciated.

2 Likes

It isn’t a question of “problems”, because, as I understand it, each goal is being reached in an orderly manner.

The project’s style is evidently one of doing each major part very well, making it efficient, before moving on to the next. That’s cool, as long as we know that’s how things are being done.

A clear lower and upper bound on how long each stage will take (e.g., “six to twelve months”) would help us impatient types, but even a clear statement that that isn’t possible would be a welcome crumb to those of us starving for any news of the final goal.

If it was up to me I would put a much less efficient but feature-complete SAFEnet out there (pre-pre-alpha) and then upgrade it. But I don’t know how to do that, so it is for others to make that choice.

1 Like

We are a small team and all such RFC’s are welcome for sure. I agree with the premise of backwards compatibility problems leading to vulnerabilities.

Alpha → Beta there has to be a security review and this is where many patches and similar options will be included and documented properly. There are answers and we have simulations nd scripts to simulate many attacks. We also have answers for all the attacks we are aware of, but almost no time to fully and publically document them all yet. There is an attacks section in the documentation (which is again being updated).

Docs are a real issue as we are iterating fast through tests. Code docs are OK as they are auto generated on PR’s etc. but overall docs are in transition once again.

Not putting this off by any means, it is important, but resources are too stretched right now, we will resource the security audits properly during the audits. All help appreciated though.

8 Likes

Its like Led Zeppelin 1 is about to be released. Its like 1969!

1 Like

I believe you’re referring to my conversation with @janitor:

If you route through random relay nodes that are owned by LE to connect to NAE Managers owned by LE and request a chunk tagged by LE from a Vault that is run by LE, it follows that you are participating in a network that is completely operated by LE.

A successful attack on Freenet - #7 by smacz

1 Like

I don’t think this is a good idea any more than requiring encryption via the ffi layer or any other IPC layer. It really isn’t protecting much on the local system because if you can see the traffic you also have the ability to replace or hot patch the launcher process.

Edit: just saw Krishna’s reply and I agree with all of it. I saw your reply and agree as well, remoting should be outside the core product.

1 Like

Are there plans to remove the b64 encoding too ? This part I really did not understand the necessity.

Yes for sure, we are removing the base64 encoding too. For the entire list of the changes you can read the RFC

5 Likes

I tried to compile the async branch of safe_vault and it fails, and I conclude that we won’t see testnet 4 until some time after the next weekly dev update.

3 Likes

That would be extremely disappointing. Just look how people here hoped for it to be released last tuesday.

Yup.
If he is right, I’d be expecting another dump.

Would be nice for us believers to buy additional MAID at a great price :slight_smile:
High-tech engines take time to build. Once working properly everyone realises they need them. Not so much prior that.

10 Likes

I wasn’t encouraging speculator trolls, just neutrally reporting facts. Only a total idiot would sell because the testnet were delayed. Dear trolls: please engage in pastimes that would make the world better place, such as playing soccer on the freeway… while drunk…

EDIT: I was asked to “tone this down” because a troll complained. :slight_smile:

11 Likes

I didn’t actually expect it to compile, because if it were compiling then they would surely have merged it with the master branch. But the fact that it doesn’t, means we have to wait until it is debugged.

1 Like

Unless … There was a much bigger change in other branches of several repo’s that also meant we had to get off ccrates.io and use github repo’s till we get some upstream parts merged :smiley:

25 Likes

They’re here…

9 Likes

No more PR’s in Routing and only 2 in Crust. One might think that this week we’ll see… :grinning:.

7 Likes