tutorial on dynamic SID generation

[Nospam]

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?

[DJ Stunks]

Nospam wrote:

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?

I don't know of one, but how about something like this:

#!/usr/bin/perl

use strict;
use warnings;

my $number_of_sids = 10;
my $max_sid_size = 10;

my @sids = sort {$a <=> $b}
map {int rand( '1' . 0 x rand $max_sid_size )}
(1..rand $number_of_sids );

for my $i (0..$#sids) {
printf "SID %d: %d\n", $i+1, $sids[$i];
}

__END__

HTH,
-jp

[lorento]

Nospam wrote:

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?

What do you mean with SID? Is it session ID?

You can try this code if you want to generate dynamic session ID:

<?php

$randomNumber = rand(10000, 20000) . microtime();
$randomValue = md5($randomNumb er);
$randomValue = substr($randomV alue, 16);

$SID = md5($randomValu e);

?>

regards,

Lorento
--
http://www.mastervb.net , http://www.padbuilder.com ,
http://www.immersivelounge.com

[VK]

Nospam wrote:

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?
Please don't crosspost.
Please make your question more understandable. Some context (or URL)
would be highly helpful.
DJ Stunks wrote: #!/usr/bin/perl <snip>

lorento wrote: <?php

<snip>
Please don't crosspost.

[Randy Webb]

VK said the following on 5/31/2006 4:49 AM:

Nospam wrote:

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?

Please don't crosspost.

Yet another example of VK's intelligence level?

You should endeavor to learn the difference between cross-posting and
multi-posting. One is frowned up and discouraged. The other is accepted
and sometimes encouraged.

--
Randy
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

[VK]

Randy Webb wrote:

VK said the following on 5/31/2006 4:49 AM:

Nospam wrote:

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?

Please don't crosspost.

Yet another example of VK's intelligence level?

Crossposting (cross-posting) is the act of posting verbatim copies of
one message on multiple message centers, without customising each copy
to suit the audience or forum.

That is an exact action I was referring, so what's the problem? I would
understand a script related question posted at say c.l.j. and .m.p.p.j
to follow later in one of threads. That may be the "good use" you've
mentioned. Obviously posting at once in JavaScript, Perl and PHP
related groups (and reply in all of them) is not such use.

In relation of multiposting (multi-posting) it looks like someone's
terminology invention. Wiki is silent about it, and in quick search I
found only rather sick comparison table at
<http://www.blakjak.dem on.co.uk/mul_crss.htm>. I call it "sick" because
the described behavior may have some relation to a particular software
(news reader) but has no relation to the Usenet as such (how does it
work).

[Brian Wakem]

Nospam wrote:

Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?

#!/usr/bin/perl

use strict;
use warnings;
use String::Random;

my $str = new String::Random;
print $str->randregex('\w{ 24}'), "\n" foreach 1..10;

########

Output:

FdvbJ3izP7EIRWa Ddc5zp7HS
cbzQ5EOuRopqZea VFPF_WZS3
Up3Dl84Un0jKMqV Wl7QFY2sL
0A0G5NySsbx_WIA 0UXewLZXV
R7EEj7wS5L0aLnp WhvBTKFrw
m3gwaEDqTmqzDec Th8KwHihB
e13WljcHp1yZAee BXhWYtWkU
P3xZM2YbjyQx3ss AsnXjb47o
f2Y7Y2KiyGN_3bS ZgKXtlcG6
oveuUqFXHzx6jao O9CNbRhwQ

--
Brian Wakem
Email: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/b.wakem/myemail.png

[Randy Webb]

VK said the following on 5/31/2006 11:52 AM:

Randy Webb wrote:

VK said the following on 5/31/2006 4:49 AM:

Nospam wrote:
Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?
Please don't crosspost. Yet another example of VK's intelligence level?

Crossposting (cross-posting) is the act of posting verbatim copies of
one message on multiple message centers, without customising each copy
to suit the audience or forum.

No, it is the act of posting the exact same message to multiple groups
at one time. Posting verbatim copies would imply multiple posting and
that is multi-posting, not cross-posting.
That is an exact action I was referring, so what's the problem?
No, you are referring to multi-posting, not cross-posting.

