p2psp team mailing list archive

[Juan Álvaro Muñoz Naranjo <juanalvaro83@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the info Ilshat!

After seeing your exps: the message you're signing is 13312 bytes long,
i.e. 13 KB. However our chunks are 1KB long. Can you repeat the exps with
1KB message? I guess the new message could be "a"*1024 right? (check with
the len() function). The length of the message affects the time taken by
the hash function. The signature itself should take the same time, since
we're doing it to a 256 bits input.

Also: when you say, for example, "key.sign x10 times: 0.00385499000549s"
then it means that 0.00385499000549s is the time taken in doing 10
signatures, right? Then the time for a single signature would be
0.00385499000549s/10 = 0.0003s That seems too small... What setup are you
using? I've run your test in my own machine and I get results one order of
magnitude higer. However I'm in an out-of-the-box Windows 8.1 (I just
bought a new machine, didn't have time yet to install Linux :D) and it
looks like the Python runtime is sooooo slow here. I'm using Python 2.7 by
the way.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1842798/python-performance-on-windows
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10150881/why-is-python-so-much-slower-on-windows

Here are my results:

Python 2.7.7 (default, Jun  1 2014, 14:21:57) [MSC v.1500 64 bit (AMD64)]
on win32
Type "copyright", "credits" or "license()" for more information.
>>> ================================ RESTART
================================
>>>
key.sign x10 times: 0.0210001468658s
key.verify x10 times: 0.0209999084473s
>>> ================================ RESTART
================================
>>>
key.sign x100 times: 0.246000051498s
key.verify x100 times: 0.230000019073s
>>> ================================ RESTART
================================
>>>
key.sign x1000 times: 2.27099990845s
key.verify x1000 times: 2.10100007057s
>>>

Juan

2015-06-23 9:11 GMT+02:00 Ilshat Shakirov <im.shakirov@xxxxxxxxx>:

