mfaktc: a CUDA program for Mersenne prefactoring - Page 82

Christenson · 2011-05-08, 18:52

This is the sort of vision Christenson was looking for. Only problem I see with it is that it will vary with "SievePrimes", which controls the quality of the process to eliminate non-primes from consideration by the GPU, so the values of that and any changes will need to be reported. I don't see this as hard to generate from the mfaktc side, but getting mfaktc to duplicate a sieveprimes pattern is beyond the project scope at the moment. [Of course, this also ignores that the function is *ALWAYS* hard to compute, so we could release it to the public anyway]

Prime95 · 2011-05-08, 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsall

Just putting out an idea which might eliminate the need for the "security code" to be released to the public, and thus allow the code in mfaktc which communicates with PrimeNet to be GPLed...

I don't want to devote much in the way of resources to solve a problem that doesn't exist at the moment. The "security code" you refer to in results.txt is more of a checksum than a security code. It is only used in the manual results form. There is a different security mechanism associated with http traffic.

I'm sure we can come up with something for licensing.

@TheJudger: If I do incorporate parts of mfaktc in a future release (and I'm not opposed) then I'm sure we can work out the license issues.

@Christenson: You can use primenet.c/h in GPL'ed code but without the security code. The downside to this is minimal (or can be made minimal). The server can be tweaked to accept non-security requests from mfaktc. The downside is that if someone builds a malicious mfaktc-clone, the server has no way to differentiate between the two - my only option would be to ignore requests from both the good mfaktc and the malicious one. If you want to build a mfaktc with our minimal security-through-secrecy scheme, then GPL won't work.

ixfd64 · 2011-05-09, 01:43

George, would you be willing to release the checksum-generating code to trusted developers, provided that they don't make it public?

Christenson · 2011-05-09, 01:51

#$@!#%%^! "The token has expired, reload the window".

Gentlemen, I am half pragmatist and half idealist. I expect to crib public parts of prime95 code into mfaktc, especially, but not limited to, primenet.c/h in the first round. This will have exactly the same security problems as the current, manually submitted data from mfaktc. I'll turn the result over to the Oliver and George and let them figure out what the license is.

A future round can include security, which we can ideally make public by having mfaktc calculate something which is relatively easy if the actual trial factoring is done, but otherwise reasonably painful. I think the step is worthwhile, in that otherwise detecting cheating will be expensive. Remember, odds are, M(Xyzzy) has no factor from 2^69 to 2^72 for all reasonable Xyzzy.

TheJudger · 2011-05-09, 09:07

Hello George,

I think I got your idea approach.

I've thought about a opensource (GPL) version of mfaktc which can interact with the primenet server using some functions from mprime (primenet.[ch]) without the security module.
Your approach is having a non-GPL version of mfaktc (binary distribution only) with the security code in it, right?

If this is the case from my point of view:

I'll continue to develop mfaktc without primenet interaction under GPL
we can workout a binary distribution with the security code which is not GPL

As I'm the only copyright holder of mfaktc I think I can easily release it with other licenses, too.

Oliver

nucleon · 2011-05-09, 10:25

If I can jump in on the mfaktc v prime95 discussion...

I have a feeling you guys are making it harder than it needs to be and at the same time developing a low-scalability solution. I think there doesn't need to be an 'all-encompassing license'.

How about another idea...

Prime95 has an 'add-ons' menu. Where prime95 launches additional executables, but fills out the worktodo.txt file, and submits results from the result.txt file.

So for example, one clicks Advanced -> add-ons, this opens a screen with a list of current add-ons, with add & edit buttons. When you add an add-on, you specify type of add-on (TF, LL, ECM, P-1 etc...) path where everything is, then exe (& exe command line options), worktodo, and results filenames. One could also specify affinity and priority options.

Prime95 then once/day checks the results file and worktodo files and processes them accordingly.

This might need a little fleshing out, but this allows GPU code to be maintained and distributed completely separately. Also allows other modules to be developed completely independently (maybe a future OpenCL exe? or even wishful thinking - P-1 CUDA code). The only requirement is that the add-ons conform to existing results/worktodo formats.

This would also free up Mr Prime95's time. This would only need to be done once. Instead of every time someone thinks their code is worthwhile to add.

License and submission details can be completely isolated from public.

I think this is more scalable solution.

-- Craig

Christenson · 2011-05-09, 10:45

Craig's suggestion has merit, but, right now, I am simply going to get my feet wet with adding P95 code to mfaktc. Long-term, I am still concerned with coming up with some kind of residue that makes calculating an undetectable cheat a little harder than actually doing the work.

Prime95 · 2011-05-09, 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJudger

I think I got your idea approach.

I've thought about a opensource (GPL) version of mfaktc which can interact with the primenet server using some functions from mprime (primenet.[ch]) without the security module.
Your approach is having a non-GPL version of mfaktc (binary distribution only) with the security code in it, right?

You understand perfectly!

drh · 2011-05-09, 18:44

Looks like I messed up ... I uploaded some results, but apparently my session had timed out, so the credit went to Anonymous. In looking at the exponents assigned to me, they are all still there. Is there a way to move the credits or do I just need to unreserve the exponents so they are available for P-1?

