Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (11347)

• Investigating Steam for Linux

  1er mars 2013, par Multimedia Mike — Game Hacking

  Valve recently released the final, public version of their Steam client for Linux, and the Linux world rejoiced. At least, it probably did. The announcement was 2 weeks ago on Valentine’s Day and I had other things on my mind, so I missed any fanfare. When framed in this manner, the announcement timing becomes suspect– it’s as though Linux enthusiasts would have plenty of time that day or something.

  
  
  

  Taming the Frontier
  Speculation about a Linux Steam client had been kicking around for nearly as long as Steam has existed. However, sometime last year, the rumors became more substantive.

  I naturally wondered how to port something like Steam to Linux. I have some experience with trying to make a necessarily binary-only program that runs on Linux. I’m fairly well-versed in the assorted technical challenges that one might face when attempting such a feat. Because of this, whenever I hear rumors that a company might be entertaining the notion of porting a major piece of proprietary software to Linux, my instinctive reflex is, “What ?! Why, you fools ?! Save yourselves !”

  At least, that’s how it used to be. The proposal of developing a proprietary binary for Linux has been rendered considerably less insane by a few developments, for example :

  1. The rise of Ubuntu Linux as a quasi de facto standard for desktop Linux computing
  2. The increasing homogeneity in personal desktop computing technology

  What I would like to know is how the Steam client runs on Linux. Does it rely on any libraries being present on the system ? Or does it bring its own ? The latter is a trick that proprietary programs can use– transport all of the shared libraries that the main program binary depends upon, install them someplace out of the way on the filesystem, probably in /opt, and then make the main program a shell script which sets a preload path to rely on the known quantity libraries instead of the copies already on the system.

  Downloading and Installing the Client
  For this exercise, I installed x86_64 desktop Ubuntu 12.04 Linux on a l33t gaming rig that was totally top of the line about 5 years ago, and that someone didn’t want anymore and handed down to me recently. So it should be ideal for this project.

  At first, I was blown away– the Linux client is in a .deb package that is less than 2 MB large. I unpacked the steam.deb file and found a bunch of support libraries — mostly X11 and standard C/C++ runtimes. Just as I suspected. Still, I can’t believe how small the thing is. However, my amazement quickly abated when I actually ran Steam and saw this :

  
  
  

  So it turns out steam.db is just the installer program which immediately proceeds to download an additional 160+ MB of data. So there’s actually a lot more information to possibly sift through.
  
  Another component of the installation is to basically run a big ‘apt-get install’ command to make sure a bunch of required packages are installed :

  
  
  

  After all these installation steps, the client was ready to run. However, whenever I tried to do so, I got this dialog which would cause Steam to close when the dialog was dismissed.

  
  
  

  Not a huge deal ; later NVIDIA drivers are fairly straightforward to install on Ubuntu Linux. After a few minutes of downloading, installing and restarting X, Steam ran with minimal complaint (it still had some issue regarding the video drivers but didn’t seem to consider it a deal-breaker).

  Using Steam on Linux

  So here’s Steam running on Linux :

  
  
  

  If you have experience with using Steam on Windows or Mac, you might observe that it looks exactly the same. I don’t have a very expansive library of games (I only started using Steam because purchasing a few computer components a few years ago entitled me to some free Steam downloads of some of the games on the list in the screenshot). I didn’t really expect any of the games to have Linux versions yet, but it turns out that the indie darling FTL : Faster Than Light has been ported to Linux. FTL was a much-heralded Kickstarter success story and sounded like something I wanted to support. I purchased this from Steam shortly after its release last year and was able to download the Linux version at no additional cost with a single click.

  It runs natively on Linux (note the Ubuntu desktop window decorations) :

  
  
  

  You might notice from the main Steam client that, despite purchasing FTL about a 1/2 year ago and starting it up at least a 1/2 dozen times, I haven’t really invested a whole lot of time into it. I only managed to get about 2 minutes further this time :

  
  
  

  What can I say ? This game just bores me to tears. It’s frustrating because I know that this is one of the cool games that all real gamers are supposed to like, but I practically catch myself nodding off every time I try to run through the tutorial. It’s strange to think that I’ve invested far more time into games that offer considerably less stimulation. That’s probably because I had far more free time compared to gaming options during those times.

  But that’s neither here nor there. We’ll file this under “games that aren’t for me.” I’m glad that people like FTL and a little indie underdog has met with such success. And I’m pleased that Steam on Linux works. It’s native and the games are also native, which is all quite laudable (there was speculation that everything would just be running on top of a Wine layer).

