Trying to get F@H going at work.

CycloniteCyclonite Tampa, Florida Icrontian
edited July 2004 in Folding@Home
Well, I've been talking to my boss about getting F@H setup on our machines here at work. We've got quite a few newer P4's running around, and some older machines that would be able to handle F@H quite well.

Now, he's raised a few questions, and I can't seem to find anything more than that article about PC performance. The questions he raised seem logical, and I understand where he's coming from.

The questions are:

1) How much bandwidth does it actually use?

This seems like a good question, especially if you have a limited amount of bandwidth. I cannot find any specific information on this.

2) Is the client hackable? Have there been any incidents of the client being hacked?

Again, this seems logical, as you definitely want your network protected. Obvisously one or two possibilites may not mean it's not secure, but is there a widespread issue? I've NEVER heard of anything, but I haven't been in the loop as much as I used to be.


Thanks for you help, guys! I really appreciate it. If we can prove the stability, security, and low bandwidth usage, then we can add quite a bit of folding power to the team.

Comments

  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    I aked for some help at the community and pointed to this thread ...those can answer the question concerning banwidth better than I can.
    As far as I know the only bandwidth used is during uploads and downloads and that's it ...and the files aren't very big really.
    As far as the hackable part? Not sure how to answer that one either ...I know of no instances where the clients have been hacked.

    Try the stanford community and see if you get better/more results ...doesn't hurt to ask from more than one source!

    Here is the source forum http://forum.folding-community.org/index.php
  • BuiesCreek847BuiesCreek847 In a van, down by the river, NC Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    What about security issues?

    We have worked very hard to maintain the best security possible with modern computer science methodology. Our software will upload and download data only from our data server here at Stanford. The Cores are also digitally signed (see below) to make sure that you're getting the true Stanford cores and nothing else.

    How is this possible? We take extensive measures to check all of the data entering your computer and the results we send back to Stanford with 2048 bit digital signatures. If the signatures don't match (on either the input or the output) the client will throw away the data and start again. This ensures, using the best software security measures developed to date (digital signatures and PKI in version 3.0), that we are keeping the tightest possible security.

    Finally, the client/screen saver are available for download only from this web site, so that we can guarantee the integrity of the software. We do not support Folding@home software obtained elsewhere and prohibit others to distribute the software.

    As found here: http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/faq.html
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    LOL ...I saw you lurking about Buies but I was having trouble PM'ing you! :fold:

    thanks
  • CycloniteCyclonite Tampa, Florida Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    BuiesCreek847 wrote:
    As found here: http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/faq.html

    Thanks! I thought there was something in there. I just couldn't find it.
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    This is the link to the thread I started at the folding community ... http://forum.folding-community.org/viewtopic.php?t=8617
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited July 2004
    Thanks BC for that info.

    As far as bandwidth goes, make sure to point out that 1) It only sends/recieved once every several hours/days depending on the WU and 2) it only sends/recieves once the the WU is finished so there is no constant connection. Once its done sending/recieving its done until it needs more work to do.

    If you want, not sure if will help you out, there is an option to recieve GAH WUs and under that is another option to minimize bandwidth. It will download 10 WUs at a time and if there is no network connection it will start the next WU when one is finished. You could open up the ports say at the end of the day when the network is clear if there is a limited amount.

    As for the actual data I am not sure. They are moving towards bigger and bigger WUs as everyone can see with the 230-240 point tinkers we have ben getting lately. That will also minmize the bandwidth on the stanford servers and everyone else. When gromacs first came out they were like 1mb+ each to upload back. I am not sure anymore but I think they have reduced it some. I am on broadband now and I was on 56k then so I noticed it a lot back then.
  • muddocktormuddocktor
    edited July 2004
    As far as the bandwidth issues go, the received work unit is compressed I'm pretty sure, but the results aren't. I have seen the work results go from around 1 MB to well over 2 MB, so for 1 completed wu, total bandwidth use could probably be estimated at around 3 MB for the whole operation of recieving and sending the wu.
  • BuiesCreek847BuiesCreek847 In a van, down by the river, NC Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    csimon wrote:
    LOL ...I saw you lurking about Buies but I was having trouble PM'ing you! :fold:

    thanks

    peepwallA.gif


    hideing_behind_computer.gif


    popworm.gif


    :thumbsup:
Sign In or Register to comment.