mreithub

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About mreithub

  • Rank
    New User
  1. Hi all of you, first of all thank you for all the responses so far (especially for the ones ) When I posted that message I already suspected that some of you might not be all that happy about what I am doing... I've been thinking a lot about it, but I think I've done the right thing. And what I've done so far was basically a mix of thinking how I'd do it myself, running tcpdump+writing a script that makes it easier to see patterns in the transmitted packets and a little research in "[uses] bittorrent technology", so it hasn't been that difficult (and would've been done anyway sooner or later
  2. I've been spending some time recently trying to figure out some of the details of BitTorrent Sync's network protocol. I really liked the idea of a p2p alternative to other cloud storage providers like dropbox etc. So I tried to find out the technical details behind the project. The official Technology page was a little sparse in that regard so I figured I'd have to dig in myself. I managed to start this as a university project (at the Vienna University of Technoligy in Austria). The goals are: Analyze the network protocol (and documenting it as far as possible) Discuss possible security issue
  3. @GreatMarko Yeah, I know that, but I'm thinking of users who want to sync their data on the go with changing IPs. I think of my proposal to be just the icing on the cake of privacy btsync provides. And it wouldn't make life harder for those users who wouldn't use this feature.
  4. Hi, I've been thinking a lot lately about whether it would be possible/useful to remove (or better: to give users an alternative to) the one centralized infrastructure btsync uses: the tracker. Currently, the app registers its shares (and asks for peers) at r.rsyncapp.com and/or t.rsyncapp.com, but what if we introduced an (optional) URL scheme for the secrets? SECRET btsync://SECRET btsync://tracker-server/SECRET The first one for compatibility (and simplicity) and uses the official trackers The second one is basically just like the first one but with a URL schema The third one might use
  5. btsync might have a problem locating its web interface files (just guessing, I get that error when entering a wrong URL to my browser, like: http://localhost:8888/abc ) Your browser goes to http://localhost:8888/gui/ right?
  6. Indexing the big files might just take a little while. I don't know what btsync indexes exactly, but I think it's generating some sort of checksum of chunks of the file (like bittorrent does...)). So it has to read the whole 175GB of VM image files which might take quite some time. Btw.: I don't quite know whether btsync is the best software for your purpose: If VirtualBox is running, it writes to the virtual disk quite frequently, with each of the writes causing the file system watcher to fire and btsync to checking the file (and trying to transmit the changes). A better idea might be to setu
  7. From what I've read in other posts it seems like you don't want to open-source the btsync app itself. But are there plans to provide a protocol specification (such that devs could write their own apps that communicate with the official clients)? This would enable an ecosystem to grow around your official app like it happened with bittorrent.