  Deeper Analysis
  So I set out wondering how Steam was able to create a proprietary program that would satisfy a large enough cross-section of Linux users (i.e., on different platforms and distros). Answer : well, they didn’t, per the stated requirements. The installation is only tuned to work on Ubuntu 12.04. However, it works on both 32- and 64-bit platforms, the only 2 desktop CPU platforms that matter these days (unless ARM somehow makes inroads on the desktop). The Steam client is quite clearly an x86_32 binary– look at the terminal screenshot above and observe that it’s downloading all :i386 support libraries.

  The file /usr/bin/steam isn’t a binary but a launcher shell script (something you’ll also see if you investigate /usr/bin/firefox on a Linux system). Here’s an interesting tidbit :

  function detect_platform()
  
    # Maybe be smarter someday
    # Right now this is the only platform we have a bootstrap for, so hard-code it.
    echo ubuntu12_32
  
  

  I wager that it’s possible to get Steam running on other distributions, it probably just takes a little more effort (assuming that Steam doesn’t put too much effort into thwarting such attempts).

  As for the FTL game, it comes with binaries and libraries for both x86_32 and x86_64. So, good work to the dev team for creating and testing both versions. FTL also distributes versions of the libraries it expects to work with.

  I suspect that the Steam client overall is largely a WWW rendering engine underneath the covers. That would help explain how Valve is able to achieve such a consistent look and feel, not only across OS platforms, but also through a web browser. When I browse the Steam store through Google Chrome, it looks and feels exactly like the native desktop client. When I first thought of how someone could port Steam to Linux, I immediately wondered about how they would do the UI.

  A little Googling for “steam uses webkit” (just a hunch) confirms my hypothesis.

• Alias Artifacts

  26 avril 2013, par Multimedia Mike — General

  Throughout my own life, I have often observed that my own sense of nostalgia has a window that stretches about 10-15 years past from the current moment. Earlier this year, I discovered the show “Alias” and watched through the entire series thanks to Amazon Prime Instant Video (to be fair, I sort of skimmed the fifth and final season which I found to be horribly dull, or maybe franchise fatigue had set in). The show originally aired from 2001-2006 so I found that it fit well within the aforementioned nostalgia window.

  
  
  

  But what was it, exactly, about the show that triggered nostalgia ? The computers, of course ! The show revolved around spies and espionage and cutting-edge technology necessarily played a role. The production designer for the series must have decided that Unix/Linux == awesome hacking and so many screenshots featured Linux.

  Since this is still nominally a multimedia blog, I’ll start of the screenshot recon with an old multimedia player. Here is a vintage Mac OS desktop running an ancient web browser (probably Netscape) that’s playing a full-window video (probably QuickTime embedded directly into the browser).

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Let’s jump right into the Linux side of things. This screenshot makes me particularly sentimental since this is exactly what a stock Linux/KDE desktop looked like circa 2001-2003 and is more or less what I would have worked with on my home computer at the time :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Studying that screenshot, we see that the user logs in as root, even to the desktop environment. Poor security practice ; I would expect better from a bunch of spooks.

  Echelon
  Look at the terminal output in the above screenshot– it’s building a program named Echelon, an omniscient spy tool inspired by a real-world surveillance network of the same name. In the show, Echelon is used to supply plot-convenient intelligence. At one point, some antagonists get their hands on the Echelon source code and seek to compile it. When they do, they will have access to the vast surveillance network. If you know anything about how computers work, don’t think about that too hard.

  Anyway, it’s interesting to note that Echelon is a properly autotool’d program– when the bad guys finally got Echelon, installation was just a ‘make install’ command away. The compilation was very user-friendly, though, as it would pop up a nice dialog box showing build progress :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Examining the build lines in both that screenshot and the following lines, we can see that Echelon cares about files such as common/db_err.c and bt_curadj.c :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  A little googling reveals that these files both belong to the Berkeley DB library. That works ; I can imagine a program like this leveraging various database packages.

  Computer Languages
  The Echelon source code stuff comes from episode 2.11 : “A Higher Echelon”. While one faction had gotten a hold of the actual Echelon source code, a rival faction had abducted the show’s resident uber-nerd and, learning that they didn’t actually receive the Echelon code, force the nerd to re-write Echelon from scratch. Which he then proceeds to do…

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  The code he’s examining there appears to be C code that has something to do with joystick programming (JS_X_0, JS_Y_1, etc.). An eagle-eyed IMDb user contributed the trivia that he is looking at the file /usr/include/Linux/joystick.h.

