OSDev.org

Hey everyone,
I just wanted to give everyone an update on the progress of the D.i.N.S. OS as it has been quite some time since I last posted an update regarding v1.07. With this new release I have fixed the two major issues I was having:
1: I wasn't getting full speed out of the cards, thus creating overhead.
2: After an arbitrary amount of time, either one of the cards would halt.

so with those two fixed, I now have speed (once again) which shows no network overhead by both just using the network with it, and using some network analysers.

at the moment I'm working on the administration interface (web interface) for remotely managing the OS and to tweak things such as the new fully working bi-directional firewall and application firewall.

The p2p/torrent packet blocking is still going well, I've been adding tons of deffinitions using some packet analysers on popular clients.

all-in-all, I have a base prototype which runs at full speed, with basic p2p/torrent filterring, and a bi-directional firewall. With that said, I'm having trouble finding good resources for research/tech funding in this state as in the past, technology was not its strong point nor focus. I've come to the reality, that I may have to take my project to either
A: outside venture capitalism or
B: find some other funding through maybe another university?

I've extremely new to the entreprenuership world and feel kind of lost. If you can think of any business or such that I could talk to about this, or any ideas in general please post.

Thanks,
Josh

p2p blocking is a rather heated debate these days, net neutrality and all, as such, I don't think you'll be able to successfully market it.

And there are after all, more time tested and solid firewall solutions, so ask yourself this question, "Why would any company trust their network security with my product".

I wouldn't let you go within 5 miles of my network, but that's just me...

this isn't an enforced set of filters and such. They can all be 'dialed-down' or completely turned off if necessary. Some admins want to use their 'already tested' firewall, so they just turn mine off. or if they perfer to have torrents available, they can either open the tracker nodes, or they can completely turn off the filterring once again.

And don't say that it wont become successful due to its nature, as there are similar products (barracudda, cisco, etc...) that are very sucessful. And why not have my product installed and stop the employees from downloading p2p during work. that seems like a no-brainer, it cuts down on network bandwidth consumption, keeps the employee in line, and keeps the company away from the liability associated with illegal p2p downloading.

Why should other companies use my product instead of existing ones?

If you can't come up with much, you need to work on your product more and come up with a really good feature that no one else has.

-JL

piranha wrote:Why should other companies use my product instead of existing ones?

If you can't come up with much, you need to work on your product more and come up with a really good feature that no one else has.

-JL

I agree, I'm not marketing it just yet lol. I'm looking for funding for r&d. I agree, my half-baked OS is not ready for shelves anywhere, that's not what im trying to do (yet).

Also,
Baraccuda = firewall/web filter. not p2p or torrent filterring, also, provides a decent amount of network overhead as it is running bulky apps on a windows backbone.
Cisco = firewall (PIX), web filter, p2p filter...ish.

all the other ones I have stumbled accross with a few exceptions im sure, are all application based, and worse, client based (filter software on every computer).

Mine provides minimal to nonexistant network overhead, filters p2p AND bittorrents, and provides a customisable firewall. but once again, in no way am i saying it is ready for the tech shelves. Also, to retort a previous comment, there are already more than a handful of network admins that have approached me about the idea and are awaiting its arrival as they want to use it for the filterring to cut down on their employees slacking, and they HAVE seen a demo of it in action. so dont say NO ONE will buy it EVER because it wasnt produced by some extremely large company. Also don't forget, all large businesses started small and usually from a half baked prototype. all you are doing is fueling the fire.

Brynet-Inc wrote:p2p blocking is a rather heated debate these days, net neutrality and all, as such, I don't think you'll be able to successfully market it.

you are talking about ISPs, he is talking about business/corporate environments. completely different

Brynet-Inc wrote:And there are after all, more time tested and solid firewall solutions, so ask yourself this question, "Why would any company trust their network security with my product".

It is not just a firewall, it does p2p/torrents as well which things like iptables/ipchains/pf whatever can't do without protocol extensions that don't exist yet as far as I know

I think its a great idea and should go well, just keep banging on them doors and keep adding more to it and you will succeed.

same, im really interested in the work your doing, i find it inspiring

good luck with it, i hope its a success

I have no actual working experience in this area, but it would seem to me that if you wanted someone to fund you for r&d, you better be researching and implementing the newest and latest, along with ventures of your own creation. P2P filtering and such is all fine and dandy, but that's not too impressive when you've got experimental kernels like Singularity and friends breaking new ground. (Please don't start an off topic discussion about Singularity. It's just an example.)

Alboin wrote:I have no actual working experience in this area, but it would seem to me that if you wanted someone to fund you for r&d, you better be researching and implementing the newest and latest, along with ventures of your own creation. P2P filtering and such is all fine and dandy, but that's not too impressive when you've got experimental kernels like Singularity and friends breaking new ground. (Please don't start an off topic discussion about Singularity. It's just an example.)

Is this not an experimental design? One which touches upon the controversy of net neutrality (even though it is geared towards businesses and not full ISPs), having the ability to filter incredibly large amounts of data efficiently and with little to no overhead, torrent tracker analysis (used to allow or disallow certain torrents through the system), and having the OS administered through a web interface?

which part wasn't at least somewhat unique?

It may not be using the .net framework as its backbone or even using some obscure language to construct it, but is that really the goal you think I am trying to accomplish? also not trying to break topic and go towards a singularity argument.

btw, thank you for the previous replys guys.

Here is why coder like 01000101, plus others on this forum will be in big demand.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/26 ... interview/

These are the sort of problem thats are going to hit our OS and network in the coming year's.
As more and more codes do not know what's going on under all those layers.
People that do, will be in more and more demand and Co that specialise in the more low level stuff will be in big demand.

haha that's a pretty awesome rootkit implementation, deffinately could prove to be extremely dangerous once later fully developed. I find it odd that the AV vendors don't reply with an official response to such an obviously real threat.

Article Dex Posted wrote:What is your suggestion to fight bootkits?
Nitin & Vipin: Software only protections are not enough to protect from bootkits. The only protection available is from hardware (Trusted Platform Module).

Microsoft can just raise the barrier for bootkits by changing algorithms, but there can be no real protection from bootkits using only software methods. Use Secure Boot (TPM).

What kind of solution is that? trusted computing chips? They seem quite willing to give up the ability to use alternative/hobby operating systems.

Brynet-Inc wrote:

Article Dex Posted wrote:What is your suggestion to fight bootkits?
Nitin & Vipin: Software only protections are not enough to protect from bootkits. The only protection available is from hardware (Trusted Platform Module).

Microsoft can just raise the barrier for bootkits by changing algorithms, but there can be no real protection from bootkits using only software methods. Use Secure Boot (TPM).

What kind of solution is that? trusted computing chips? They seem quite willing to give up the ability to use alternative/hobby operating systems.

Trusted Computing isn't even an answer. The fact is that there is no answer, and that any method of protection that is dreamed up will only be circumvented anyway. In the mean time, all you're doing is giving the government and industry more and more control over your computer. It's all ridiculous.

But then again, we're off topic.

Alboin wrote: But then again, we're off topic.

just weeeeee bit .
but it is an interesting topic none-the-less.