WinMX.com Fix PIE Patch 2.6 - Update

[JO ro0ker]

why is that then that you want people to allow flooders to connect? please do tell how much they are paying you...

Get a life and leave her alone

[JIM-921]

especially when you've used the .dll file to DDoS websites maliciously.

you used users winmx machines to perform your dirty deeds.

you're no longer a credible option for winmx users.

you blew it.

what did you gain besides an ego boost? nothing.

game over.

[Camille]

he used our machines to attack vladd ????

i have km's patch, i have been running it for a while just to see what happens, i still have no secondaries.

you blew it buster, PIE patch now being installed.

what a sack of shit to use others to do his dirty work.

i hope all who read what you did see you for what you are and damn soon.

it seems some leopards can never change their spots.



LOW f**k BLOW

[KM]

i notice jim has said several times the exact same thing with no evidence, or even accusation, simply talking like it is some fact that vladds web host closed his site down so it must be something to do with me, rather than being something that has happened nearly every day for the last week or so

indeed vladd himself has not even accused anybody of attacking his website, him stating that because vladds quota ran out again it must be my fault is no form of accusation, let alone a basis to make any conclusions

you read the page i wrote detailing how vladd abused all of those pie patch users to launch an attack against a website simply because he does not like it, you then come back and act as if it says something completely different

there is no question at all that winmxworld was attacked by users of the "pie" text file, and i have given the reasons why i concluded that it must be either vladd or someone else very close to him that is part of the pie team, a conclusion that vladd himself has agreed with, as it is undenyable

however i have yet to see any evidence that this website was attacked at all, let alone anything to indicate that i attacked it... the only outages i have seen on this website are due to vladds quotas running out again (which is a daily occurrence and hardly anything abnormal when using cheap web hosts that don't have the capacity to handle a small website...)

[Ome_Leo]

If this is true, this post is outdated and confirms my concerns about the use of KM's dll patch. So I hope it is not.

I have seen many discussions around and a lot of guessing what's going on. I will put another opinion to the discussion and not with the intention to make more confusion. I see the pie team in no other way than a group of dedicated people trying to hold the WinMx users group together and by doing that, a strong network.

The Pieteam is accused of making a Trojan to delete a dll patch with the next version of piepatch installer. looks ok to me, as we all know the pie patch and the dll path don't mix very well.

If I go on, the dll patch is to be called a Trojan too, deleting the piepatch lines from the hosts file, restoring it to default, for the very same reason.
looks ok to me.

Now I will explain my pro piepatch and contra dll patch
The piepatch shows me clear and in plain text what is going on, makes it possible to see what cache servers are included.

The dll patch however does not allow that and if I read well the latest version will be automatically upgraded when needed, in other words, it has a backdoor making it possible tho change the file without my knowledge.
Next to that, it has a built in IPfilter, which might be upgradable as well?
I would like to decide myself what to filter or not.

In both cases I have no control what is filtered on the server side, which means, if your IP is blocked by all caches, you cannot connect to the peer at all, unless you know the IP of an connected primary. which is what you request the cache server for.

This is the situation as it is now. We all use a P2P client of 2 years old and were in fact all looking forward to the new release to be expected around the end of this year. We know now we can forget about that new release.

So in the near future the development of a new client should be started and if possible with the same look and feel as WinMx, but maybe based on an entirely new P2P concept making the need of cache servers obsolete.

For the time being we will have to do with the current situation and IMHO it is a big waste of time to fight over the difference in the temporary solutions. Both are not perfect if you are honest.

Let the users decide which way to connect to the WinMx peer and have the problems solved by the builders of the patch.

If I'm wrong about the way the dll patch works, I'm sorry, but it is nowhere explained and not open source as the new network is supposed to be.

[KM]

firstly, i would encourage you to actually download the patch before commenting on all of these things you want it to do so you can pretend it does harm. It does not do any of those things.