> Hello,
>
> here is exact results for pycrypto:
>
> key.sign x10 times: 0.00385499000549s
>> key.verify x10 times: 0.00309109687805s
>>
>> key.sign x100 times: 0.0352149009705s
>> key.verify x100 times: 0.0317900180817s
>>
>> key.sign x1000 times: 0.332525968552s
>> key.verify x1000 times: 0.326780080795s
>
>
> Also, I've updated post.
>
> Thanks!
>
> 2015-06-23 0:34 GMT+05:00 Juan Álvaro Muñoz Naranjo <
> juanalvaro83@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> Hi Ilshat,
>>
>> great job during last week.
>>
>> Regarding the signature benchmarks it is clear that DSA is the preferable
>> option. However, the plot does not allow to appreciate the exact result in
>> seconds for DSA. Can you just post the exact numbers? We need to check if
>> DSA's is enough for signing and verifying a stream of chunks.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Juan
>>
>>
>> 2015-06-22 20:58 GMT+02:00 Vicente Gonzalez <
>> vicente.gonzalez.ruiz@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>>> Have you check that the VLC is serving the video well? (Please, connect
>>> to http://localhost:8080 with Firefox or with VLC when you detect that
>>> the problem happens).
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:54 PM Ilshat Shakirov <im.shakirov@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Not really, I just open many tabs in mac terminal (instead of using
>>>> xterm);
>>>> Order of commands is the same.
>>>>
>>>> 2015-06-23 0:50 GMT+06:00 Vicente Gonzalez <
>>>> vicente.gonzalez.ruiz@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ilshat,
>>>>>
>>>>> are you using the commands I can see in your blog?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Vi.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 9:59 PM Ilshat Shakirov <im.shakirov@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is new blogpost:
>>>>>> http://shakirov-dev.blogspot.ru/2015/06/the-third-week.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I want you to test my code please. There is strange errors
>>>>>> sometimes. After monitor is connected, it doesnt receive new chunks from
>>>>>> splitter. And after the trusted peer is connected to team, monitor exclude
>>>>>> it from team for 129 losses. It occurs sometimes, and I can't understand
>>>>>> why it's happening.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2015-06-20 5:05 GMT+05:00 Juan Álvaro Muñoz Naranjo <
>>>>>> juanalvaro83@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FYI:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://torrentfreak.com/popular-torrents-being-sabotaged-by-ipv6-peer-flood-150619/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 18 juin 2015 19:41:12 CEST, Ilshat Shakirov <
>>>>>>> im.shakirov@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry for the delay in the response.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -On replacing CRC32 for SHA-256. ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, thanks for the explanation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Overriding sendto() function ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks =)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Packet verification frequency (the 255 problem).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok, I will do it as you described.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Malicious peers sending packets even after expelled. ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will return to this task after implementing the first steps in
>>>>>>>> STrPe-DS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regarding testing crypto-libs:
>>>>>>>> I have performed that tests, here is results:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> MacBookPro-Ilya-Shakirov:crypto-test i.shakirov$ ./test-ecdsa.py
>>>>>>>>> key.sign x100 times: 2.76373291016s
>>>>>>>>> key.verify x100 times: 5.61430811882s
>>>>>>>>> MacBookPro-Ilya-Shakirov:crypto-test i.shakirov$
>>>>>>>>> ./test-pycrypto.py
>>>>>>>>> key.sign x100 times: 0.0404751300812s
>>>>>>>>> key.verify x100 times: 0.038027048111s
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My laptop config is i7 2.9GHz; 8Gb RAM;
>>>>>>>> Source of this synth-tests can be found here:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ishakirov/p2psp/commit/d833589ffc5a9a923123c56a74bc0bba2a79c97a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that pycrypto lib is suitable for our needs in speed. So Im
>>>>>>>> planning to use it in STrPe-DS implementation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PS. Sorry for 3rd week blogpost, but I think there is too small
>>>>>>>> results to write blogpost. But 4th week blogspot will be. =)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2015-06-15 11:19 GMT+05:00 Vicente Gonzalez <
>>>>>>>> vicente.gonzalez.ruiz@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi everybody!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just a little remark to this long but insightful message (thanks
>>>>>>>>> Juan Alvaro).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> First, yes, using DS should be the definitive solution, but,
>>>>>>>>> regarding this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 9:04 PM Juan Álvaro Muñoz Naranjo <
>>>>>>>>> juanalvaro83@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  all peers behind the same public IP (NAT scenario) will be banned
>>>>>>>>>> if one of them is malicious
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It the EMS set of rules is implemented, more than one peer can be
>>>>>>>>> in the same private network and all are different for the splitter.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Vi.
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Vicente González Ruiz
>>>>>>>>> Depto de Informática
>>>>>>>>> Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería
>>>>>>>>> Universidad de Almería
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Carretera Sacramento S/N
>>>>>>>>> 04120, La Cañada de San Urbano
>>>>>>>>> Almería, España
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> e-mail: vruiz@xxxxxx
>>>>>>>>> http://www.ual.es/~vruiz
>>>>>>>>> tel: +34 950 015711
>>>>>>>>> fax: +34 950 015486
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~p2psp
>>>>>>>>> Post to     : p2psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~p2psp
>>>>>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Enviado desde mi teléfono con K-9 Mail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>> Vicente González Ruiz
>>>>> Depto de Informática
>>>>> Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería
>>>>> Universidad de Almería
>>>>>
>>>>> Carretera Sacramento S/N
>>>>> 04120, La Cañada de San Urbano
>>>>> Almería, España
>>>>>
>>>>> e-mail: vruiz@xxxxxx
>>>>> http://www.ual.es/~vruiz
>>>>> tel: +34 950 015711
>>>>> fax: +34 950 015486
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> --
>>> Vicente González Ruiz
>>> Depto de Informática
>>> Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería
>>> Universidad de Almería
>>>
>>> Carretera Sacramento S/N
>>> 04120, La Cañada de San Urbano
>>> Almería, España
>>>
>>> e-mail: vruiz@xxxxxx
>>> http://www.ual.es/~vruiz
>>> tel: +34 950 015711
>>> fax: +34 950 015486
>>>
>>
>>
>