1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jan@uos.de>) id 1Qcghd-0000TY-BG
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:36:25 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from vm136.rz.uni-osnabrueck.de ([131.173.16.11]
helo=smtp-auth.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE)
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Qcghb-00006G-0D
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:36:25 +0000
Received: from msmtp-using-host (0xbcb2ab7c.ronqu1.dynamic.dsl.tele.dk
[188.178.171.124] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0)
by smtp-auth.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id
p61GaDsE022894
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO)
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 1 Jul 2011 18:36:15 +0200
From: jan@uos.de
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 18:35:58 +0200
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Message-ID: <20110701163558.GA7311@dax.lan.local>
References: <1309478838.3689.25.camel@Desktop666>
<20110701080042.GA657@ulyssis.org>
<BANLkTim-QWvtfL65mo3uW7ESiehKOmHjtw@mail.gmail.com>
<BANLkTi=DWUhGmoHcQB5EPZHF71JE71gcTg@mail.gmail.com>
<1309524016.2541.0.camel@Desktop666>
<BANLkTimobc7471uBMLBecYT3vz0GO6RLzQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimobc7471uBMLBecYT3vz0GO6RLzQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-PMX-Version: 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379,
Antispam-Data: 2011.7.1.162115 (Univ. Osnabrueck)
X-PMX-Spam: Gauge=X, Probability=10%, Report=
TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.5, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_1600_1699 0,
BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0,
BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, FROM_MISSING 0, __ANY_URI 0,
__BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CD 0,
__CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0,
__HAS_MSGID 0, __INT_PROD_COMP 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0,
__MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0,
__TO_NO_NAME 0, __URI_NO_MAILTO 0, __URI_NO_WWW 0, __URI_NS ,
__USER_AGENT 0
X-PMX-Spam-Level: X
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by
smtp-auth.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE id p61GaDsE022894
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.4 TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT To: misformatted + percentage
-0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1Qcghb-00006G-0D
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.3.24
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:36:25 -0000
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 11:06:56AM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> > Not sure about OS differentiation, seems...wrong? =A0Maybe disabled b=
y
> > default on bitcoind but on by default on bitcoin?
>=20
> OK. I mis-remembered the poll:
> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=3D4392.0
>=20
> On by default 8 (20%)
> Off by default 22 (55%)
> On by default in the GUI, off by default in bitcoind 10 (25%)
I just voted as well and now - with some extra votes in the meantime -
it's 9 / 22 / 13. So exactly 50/50 between off (22) and some form of on
(9 + 13).
I'm in favor of turning it on by default in the GUI and leaving it off
in bitcoind.
I don't like UPnP much, I find it exemplifies exactly what is wrong with
computer security today: Convenience trumps security almost every time.
BUT: I don't think this is the moment to fight UPnP. It's the standard
mechanism in use today to let a computer behind a NAT accept incoming
connections. The user has already made the decision in regards to
convenience over security. By enabling UPnP (or by buying a product that
does this automatically) they are saying: I want it to "just work"
instead of having fine-grained but more complicated control.
Bitcoin is a P2P application and as such should use this
mechanism. I think it's pretty clear that participating in a P2P network
requires one to receive messages from other peers. At least no one seems
to be concerned that Bitcoin (by default!) listens on port 8333. So I
think it's only logical to extend that to work behind NATs as well.
Cheers!
Jan
|