The patch does not automatically update, otherwise why would there be old versions to download? seems pointless if they were able to automatically update

The patch does not edit any other files, although the first version did attempt to fix any messed up system files that had may have been modified without the users knowing what was going on, but in the end i decided that if someone is stupid enough to install the pie text file then they might as well live with the consequences, not my fault if they want to slow their system down with it...

the patch in its current form is extremely simple and very easy for anyone to see exactly what it does, about the only thing that cant be plainly seen by looking through the binary are the specifics of the blocklist update (which loads a text file) - if you must know it uses the wininet API, mainly because I was playing with that at the time and figured I might as well use it just because I can

The block list is plain for all to see and only contains confirmed flooders that are known to not be innocent users, not a single innocent user has yet reported being on that list and if anyone ever did then it would be seriously investigated, the list is not hidden and anyone can view it if you wish to - i would post the exact URL the file is loaded from here but that is not allowed as it is on a website that isn't completely dedicated to telling users to delete files with no regard to the consequences... sites that don't tell people to start deleting random files are banned from this forum and automatically censored

The only major differences between the 2 patches are:
1. my patch contains a blocklist, which is the reason that secondary users are able to connect, or did you not notice that it was taking several minutes for secondaries to connect before this block list started to become widely used? the sole purpose of this block list is so that primary users don't get all of their slots taken up by flooders, which was happening before and is a very serious problem - I don't like the idea of a block list like that, but it is the only thing keeping the network usable
2. my patch has no dependence on the peer caches staying the same, there is no need to keep updating the patch, the original patch works just as well as the latest version, as the only real changes have been tiny tweaks for small bug fixes - although the next update will feature the first really useful update (to actively protect the network from harm)

you'll also notice that the pie file already excludes one of my caches, and it has been stated that they are trying to find excuses to remove my other peer cache from it, this would lock you to using only their caches, as well as meaning slower connection times (which is a completely different issue...) this also means that the problem you mentioned of being blocked from the network is very real, if you were to depend solely on their peer caches then you would run a very high risk of being banned from the network for even looking at them in the wrong way. This is also one of the reasons they are trying to get as many users as possible to be completely dependent on them, as long as a large number of users are using alternate caches they can't ban you from the network...

I have already stated that my patch will always use whichever peer caches are online, and will never implement any form of blocking or filtering who can and can't connect to them, something their caches have done and something they keep talking about doing again... Users of my patch are also not only using my peer caches but all online peer caches, this is of course against the wishes of the pie fools who have stated several times that their caches are for users of their patch only and users shouldn't be able to use all online caches...

I have to ask you, how can you possibly support a group that refuses to allow any alternate patches, stating that users are only allowed to use their temporary solution and censoring any references to other solutions, and justify it by claiming to support users having choice? lol

and btw, my patch is not a temporary solution, it can sustain winmx indefinitely if required, no updates or changes are required or would ever be required... although as i said i will be updating it just to add some extra little features and make it even better, but it is far from a temporary solution... unlike a fixed text file that you have to keep updating as it is already out of date

[subhuman_bob]

you'll also notice that the pie file already excludes one of my caches, and it has been stated that they are trying to find excuses to remove my other peer cache from it, this would lock you to using only their caches

That's a complete load of bullshit. I refer you to this thread, where you were asked multiple times which of your caches you wanted included in the next PIE release and you never gave a straight answer. http://www.vladd44.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=6221
All along you've been crying about some big plot to exclude your caches. In reality you've gone out of your way to make it difficult for the PIE patches to include your caches.

[KM]

you'd almost think that an updated list of every peer cache that my patch uses isn't posted on a website, you'd almost think that they hadn't memorised the IP Addresses of my caches... they did know about my peer caches as they have both been included in previous versions, however by their own admission they removed them, the excuses vary between posts but the general theme of their argument is that it was down for 5 minutes so they excluded it from both versions and instead used a more stable one that is only offline about 75% of the time... lol

[DragonRider]

firstly, i would encourage you to actually download the patch before commenting on all of these things you want it to do so you can pretend it does harm. It does not do any of those things.

The patch does not automatically update, otherwise why would there be old versions to download? seems pointless if they were able to automatically update

The patch does not edit any other files, although the first version did attempt to fix any messed up system files that had may have been modified without the users knowing what was going on, but in the end i decided that if someone is stupid enough to install the pie text file then they might as well live with the consequences, not my fault if they want to slow their system down with it...

the patch in its current form is extremely simple and very easy for anyone to see exactly what it does, about the only thing that cant be plainly seen by looking through the binary are the specifics of the blocklist update (which loads a text file) - if you must know it uses the wininet API, mainly because I was playing with that at the time and figured I might as well use it just because I can

The block list is plain for all to see and only contains confirmed flooders that are known to not be innocent users, not a single innocent user has yet reported being on that list and if anyone ever did then it would be seriously investigated, the list is not hidden and anyone can view it if you wish to - i would post the exact URL the file is loaded from here but that is not allowed as it is on a website that isn't completely dedicated to telling users to delete files with no regard to the consequences... sites that don't tell people to start deleting random files are banned from this forum and automatically censored