  Getting back to the plot, how could the bad buys possibly expect him to re-write a hugely complex piece of software from scratch ? You might think this is the height of absurdity for a computer-oriented story. You’ll be pleased to know that the writers agreed with that assessment since, when the program was actually executed, it claimed to be Echelon, but that broke into a game of Pong (or some simple game). Suddenly, it makes perfect sense why the guy was looking at the joystick header file.

  This is the first bit of computer-oriented fun that I captured when I was watching the series :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  This printout purports to be a “mainframe log summary”. After some plot-advancing text about a security issue, it proceeds to dump out some Java source code.

  SSH
  Secure Shell (SSH) frequently showed up. Here’s a screenshot in which a verbose ‘ssh -v’ connection has just been closed, while a telnet command has apparently just been launched (evidenced by “Escape character is ‘^]’.”) :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  This is followed by some good old Hollywood Hacking in which a free-form database command is entered through any available command line interface :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  I don’t remember the episode details, but I’m pretty sure the output made perfect sense to the character typing the command. Here’s another screenshot where the SSH client pops up an extra-large GUI dialog element to notify the user that it’s currently negotiating with the host :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Now that I look at that screenshot a little more closely, it appears to be a Win95/98 program. I wonder if there was an SSH client that actually popped up that gaudy dialog.

  There’s a lot of gibberish in this screenshot and I wish I had written down some details about what it represented according to the episode’s plot :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  It almost sounds like they were trying to break into a network computer. Analyzing MD5 structure… public key synthesized. To me, the funniest feature is the 7-digit public key. I’m a bit rusty on the math of the RSA cryptosystem, but intuitively, it seems that the public and private keys need to be of roughly equal lengths. I.e., the private key in this scenario would also be 7 digits long.

  Gadgets
  Various devices and gadgets were seen at various junctures in the show. Here’s a tablet computer from back when tablet computers seemed like fantastical (albeit stylus-requiring) devices– the Fujitsu Stylistic 2300 :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  Here’s a videophone from an episode that aired in 2005. The specific model is the Packet8 DV326 (MSRP of US$500). As you can see from the screenshot, it can do 384 kbps both down and up.

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  I really regret not writing down the episode details surrounding this gadget. I just know that it was critical that the good guys get it and keep from falling into the hands of the bad guys.

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  As you can see, the (presumably) deadly device contains a Samsung chip and a Lexar chip. I have to wonder what device the production crew salvaged this from (probably just an old cell phone).

  Other Programs

  The GIMP photo editor makes an appearance while scrubbing security camera footage, and serves as the magical Enhance Button (at least they slung around the term “gamma”) :

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  I have no idea what MacOS-based audio editing program this is. Any ideas ?

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

  FTP shows up in episode 2.12, “The Getaway”. It’s described as a “secure channel” for communication, which is quite humorous to anyone versed in internet technology.

  
  

  

  Click for larger image

  
  

• Hung out to dry

  31 mai 2013, par Mans — Law and liberty

  Outrage was the general reaction when Google recently announced their dropping of XMPP server-to-server federation from Hangouts, as the search giant’s revamped instant messaging platform is henceforth to be known. This outrage is, however, largely unjustified ; Google’s decision is merely a rational response to issues of a more fundamental nature. To see why, we need to step back and look at the broader instant messaging landscape.

  A brief history of IM

  The term instant messaging (IM) gained popularity in the mid-1990s along with the rise of chat clients such as ICQ, AOL Instant Messenger, and later MSN Messenger. These all had one thing in common : they were closed systems. Although global in the sense of allowing access from anywhere on the Internet, communication was possible only within each network, and only using the officially sanctioned client software. Contrast this with email, where users are free to choose any service provider as well as client software, inter-server communication over open protocols delivering messages to their proper destinations.

  The email picture has, however, not always been so rosy. During the 1970s and 80s a multitude of incompatible email systems (e.g. UUCP and X.400) were in more or less widespread use on various networks. As these networks gave way to the ARPANET/Internet, so did their mail systems to the SMTP email we all use today. A similar consolidation has yet to occur in the area of instant messaging.

  Over the years, a few efforts towards a cross-domain instant messaging have been undertaken. One early example is the Zephyr system created as part of Project Athena at MIT in the late 1980s. While it never saw significant uptake, it is still in use at a few universities. A more successful story is that of XMPP. Conceived under the name Jabber in the late 1990s, XMPP is an open standard specified in a set of IETF RFCs. In addition to being open, a distinguishing feature of XMPP compared to other contemporary IM systems is its decentralised nature, server-to-server connections allowing communication between users with accounts on different systems. Just like email.

