Talk:Skype protocol

message: Skype relies heavily on code obfuscation:
* Much of the skype binary is encrypted. It provides its own unpacker which erases the original import table as it is loaded.
* Code integrity checksums, executed randomly, and obfuscated with random lengths and random operators
* Anti-debuggers
** attempt to identify breakpoints and trap the debugger.
** target specific debuggers by checking for certain loaded drivers
* General code obfuscation with fake error handlers that directly manipulate memory and registers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pgr94 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Techniques used to defend the Skype binary 

message: Can someone who knows please add a section listing implementations? I'm not talking about wrappers around the Skype binary client, but actual new code. The official client is obviously an implementation, it appears ++skype may also be one. Are there any others?
: I'm not really sure what ++skype is.  Is it just a wrapper?  I'm not aware of any other implementations, but would also be interested to know if anyone has started a GPL project. Pgr94 17:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  According to User:217.162.207.65 "++Skype library is a library for the API of the software and not for the network." Pgr94 09:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Fring does in fact do skype voice, but I don't know if it's encrypted.  fring! --TIB (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skype protocol implementations 

message: start
  2.  send UDP packet(s) to HC
  3.  if no response within 5 seconds then
  4.    attempt TCP connection with HC
  5.    if not connected then
  6.      attempt TCP connection with HC on port 80 (HTTP)
  7.      if not connected then
  8.        attempt TCP connection with HC on port 443 (HTTPS)
  9.        if not connected then
 10.          attempts++
 11.          if attempts==5 then
 12.            fail
 13.          else
 14.            wait 6 seconds
 15.            goto step 2
seems incorrect
attempts not initialized. --Sylvestersteele (talk) 08:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect code 

message: The obfuscated Skype RC4 key expansion algorithm has been leaked and is available in portable C code.  Code is available here: http://cryptolib.com/ciphers/skype/
pgr94 (talk) 19:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skype protocol leak 

message: in 2003 MS made an AntiTrust Settlement, in which they told to publish a lot of interoperability data, including "proprietary communications protocols". I bet Skype protocol fals into the definition ? i wonder if someone would push Microsoft into making the protocol public. 79.111.223.5 (talk) 20:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microsoft buyout 

message: There is news , that guy called Efim Bushmanov reverse engineered Skype protocol.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.113.233 (talk) 13:10, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a direct link to the website: http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/  The site appears to have received a DMCA takedown notice.  Is this legal if the protocol is being reverse-engineered for interoperability? 83.33.251.146 (talk) 19:46, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skype protocol reverse engineered by Efim Bushmanov 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Skype protocol. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090303112252/http://support.skype.com:80/en_US/faq/FA153/Which-protocols-does-Skype-use to http://support.skype.com/en_US/faq/FA153/Which-protocols-does-Skype-use
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: According to the article at its present state, "In 2012, Microsoft altered the design of the network, and brought all supernodes under their control", and "Supernodes relay communications on behalf of two other clients". This would appear to suggest that if all packets produced by Skype after this change would go to Microsoft. However, Microsoft told this tech magazine (in Danish, sorry) that indeed packets still travel from peer to peer directly, a claim which is backed up by the magazine's own Wireshark testing. Perhaps something else is meant in the Wikipedia article, but in that case, I think that the current wording is misleading. --pred (talk) 10:08, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  P2P or not? 

message: None of the domain names in the list under the section Login is actually current. Either the new ones should be found and posted or they should be removed.
--Ispanesach (talk) 16:14, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'll go ahead and remove all the detailed description of the protocol; it looks like original research, at least no sources are cited. And as a proprietary protocol it's subject to change without any notice or documentation of changes, thus likely to get out of date, as has already happened now. -- intgr [talk] 17:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  If it is any help I found that the information in the following Symantec document is still valid. Whitelisting the IP ranges as well as all the URLs provided there allowed me to make Skype work on our network whereas previously it was blocked by the firewall. Symantec Skype IP and URL info --Ispanesach (talk) 12:03, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Login 

message: The entire article is talking about the original classic Skype protocol which has long been deprecated and is no longer used however it's only reflected in the header: "The new Skype protocol—Microsoft Notification Protocol 24". I guess the article must be renamed and updated to reflect the status quo. Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 15:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article validity and name