10.04 Downloaded Through Torrent...Check It's Integrity

[Excedio]

I downloaded through the official torrent link yesterday. I checked the integrity of the .ISO this morning and it was way off.



md5sum ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso



Output was:



54caea43273d726d2b497917266888f4 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso



However when I compared it to 3e0f72becd63cad79bf784ac2b34b448 (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes) you can see that it's pretty far off.

I then re-downloaded this morning from the "normal" United States download location (non-torrent) and got a perfect output when checking integrity.

Not saying that everyone will encounter this, but I did. Make sure you check your .ISO's integrity.

Side Note: I also downloaded the server edition through torrent.. Integrity was perfect.

[Paqman]

Are you sure you didn't just have the torrent for a previous build?

[ParadoxBlue]

I downloaded 10.04 eariler through torrent and had the same problem. Then I downloaded it normally and everything checked out ok. Hated to put extra drag on the systems but not much choice although at first I tried downloading from the University of Tennessee and all went well until I hit about 34% complete and the speed bottomed out and was showing about 11hrs left. So I quit that one and re-downloaded through Georgia Tech and all went normally.

[Excedio]

Are you sure you didn't just have the torrent for a previous build?

I used this: http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/downloadmirrors#bt

ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso.torrent (http://releases.ubuntu.com/10.04/ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso.torrent).


Also, if you go here (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes), do a Ctrl+F and search for 54caea43273d726d2b497917266888f4, nothing comes up. I will attempt to re-download through the torrent. If it fails integrity again, I will report it to the webmaster.

[Excedio]

Ok. I re-downloaded through the Official torrent (Gotta love the 3 MB/s download speed) again. This time the integrity was perfect.

Although, I still urge EVERYONE to please check your .ISO's integrity before burning to a CD or DVD.

This might mean the difference between coming to the forum pissed and looking for help with a problem or coming to the forum proclaiming your love for 10.04.

[insane_alien]

mine was fine.

just a thought on it though, it could be that the file had not fully been written to disk and some of it was in the cache but never got read for some reason. i've seen this before. if you get a bad check, try closing the application and rechecking.

[WannabeFantasma]

now i have to check mine too this evening.... urgh.. :d

[Excedio]

now i have to check mine too this evening.... urgh.. :d


Is that really a headache? It should only take about 10-15 seconds to do this. 1 minute if you type slow.

[WannabeFantasma]

Is that really a headache? It should only take about 10-15 seconds to do this. 1 minute if you type slow.

Kinda... :D yesterday I tried like 5 times to blank a cd-rw on ubuntu (brasero) gave me all sorts of errors...

got new dvd, tried to burn it still wouldn't work...
I just wanted my Ubuntu 10.04 fast :(
Anyway the Urgh was kind of a joke ;)

[cgroza]

Is that really a headache? It should only take about 10-15 seconds to do this. 1 minute if you type slow.

Tab autocompletion makes it possible in 5 second :D

[Excedio]

Kinda... :D yesterday I tried like 5 times to blank a cd-rw on ubuntu (brasero) gave me all sorts of errors...

got new dvd, tried to burn it still wouldn't work...
I just wanted my Ubuntu 10.04 fast :(
Anyway the Urgh was kind of a joke ;)

Gotcha. ;-)

You know, this forum really needs to adopt the SarcMark (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlwCCWGYOGg&feature=player_embedded).

**If the YouTube video doesn't work for you: http://02d9656.netsoljsp.com/SarcMark/modules/user/commonfiles/loadhome.do **

[WannabeFantasma]

Gotcha. ;-)

You know, this forum really needs to adopt the SarcMark (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlwCCWGYOGg&feature=player_embedded).

**If the YouTube video doesn't work for you: http://02d9656.netsoljsp.com/SarcMark/modules/user/commonfiles/loadhome.do **

I'll check it later.... :D

Anyway, what happens when you burn an image with wrong code?

[Excedio]

Tab autocompletion makes it possible in 5 second :D

the other 5-10 seconds can be copy/paste to ensure the Hash matches the the correct hash. :-D

[Excedio]

I'll check it later.... :D

anyway, what happens when you burn an image with wrong code? just doesn't work?

Beats me. I prefer not to find out either.

[NMFTM]

All of the bittorrent clients I've used give you the ability to check the integrity of a file. It's somewhere in Transmission's menu bar.

[WannabeFantasma]

Wish it was like 19.30, than I could finally start checking all things, burning (hopefully for good) and finally see Ubuntu 10.04 for myself!

[samalex]

I guess I was lucky, I downloaded 64-bit Desktop version via Bittorrent last night, which only took about 15 minutes, and the MD5 Checksum matched the hash page (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes) perfectly.

3e0f72becd63cad79bf784ac2b34b448 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso

Put a smile on my face though I probably won't have time to install it for a few weeks since we're in the middle of moving. Heck it might even be a few weeks after moving before we even have broadband at the new house. :-/

Take care --

Sam

[kavon89]

md5sum ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso



Output was:



54caea43273d726d2b497917266888f4 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso



However when I compared it to 3e0f72becd63cad79bf784ac2b34b448 (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes) you can see that it's pretty far off.

As an aside, if if you change just one byte in the file and you will have a completely different hash result.

[Phrea]

CLI's scare me.

Transmissions MD5 hash, is that the hash it shows in the information tab when you check out the properties of a seeding file...?
If it is, I have a problem.
I'm seeding 4 versions of Ubuntu totalling 33GB so far, and NONE of the hashes match...

Can somebody confirm that the hash that Transmission shows in the information tab is the hash of the file...?