  The social network

  A more recent emergence on the Internet is the social network. Although not the first of its kind, Facebook was the first to achieve its level of penetration, both geographically and across social groups. A range of messaging options, including email-style as well as instant messaging (chat), are available, all within the same web interface. What it does not allow is communication outside the Facebook network. Other social networks operate in the same spirit.

  The popularity of social networks, to the extent that they for many constitute the primary means of communication, has in a sense brought back fragmented networks of the 1980s. Even though they share infrastructure, up to and including the browser application, the social networks create walled-off regions of the Internet between which little or no exchange is possible.

  The house that Google built

  In 2005, Google launched Talk, an XMPP-based instant messaging service allowing users to connect using either Google’s official client application or any third-party XMPP client. Soon after, server-to-server federation was activated, enabling anyone with a Google account to exchange instant messages with users of any other federated XMPP service. An in-browser chat interface was also added to Gmail.

  It was arguably only with the 2011 introduction of Google+ that Google, despite its previous endeavours with Orkut and Buzz, had a viable contender in the social networking space. Since its inception, Google+ has gone through a number of changes where features have been added or reworked. Instant messaging within Google+ was until recently available only in mobile clients. On the desktop, the sole messaging option was Hangouts which, although featuring text chat, cannot be considered instant messaging in the usual sense.

  With a sprawling collection of messaging systems (Talk, Google+ Messenger, Hangouts), some action to consolidate them was a logical step. What we got was a unification under the Hangouts name. A redesigned Google+ now sports in-browser instant messaging similar the the Talk interface already present in Gmail. At the same time, the standalone desktop Talk client is discontinued, as is the Messenger feature in mobile Google+. All together, the changes make for a much less confusing user experience.

  The sky is falling down

  Along with the changes to the messaging platform, one announcement stoked anger on the Internet : Google’s intent to discontinue XMPP federation (as of this writing, it is still operational). Google, the (self-described) champions of openness on the Internet were seen to be closing their doors to the outside world. The effects of the change are, however, not quite so earth-shattering. Of the other major messaging networks to offer XMPP at all (Facebook, Skype, and the defunct Microsoft Messenger), none support federation ; a Google user has never been able to chat with a Facebook user.

  XMPP federation appears to be in use mainly by non-profit organisations or individuals running their own servers. The number of users on these systems is hard to assess, though it seems fair to assume it is dwarfed by the hundreds of millions using Google or Facebook. As such, the overall impact of cutting off communication with the federated servers is relatively minor, albeit annoying for those affected.

  A fragmented world

  Rather than chastising Google for making a low-impact, presumably founded, business decision, we should be asking ourselves why instant messaging is still so fragmented in the first place, whereas email is not. The answer can be found by examining the nature of entities providing these services.

  Ever since the commercialisation of the Internet started in the 1990s, email has been largely seen as being part of the Internet. Access to email was a major selling point for Internet service providers ; indeed, many still use the email facilities of their ISP. Instant messaging, by contrast, has never come as part of the basic offering, rather being a third-party service running on top of the Internet.

  Users wishing to engage in instant messaging have always had to seek out and sign up with a provider of such a service. As the IM networks were isolated, most would choose whichever service their friends were already using, and a small number of networks, each with a sustainable number of users, came to dominate. In the early days, dedicated IM services such as ICQ were popular. Today, social networks have taken their place with Facebook currently in the dominant position. With the new Hangouts, Google offers its users the service they want in the way they have come to expect.

  Follow the money

  We now have all the pieces necessary to see why inter-domain instant messaging has never taken off, and the answer is simple : the major players have no commercial incentive to open access to their IM networks. In fact, they have good reason to keep the networks closed. Ensuring that a person leaving the network loses contact with his or her friends, increases user retention by raising the cost of switching to another service. Monetising users is also better facilitated if they are forced to remain on, say, Facebook’s web pages while using its services rather than accessing them indirectly, perhaps even through a competing (Google, say) frontend. The users do not generally care much, since all their friends are already on the same network as themselves.

  While Google Talk was a standalone service, only loosely coupled to other Google products, these aspects were of lesser importance. After all, Google still had access to all the messages passing through the system and could analyse them for advert targeting purposes. Now that messaging is an integrated part of Google+, and thus serves as a direct competitor to the likes of Facebook, the situation has changed. All the reasons for Facebook not to open its network now apply equally to Google as well.