The only major differences between the 2 patches are:
1. my patch contains a blocklist, which is the reason that secondary users are able to connect, or did you not notice that it was taking several minutes for secondaries to connect before this block list started to become widely used? the sole purpose of this block list is so that primary users don't get all of their slots taken up by flooders, which was happening before and is a very serious problem - I don't like the idea of a block list like that, but it is the only thing keeping the network usable
2. my patch has no dependence on the peer caches staying the same, there is no need to keep updating the patch, the original patch works just as well as the latest version, as the only real changes have been tiny tweaks for small bug fixes - although the next update will feature the first really useful update (to actively protect the network from harm)

you'll also notice that the pie file already excludes one of my caches, and it has been stated that they are trying to find excuses to remove my other peer cache from it, this would lock you to using only their caches, as well as meaning slower connection times (which is a completely different issue...) this also means that the problem you mentioned of being blocked from the network is very real, if you were to depend solely on their peer caches then you would run a very high risk of being banned from the network for even looking at them in the wrong way. This is also one of the reasons they are trying to get as many users as possible to be completely dependent on them, as long as a large number of users are using alternate caches they can't ban you from the network...

I have already stated that my patch will always use whichever peer caches are online, and will never implement any form of blocking or filtering who can and can't connect to them, something their caches have done and something they keep talking about doing again... Users of my patch are also not only using my peer caches but all online peer caches, this is of course against the wishes of the pie fools who have stated several times that their caches are for users of their patch only and users shouldn't be able to use all online caches...

I have to ask you, how can you possibly support a group that refuses to allow any alternate patches, stating that users are only allowed to use their temporary solution and censoring any references to other solutions, and justify it by claiming to support users having choice? lol

and btw, my patch is not a temporary solution, it can sustain winmx indefinitely if required, no updates or changes are required or would ever be required... although as i said i will be updating it just to add some extra little features and make it even better, but it is far from a temporary solution... unlike a fixed text file that you have to keep updating as it is already out of date

A very fine speech on the merits of your patch, KM. It was well thought out and clearly articulated...who did you steal it from? This should be a moment of dawning for anyone who believes that posts are being censored here. Km has been allowed to ramble along with no edits or having his post being removed. So when you look at his avatar "MXCensor" what you should reall be reading is "KMLies"...

The patch does not edit any other files, although the first version did attempt to fix any messed up system files that had may have been modified without the users knowing what was going on

hmmmm...not sure I like a patch that fixes things on my computer without me knowing what is going on. I think I'll go check my bank account and credit cards to see if anything else was fixed...after all I did try KM's patch when it first came out...

[JIM-921]

if users were connected MXpie encouraged them to stay connected regardless of the solution they chose.

now, it's an entirely different matter.

there's no excuse for using peoples computers and connections to commit a crime.

the .dll file is malicious and users need to delete it.

KM's credibility is shot.

Game Over

[Guest]

What's the difference between both? Can't i use both the PIE Patch and that ws2 dll?

.
Download PIE Patch 2.6 here

PIEpatch, Easy to use and simple to install. The easiest way to get WinMX working again.


If you installed the vladd44.com/mx/piepatch.php ws2_32.dll file

The Dll patch will negate the value of the PIEpatch. If you want to use the PIEpatch, you will need to uninstall ws2_32.dll.

[url=file:///c:/Program%20Files/WinMX/]C:\Program Files\WinMX[/url]. <-- Clicking will allow you to open the folder that WinMX defaults to,here you can verify whether you have the dll installed.

This is a matter of personal preference, however to take advantage of the latest PIEpatch you will need to uninstall the dll.



Thanks to Hollowlife for creating the automatic installer.

PIE Patch is updated to reflect new options in peer caches. Please update asap if you are using an older version.

Good Work all involved. Special thanks to Sabre and Ranma.

[JIM-921]

you can use whatever connects you to winmx.

however the .dll file has already been deployed in an attack against this website and who knows what other websites in the future.

i personally wouldn't want to have a file on my system that could systematically hijack my connection to do another DDoS attack on another site.

plain and simple, that's a crime.

the .dll file has no credibility now

Game Over

[MP33.2]

JIM-921

You constantly refer to the attack on the Vladd44 site and point the finger at KM as the one who carried it out.

However you do not own this site and cannot in no way make a conclusive condemnation towards any individual with absolute truth.

I have not seen Vladd post anything about this on the forum have you?

I refer you to the following post http://www.vladd44.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=5192

That is what Vladd does when someone attacks his website.
(I am not condemning the response)

Both you (JIM921) and DragonRider are carrying out a flaming campaign against KM and the dll. file - two users who in fact condemned such actions in previous weeks.