Thanks ...

xilman · 2011-05-09, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by drh

Looks like I messed up ... I uploaded some results, but apparently my session had timed out, so the credit went to Anonymous. In looking at the exponents assigned to me, they are all still there. Is there a way to move the credits or do I just need to unreserve the exponents so they are available for P-1?

Thanks ...

I did the same.

Just log in and then resubmit your results. You will get messages to the effect that the results are not needed but you will get the credit.

Paul

drh · 2011-05-09, 18:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by xilman

I did the same.

Just log in and then resubmit your results. You will get messages to the effect that the results are not needed but you will get the credit.

Paul

Thanks, will do this evening.

Doug

2011-05-09, 01:51	#895
Christenson Dec 2010 Monticello 5×359 Posts	#$@!#%%^! "The token has expired, reload the window". Gentlemen, I am half pragmatist and half idealist. I expect to crib public parts of prime95 code into mfaktc, especially, but not limited to, primenet.c/h in the first round. This will have exactly the same security problems as the current, manually submitted data from mfaktc. I'll turn the result over to the Oliver and George and let them figure out what the license is. A future round can include security, which we can ideally make public by having mfaktc calculate something which is relatively easy if the actual trial factoring is done, but otherwise reasonably painful. I think the step is worthwhile, in that otherwise detecting cheating will be expensive. Remember, odds are, M(Xyzzy) has no factor from 2^69 to 2^72 for all reasonable Xyzzy. Last fiddled with by Christenson on 2011-05-09 at 01:52

2011-05-09, 09:07	#896
TheJudger "Oliver" Mar 2005 Germany 10001010111₂ Posts	Hello George, I think I got your idea approach. I've thought about a opensource (GPL) version of mfaktc which can interact with the primenet server using some functions from mprime (primenet.[ch]) without the security module. Your approach is having a non-GPL version of mfaktc (binary distribution only) with the security code in it, right? If this is the case from my point of view: I'll continue to develop mfaktc without primenet interaction under GPL we can workout a binary distribution with the security code which is not GPL As I'm the only copyright holder of mfaktc I think I can easily release it with other licenses, too. Oliver

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
mfakto: an OpenCL program for Mersenne prefactoring	Bdot	GPU Computing	1676	2021-06-30 21:23
The P-1 factoring CUDA program	firejuggler	GPU Computing	753	2020-12-12 18:07
gr-mfaktc: a CUDA program for generalized repunits prefactoring	MrRepunit	GPU Computing	32	2020-11-11 19:56
mfaktc 0.21 - CUDA runtime wrong	keisentraut	Software	2	2020-08-18 07:03
World's second-dumbest CUDA program	fivemack	Programming	112	2015-02-12 22:51

2011-05-08, 18:52	#892
Christenson Dec 2010 Monticello 5×359 Posts	This is the sort of vision Christenson was looking for. Only problem I see with it is that it will vary with "SievePrimes", which controls the quality of the process to eliminate non-primes from consideration by the GPU, so the values of that and any changes will need to be reported. I don't see this as hard to generate from the mfaktc side, but getting mfaktc to duplicate a sieveprimes pattern is beyond the project scope at the moment. [Of course, this also ignores that the function is ALWAYS hard to compute, so we could release it to the public anyway]

2011-05-09, 01:43	#894
ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter "Danny" Dec 2002 California 100101011110₂ Posts	George, would you be willing to release the checksum-generating code to trusted developers, provided that they don't make it public?

2011-05-09, 10:25	#897
nucleon Mar 2003 Melbourne 1000000011₂ Posts	If I can jump in on the mfaktc v prime95 discussion... I have a feeling you guys are making it harder than it needs to be and at the same time developing a low-scalability solution. I think there doesn't need to be an 'all-encompassing license'. How about another idea... Prime95 has an 'add-ons' menu. Where prime95 launches additional executables, but fills out the worktodo.txt file, and submits results from the result.txt file. So for example, one clicks Advanced -> add-ons, this opens a screen with a list of current add-ons, with add & edit buttons. When you add an add-on, you specify type of add-on (TF, LL, ECM, P-1 etc...) path where everything is, then exe (& exe command line options), worktodo, and results filenames. One could also specify affinity and priority options. Prime95 then once/day checks the results file and worktodo files and processes them accordingly. This might need a little fleshing out, but this allows GPU code to be maintained and distributed completely separately. Also allows other modules to be developed completely independently (maybe a future OpenCL exe? or even wishful thinking - P-1 CUDA code). The only requirement is that the add-ons conform to existing results/worktodo formats. This would also free up Mr Prime95's time. This would only need to be done once. Instead of every time someone thinks their code is worthwhile to add. License and submission details can be completely isolated from public. I think this is more scalable solution. -- Craig

2011-05-09, 10:45	#898
Christenson Dec 2010 Monticello 5·359 Posts	Craig's suggestion has merit, but, right now, I am simply going to get my feet wet with adding P95 code to mfaktc. Long-term, I am still concerned with coming up with some kind of residue that makes calculating an undetectable cheat a little harder than actually doing the work.

2011-05-09, 18:44	#900
drh Jan 2011 Cincinnati, OH 2²·5² Posts	Looks like I messed up ... I uploaded some results, but apparently my session had timed out, so the credit went to Anonymous. In looking at the exponents assigned to me, they are all still there. Is there a way to move the credits or do I just need to unreserve the exponents so they are available for P-1? Thanks ...