[Excedio]

As an aside, if if you change just one byte in the file and you will have a completely different hash result.

True. However, those bytes that I might have bene missing couls have meant the difference between functioning Graphics drivers or just being able to boot up. Better safe than sorry. :-)

[LMP900]

All of the bittorrent clients I've used give you the ability to check the integrity of a file. It's somewhere in Transmission's menu bar.

Are you talking about the "verify local data" option? I ran into an issue with an alpha release, but this option seemed to have resolved it.

[Phrea]

CLI's scare me.

Transmissions MD5 hash, is that the hash it shows in the information tab when you check out the properties of a seeding file...?
If it is, I have a problem.
I'm seeding 4 versions of Ubuntu totalling 33GB so far, and NONE of the hashes match...

Can somebody confirm that the hash that Transmission shows in the information tab is the hash of the file...?

I really need to know this asap.
Don't want to seed faulty iso's.

[WannabeFantasma]

Mine are ok! now going to burn them! muhahahaa!

[deanhopkins]

I have a question regarding torrents, lets say what I have downloaded doesnt match the md5sum that it should, and I seed it for a few days.

Will everyone who has leeched off me have a corrupted ISO, even though they are only downloading small segments of the ISO from me?

[gemmakaru]

I never thought to check mine, maybe that's why the live cd kept crashing on my other pc, this laptop was upgraded. i didn't even get to choose a language from the cd. thanks for the tip.

[samalex]

CLI's scare me.

Transmissions MD5 hash, is that the hash it shows in the information tab when you check out the properties of a seeding file...?
If it is, I have a problem.
I'm seeding 4 versions of Ubuntu totalling 33GB so far, and NONE of the hashes match...

Can somebody confirm that the hash that Transmission shows in the information tab is the hash of the file...?

I don't know if the hash in the properties would be correct because checking it from command line took a few minutes to return a result... unless the file manager does this on all new files and caches the results. Not sure, but nifty if it does.

I've only used the command line app because it's the simplest, but I'm sure there are graphical tools to get the same info.

Sam

[insane_alien]

the hash on transmission isn't md5 i don't think

[Phrea]

I'm on Karmic, do you need to add something to it, so that the CLI can do the sum check, or can it do it as standard?

Thanks for the answers so far.

[deanhopkins]

just type this into a terminal:


md5sum ubuntu.iso
Replacing "ubuntu.iso" with the relevant iso name.

Make sure you are in the same directory as the iso, if not, type:


cd /home/user/directory/of/iso

before entering the first command.

[Excedio]

I'm on Karmic, do you need to add something to it, so that the CLI can do the sum check, or can it do it as standard?

Thanks for the answers so far.

I am currently on Karmic. md5sum comes by default with the Ubuntu. Just follow this (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToMD5SUM).

[Phrea]

I am currently on Karmic. md5sum comes by default with the Ubuntu. Just follow this (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToMD5SUM).

Thanks.

[Excedio]

Thanks.

Sure thing. :-)

[Phrea]

phrea@Pb2:~$ cd /media/downloads
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-alternate-amd64.iso
a54366aa72d6b576ee8fc0215f8a13b9 ubuntu-10.04-alternate-amd64.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-alternate-i386.iso
5b2dadacfd692b4f2d5c7cf034539262 ubuntu-10.04-alternate-i386.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso
3e0f72becd63cad79bf784ac2b34b448 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-desktop-i386.iso
d044a2a0c8103fc3e5b7e18b0f7de1c8 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-i386.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$

Yay, everything is OK. :)
Proceeding seeding.

The hash in Transmission -I think- is the hash of the .torrent files.

Thanks again !

[NMFTM]

Are you talking about the "verify local data" option? I ran into an issue with an alpha release, but this option seemed to have resolved it.
Yes.

Will everyone who has leeched off me have a corrupted ISO, even though they are only downloading small segments of the ISO from me?
If you downloaded corrupt chunks of data and didn't use the verify local data option than you would transmit the corrupt data to other people. But if those other people used the verify local data option then the bad chunks they recieved from you would be discarded and redownloaded.

I don't know if the hash in the properties would be correct because checking it from command line took a few minutes to return a result... unless the file manager does this on all new files and caches the results. Not sure, but nifty if it does.
Hashing is a complex mathmatical process and can sometimes take a little while. Files aren't hashed unless you manually generate one. Although, I think that when you move files (e.g. HD to USB drive) around it hashes them behind the scenes to make sure that it transferred correctly. Although, these hashes aren't cryptographic strength, but they should suffice.

[Excedio]

phrea@Pb2:~$ cd /media/downloads
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-alternate-amd64.iso
a54366aa72d6b576ee8fc0215f8a13b9 ubuntu-10.04-alternate-amd64.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-alternate-i386.iso
5b2dadacfd692b4f2d5c7cf034539262 ubuntu-10.04-alternate-i386.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso
3e0f72becd63cad79bf784ac2b34b448 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-amd64.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$ md5sum ubuntu-10.04-desktop-i386.iso
d044a2a0c8103fc3e5b7e18b0f7de1c8 ubuntu-10.04-desktop-i386.iso
phrea@Pb2:/media/downloads$

Yay, everything is OK. :)
Proceeding seeding.

The hash in Transmission -I think- is the hash of the .torrent files.

Thanks again !


Awesome! :-)

See, that wasn't scary. :-)

[Phrea]

Awesome! :-)

See, that wasn't scary. :-)

LOL [genuine, I actually laughed], no it wasn't. :D