I use WinMX as a chat client only I take no sides on this issue - users currently connected to WinMX will not be put off by all the in-house fighting they will ride it out (hopefully it will stop) however I am sure new and old users who enter this site to try and get reconnected will be discouraged from doing so.

I wish everyone would just take a step back and think before they post sometimes – there has been more harm done than good lately.

[subhuman_bob]

What's the difference between both? Can't i use both the PIE Patch and that ws2 dll?

Some earlier versions did not co-exist very well, resulting in instability- typicly the dreaded Windows message that WinMX had to be shut down. I'm not sure if this is still the case or not, I have not personally run both concurrently recently.
However, both methods do the same thing- but in diffeent ways- which is to redirect WinMX from www.winmx.com to the existing peer caches. Once the first redirection occurs, no additional redirection will occur.
Before you ask, having both in place will not add redundancy to your system- thinking that having a second in place for "backup" won't work. Your compter doesn't function that way.

[JIM-921]

JIM-921

You constantly refer to the attack on the Vladd44 site and point the finger at KM as the one who carried it out.

However you do not own this site and cannot in no way make a conclusive condemnation towards any individual with absolute truth.

I have been at the heart of this matter since the crisis of frontcode pulling the plug in September.

I have logs and conversations in my possession that prove conclusive my statements.

I have also remained silent concerning most matters in this dire time for winmx.

One thing i won't do is stand by and watch as tens of thousands of winmx users are downloading a file that facilitates KM's ruthless schemes against them.

This is why i have chosen to become vocal, it's no longer a matter of choice of connection software, it's a matter of malicious intent.

[DragonRider]

I concur with Jim. Having learned that the .dll patch may contain malicious code there is no way that I would ever d/l it. Personally I don't have time to spend 1-3 years in a Federal Penitentary or thousands of dollars for legal defense for taking part in a DDoS that I didn't even know took place, which is exactly what would happen if the rumors about the patch are true. It makes no sense to use a patch which you know nothing about and may very well land you in jail. The code for making a computer a zombie is nothing new, it's even older than the poison Nushi that KM has used in the past.

[KM]

please do post these logs you claim to have, the only logs posted so far are extracts from my conversation with vladd where he says about closing down the website for a few hours to pretend it got attacked, and of course also the message he left me telling me how he was going to attack winmxworld

i think they are the only things that really matter but if you wish to further add to those facts then please feel free, continuing to say something happened because you said it did does not make you credible, indeed your refusal to back you your wild allegations says much more than any of the evidence against you.

perhaps i should post those log extracts again, as the last thead i did that in suddenly went all quiet

(19:33:09) KingMacro: i have a great avatar i want to put on your forum but can't because it is down, will you fix it already?
(19:33:11) KingMacro: lol
(19:33:24) Vladd44: i think i will leave it down for the day
(19:33:31) Vladd44: that would play better

(21:50:07) KingMacro: but i assume you are going to fix it some time soon, so fix the f**k... lol
(21:50:14) Vladd44: no, i am not
(21:50:21) Vladd44: i am going to let it sit a while
(21:50:51) KingMacro: lol, why?
(21:50:54) Vladd44: goes well after your post

you can have the full logs if you want to dispute the content - which you are probably not stupid enough to do, but i don't see much point in posting them as it is just a mixture of conversations that losely follow on spread out over several hours

although you might be dumb enough to dispute the content of the logs, as you do post stupid things like saying to use a patch that has been used to attack users because that way you can't be used to attack users, lmfao - it has been fully documented exactly how the users of the pie text file were exploited to launch an attack against winmxworld, yet you tell people to use it because there is no way for it to be used to attack a site?

[JIM-921]

yet another abridged for your convenience log edit.

the whole log reads differently.

as does the server log from the host of vladds site.

[KM]

i give up, on this thread alone you have been invited to give people these logs you keep saying support what you say, i give up, i will no longer request any evidence from you as you have made it clear you have none, i will simply consider your refusal to be a confession that those things do not exist and you have been telling blatant lies

and if you wish to claim that those quotes are edited then i would encourage you to speak to vladd first, he is after all the one who said it not you, you do not speak for vladd and you obviously have no knowledge of what vladd has been doing, if you do then you are a much better used car salesman (read "lier") than i gave you credit for...

btw, people will no doubt notice that over the last couple of days i have started using the word lier more and more when talking about the various people involved in the whole "pie" campaign, this is because to be completely honest i have given up trying to word it in any more polite way, they do not deserve that any more... you'll also note that my stating that they are lieing to everyone is something that has yet to be disputed

[subhuman_bob]

btw, people will no doubt notice that over the last couple of days i have started using the word lier more and more when talking about the various people involved in the whole "pie" campaign, this is because to be completely honest i have given up trying to word it in any more polite way, they do not deserve that any more... you'll also note that my stating that they are lieing to everyone is something that has yet to be disputed

If you look, you'll see the definition if "lier" as being:
"One who lies down; one who rests or remains, as in concealment."

