P2P Reputation Management

Introduction:
Many P2P networks with varying degree of success. Reputation based methods have proven to be the most effective in this task. Nevertheless, there are number of different approaches which adapt reputation management to different P2P environment. In this paper, we investigate the methods which have been develop ed to cope with undesirable peer behavior. Our goal is to survey the present reputation classification which management facilitates methods and propose We identify a all a system analysis.

published methods and outline the possible solutions. First, we investigate what secure P2P network. We sharing areas are resource availability, resource quality, anonymity, and access control. We added an area referred P2P system. Peers which adhere to the first four criteria are called faithful. Reputation management techniques peers chance to detect the low trustworthiness or faithfulness of their partners. Similar to a human community, individual peers make decisions about the trustworthiness of other peers on the basis of recommendations basis of their own past experience.

Abstract:
A requester requests the service from the provider and optionally evaluates the attributes of the provider besides giving recommendation(s) to the provider. The method used by the requester to ascertain the value of the recommendation it provides, can be common across peers if they are able to download a le irrespective of the content le ) or specic to a peer . In a completely decentralized network, the method used to

ascertain the recommendation is unlikely to be Global, because unrelated peers are likely to value the different aspects of a service differently. We must overcome this problem using certification.

Scope of the project:

In all this principle a peer can refuse a request when it believes that the remote peer has a low trustworthiness broken. Reputation management is a methods dealing with how to distribute reputation among peers transaction. When the peer gets a reputation value, it must decide whether to perform the given transaction or not. Because the reputation value represents the probability of expected behavior, the peer always runs, accept to get a certain resource is expressed as the risk value. The risk value can reflect possible benefits one fails, and can be determined with human assistance. The risk value can be the radio of all bad service over the worst effect when all services received in this time interval were bad. This methods takes there are two basic scenarios which can occur in a remote resource and has to choose among several possible sources. The aim is to weed out untrustworthy is contacted by another peer and is asked for a resource. Targets mainly have fairness in mind in this scenario. Therefore, the reputation criterion which relies is important for us. Not all information is available to with trusted peers. So, the trustworthiness of the target. While P2P networks are useful and provide a beneficial service, they also provide an opportunity for abuse and computer virus transmission. Project Juxtapose is building core network computing technology to provide a set of simple, small, and flexible mechanisms that can support P2P computing on any platform, anywhere, and at any time. The

project is first generalizing P2P functionality and then building core technology that addresses today's limitations on P2P computing. The focus is on creating basic mechanisms and leaving policy choices to application developers. Juxtapose strives to provide a base P2P infrastructure over which other P2P applications can be built. This base consists of a set of protocols that are language independent, platform independent, and network agnostic (that is, they do not assume anything about the underlying network). These protocols address the bare necessities for building generic P2P applications. Designed to be simple with low overhead, the protocols target, to quote the Juxtapose vision statement, "every device with a digital heartbeat." Juxtapose currently defines six protocols, but not all Juxtapose peers are required to implement all six of them. The number of protocols that a peer implements depends on that peer's capabilities, conceivably, a peer could use just one protocol. Peers can also extend or replace any protocol, depending on its particular requirements.

Existing system:
In distributed environments formed by a large number of peers conventional authentication techniques are inadequate for the group joining process, and more advanced ones are needed.

Complex transactions among peers may require more

elaborate interactions based on what peers can do or possess instead of peers identity.

Not easy to access the group. Not using certification validation.

Proposed System:

We propose a novel peer group joining protocol. We introduce a User friendly for the users. Certification will validate the user. Resource negotiation language, able to support the specification highly expressive.

of a large variety of conditions applying to single peers or groups of peers. Moreover, we define protocols to test such resource availability customized to the level of assurance required by the peers.

Our approach has been tested and evaluated on an extension of

the JUXTAPOSE P2P platform.

Data Flow Diagram:

Check User Login
JXTA protocol

Enter your Group

certification

Certification not exist

Choose file to

Download required files

Check sum

View files shared By group users

View Peer group Users

Logout

Certificate

Secure server

Client

Server certificate

Client certificat e

Modules:
Juxtapose Certificate verification Validation
Assort file Acquire Group

Algorithm Used:
Checksum