Why refer to Rednet as a "wrapper" of Channels? It's much more useful than that!
#1
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:18 AM
#2
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:31 AM
#3
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:46 AM
#4
Posted 29 May 2013 - 12:34 PM
#5
Posted 29 May 2013 - 08:45 PM
#6
Posted 29 May 2013 - 09:00 PM
In case you don't feel like looking it up, here's a link to the entire API.
#7
Posted 29 May 2013 - 09:15 PM
Bubba, on 29 May 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:
In case you don't feel like looking it up, here's a link to the entire API.
#9
#10
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:06 PM
#11
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:08 PM
JJRcop, on 29 May 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:
This is simply not true. It's good to use rednet if your use case doesn't require more. It's easier to create tools and have things work interoperably if people use similar standards (i.e., rednet). I would encourage direct use of modem methods only if the use case cannot otherwise function with the rednet API.
#12
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:15 PM
Lyqyd, on 29 May 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:
JJRcop, on 29 May 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:
This is simply not true. It's good to use rednet if your use case doesn't require more. It's easier to create tools and have things work interoperably if people use similar standards (i.e., rednet). I would encourage direct use of modem methods only if the use case cannot otherwise function with the rednet API.
But rednet is so easy to spoof! You can just change the reply channel and act like you're another computer. Also, I used the word 'think', so that means it is my personal opinion, not a fact or unanimously agreed standard.
#13
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:20 PM
#14
Posted 29 May 2013 - 11:25 PM
#15
Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:23 AM
Shazz, on 29 May 2013 - 08:45 PM, said:
I usually still used the rednet api for computers that I want to ensure will communicate in a standardized manner. There is no real way to 'spoof' as another computer, as you cannot fake a computer ID. As long as your program is written properly, there is not much that wrapping the modem directly can do that the rednet api can't do already, with the exception of channels, of course.
#16
Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:43 AM
Cranium, on 30 May 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:
I usually still used the rednet api for computers that I want to ensure will communicate in a standardized manner. There is no real way to 'spoof' as another computer, as you cannot fake a computer ID. As long as your program is written properly, there is not much that wrapping the modem directly can do that the rednet api can't do already, with the exception of channels, of course.
It is quite easy to write an api the same as rendet but gets its ID from a variable that the user can alter allowing that computer to be what ever ID the user wants it to be. this can facilitate a man in the middle style attack. The rednet api is a non secure means of communication and can be fooled.
[Edit]
If you would like I can provide proof via PM
#17
Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:59 AM
#18
Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:03 PM
Cranium, on 30 May 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:
EDIT:
Cranium, on 30 May 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:
#19
Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:09 PM
Cranium, on 30 May 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:
#20
Posted 30 May 2013 - 04:08 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users