As reported by http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lier

However, by the definition of that word I am unsure how one would by "lieing to everyone." There it is also mentioned that there are towns by that name in Norway and Belguim. Since it's not common to call someone a municipality, I'm presuming that you didn't mean the word in that sense. I do indeed tend to lie at times, to be completely honest I haven't attempted let alone mastered the art of sleeping while remaining upright.

If, on the other hand, you meant to call me a "liar" then I will dispute that claim. I have never intentionally misled anyone either here or in a WinMX chatroom. If I have provided false information, it was unintentional and believed by me to be true at that time and provided in good faith.

[Ranma½042]

you'd almost think that an updated list of every peer cache that my patch uses isn't posted on a website, you'd almost think that they hadn't memorised the IP Addresses of my caches... they did know about my peer caches as they have both been included in previous versions, however by their own admission they removed them, the excuses vary between posts but the general theme of their argument is that it was down for 5 minutes so they excluded it from both versions and instead used a more stable one that is only offline about 75% of the time... lol

What about updating your stats? No pie server has been offline last week (and i can't even remember if there has been a moment when all pie servers were offline).
Of course sometimes one of them gets offline to update the peercache software, but this is happening with much lower frequency than before and requires only a short downtime.

[KM]

to be honest a single server outage isn't something anyone would bother with, as everyone should be using at least 2 or 3 caches, however a cache that is not able to handle the small amounts of traffic generated by users starting up winmx should not be being posted about as a cache for everyone to use

the biggest concern really is the flooders, not in the traditional sense in filling the search results with crap (that is a problem, but not much of one) but with the reduced network size and the same number of them, unchecked they fill all primaries and make it almost impossible to connect, indeed pretty much the only thing keeping secondary users able to connect reasonably quickly is the fact that such a large number of primaries are blocking them.

as you are no doubt aware i strongly oppose any blocklist ideas (and have been very outspoken against such things as peerguardian etc) however the issue of secondaries not being able to connect became important enough that i was forced to do something about it, i have not however changed my views about block lists in general and i closely watch which IP Addresses are added to the list and question he evidence for every single one of them... which as you can imagine does piss off the 2 people who maintain that list...

...that is how much of an issue i consider the flooders to be, we need them eliminated from the network, this means every (or at least nearly every) primary blocking them, you'll note several older posts by me stating that wasn't going to happen, well we have a great opportunity now to make this happen before the opportunity passes, i however regret that the pie team refuse to acknowledge this obvious problem and do anything at all to help get rid of it.

[Ranma½042]

to be honest a single server outage isn't something anyone would bother with, as everyone should be using at least 2 or 3 caches, however a cache that is not able to handle the small amounts of traffic generated by users starting up winmx should not be being posted about as a cache for everyone to use

afaik pie's peercache are now rinnung fine

... the pie team refuse to acknowledge this obvious problem and do anything at all to help get rid of it.

didn't the pie team suggest using peerguardian?

[Just Concerned 4 "x]

{The Choice is clear}

Objectively, it seems WinmxWorld is technologically competent and has the ability to adapt, while Vladd44’s desire to take over the network is out of concern rather than power.

Each side has created the power to make the resurrection of WinMX work (while interestingly also creating the power to destroy it.) Working together will achieve this goal.

{Make it and keep sticking it to the man}

WinmxWorld,com Homepage. {Nea}

Vladd44.com Homepage. {Yea}

[rball]

{EDIT}
In reality, both sides want what is best for their users, and both want to see the WinMX PNP Network restored. But neither side has trust for the other. Vladd44’s position is WinmxWorld’s remedy is not technologically capable, while WinmxWorld.com feels Vladd44.com is simply trying to take over the network out of a lust for power.

Objectively, it seems WinmxWorld is technologically competent and has the ability to adapt, while Vladd44’s desire to take over the network is out of concern rather than power.

Each side has created the power to make the resurrection of WinMX work (while interestingly also creating the power to destroy it.) Working together will achieve this goal.