Let me quote what you snipped:

<quote>
You should endeavor to learn the difference between cross-posting and
multi-posting. One is frowned up and discouraged. The other is accepted
and sometimes encouraged.
</quote>

Now, I suppose I have to explain it to you since you didn't get it the
first time. Multi-posting is frowned upon and discouraged. Cross-posting
is accepted *and sometimes encouraged*.
I would understand a script related question posted at say c.l.j. and
.m.p.p.j to follow later in one of threads.
I doubt you would understand it, but ok.
That may be the "good use" you've mentioned.
Maybe. Maybe not. Do you know the difference?
Obviously posting at once in JavaScript, Perl and PHP related groups
(and reply in all of them) is not such use.
If the problem/question is related to JS, PERL, and PHP, then sure a
cross-post is justified. If the question had been PERL or PHP related
alone, then a "What does this have to do with JS?" response would have
been more appropriate.

But, let me ask you this. What freaking good did it do to reply to it,
not leave the cross-post intact so that anybody that ever read the
message would see the reply, and limit your response to c.l.j? That is
ignorant at best.

In relation of multiposting (multi-posting) it looks like someone's
terminology invention. Wiki is silent about it, and in quick search I
found only rather sick comparison table at
And I suppose you are going to argue that Wiki is a know all, always
correct, idea? It isn't. Not even close.
<http://www.blakjak.dem on.co.uk/mul_crss.htm>. I call it "sick" because
the described behavior may have some relation to a particular software
(news reader) but has no relation to the Usenet as such (how does it
work).

The only thing in that article that could be considered software
oriented would be reading it in one group and it getting marked as read
in all other groups that you may subscribe to. I definitely have not
used software that does that.

Other than that, the explanation of cross-posting and multi-posting is
dead on.

Now I know why Richard has the opinion of you that he does.

--
Randy
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

[Andy Baxter]

VK said:

Randy Webb wrote:

VK said the following on 5/31/2006 4:49 AM:

> Nospam wrote:
>> Is there a tutorial on dynamic SID generation?
>
> Please don't crosspost.

Yet another example of VK's intelligence level?

Crossposting (cross-posting) is the act of posting verbatim copies of
one message on multiple message centers, without customising each copy
to suit the audience or forum.

It's not what people usually mean by the word. usually I've seen people
being encouraged to cross-post (i.e. put multiple groups in the header)
because it means people who follow multiple groups can follow it as a
single thread rather than having to read the separate replies in each
group. It's multiposting that's usually discouraged. Maybe you don't see
it like that, but that's what people usually mean. (As far as anyone is
bothered one way or the other)

--
http://www.niftybits.ukfsn.org/

remove 'n-u-l-l' to email me. html mail or attachments will go in the spam
bin unless notified with [html] or [attachment] in the subject line.

[VK]

VK wrote:

Crossposting (cross-posting) is the act of posting verbatim copies of
one message on multiple message centers, without customising each copy
to suit the audience or forum.

Randy Webb wrote: No, it is the act of posting the exact same message to multiple groups
at one time. Posting verbatim copies would imply multiple posting and
that is multi-posting, not cross-posting.

First of all let put right: the OP I responded to used a list of
newsgroups in a single message. It is called /crossposting/ even in
these weird articles I had to spend time to read last 25 min. In my
post I called it /crossposting/. So I used the right term from the very
beginning.

You (and some authors I had to read) presume that some magic happens
with message distribution over NNTP servers depending on how does one
post: using a list of newsgroups in a single message or one newsgroup
per message but posted several times. In the first case each copy in
each newsgroup will have the same Message-ID (but obviously different
Path). In the second case each copy will have a different Message-ID.
But it doesn't change "bandweight usage" nor the complexity to respond
to such post not the risk to have broken threads. If someone really
trully needs to crosspost, use either way but make sure to set
Followup-To properly to ensure a single discussion point.

It is funny that you're arguing with me about crossposting in the very
thread where overyone can see no damn difference in how bad /both/
cross or "multi" are /if/ Followup-To is not set properly. Just look at
the fresh "harvest" the thread got from a Perl group.