Author Topic: A Legal Blow to File-Sharing (Read 1485 times)

indy007 · « **Reply #30 on:** June 27, 2005, 04:36:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
It would be trivial to kill. You guys need to be grateful the government does not know how easy it would be to do, or the RIAA.
Do not ask me to explain how. Just know it could be done, and done quite easily (relatively speaking).

Don't forget to include shutting down irc. It's still one of the easiest places to find warez, mp3s.. anything really.

SOB · « **Reply #31 on:** June 27, 2005, 04:41:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by vorticon
could you at least give us the uber technical description of this, that only a person who invented a primitive form of the internet with his mothers garden hoses in 1862 would understand?

Precision bombing and ball bearings.

Raider179 · « **Reply #32 on:** June 27, 2005, 04:46:28 PM »

I wouldnt be surprised if some of these p2p's dont become created by anonymous software writers. They don't seem that hard to create being as there are so many. Kinda hard to hold someone responsible if you don't know who they are.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #33 on:** June 27, 2005, 05:11:22 PM »

I deliberately did not say how it could be done, as I do not want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag, for free. If they want to know, they can call me and pay me a contractor fee for the information.
Suffice it to say, it would cost them a lot less and be a lot less troublesome for them to shut it off, if they had a clue.

Be grateful they don't.

Sandman · « **Reply #34 on:** June 27, 2005, 05:51:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
I deliberately did not say how it could be done, as I do not want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag, for free. If they want to know, they can call me and pay me a contractor fee for the information.
Suffice it to say, it would cost them a lot less and be a lot less troublesome for them to shut it off, if they had a clue.

Be grateful they don't.

You should patent the idea and sell it to the RIAA.

Vulcan · « **Reply #35 on:** June 27, 2005, 05:58:58 PM »

The problem is that filesharing is like whack-a-mole. Hit one on the head and two more pop up.

All this decision really does is open up a huge can of worms for other areas (DVD and CD burners for a start).

My guess is skuzzy is thinking about preventing users from hosting ports at all. IE don't allow inbound service requests to dsl/cable/dialup users, block tcp syn packets to non-business users or non-static IP's.

Most ISPs have a clause for home users stating they cannot "host servers". Therefore the only legitimate traffic should be outbound service requests (ie web browsing etc). So in theory you should only ever be making outbound tcp syn requests and not receiving inbound tcp syn requests.

However, I'm not sure how UDP fits into this equation. I doubt an ISP could block UDP and it would not take long for someone to build a reliable layer on top of UDP. I'd give your average Linuxware geeks about half a day

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #36 on:** June 27, 2005, 07:59:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
I deliberately did not say how it could be done, as I do not want to be the one to let the cat out of the bag, for free. If they want to know, they can call me and pay me a contractor fee for the information.
Suffice it to say, it would cost them a lot less and be a lot less troublesome for them to shut it off, if they had a clue.

Be grateful they don't.

Dont think it will ever be done no matter how easy it is.
Cause you just know while the recording industry may be helping to line the right hand pockets of politicians tp pass more strict laws about file sharing you can bet your bippy there are people on the other side of the fence stuffing money in the left hand pocket.

Saintaw · « **Reply #37 on:** June 28, 2005, 01:58:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy

^^ Somebody gag this man and attach him to a pole!!!

lada · « **Reply #38 on:** June 28, 2005, 03:00:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan

My guess is skuzzy is thinking about preventing users from hosting ports at all. IE don't allow inbound service requests to dsl/cable/dialup users, block tcp syn packets to non-business users or non-static IP's.

Most ISPs have a clause for home users stating they cannot "host servers". Therefore the only legitimate traffic should be outbound service requests (ie web browsing etc). So in theory you should only ever be making outbound tcp syn requests and not receiving inbound tcp syn requests.

However, I'm not sure how UDP fits into this equation. I doubt an ISP could block UDP and it would not take long for someone to build a reliable layer on top of UDP. I'd give your average Linuxware geeks about half a day

I used to play with snort and "special event trigger" some 2 years ago. Its quite simple... match rule and trigger.
So all you have to know is, how to reconize P2P packet and then simply send reset from the middle to both sides

Actualy IP2PP have a bit similary aproach. Check link i posted above and yo will find that blocking UDP is not unreal.
Lets use less irritating terminology Vulcan.... Identify P2P UDP is not unreal

lada · « **Reply #39 on:** June 28, 2005, 03:42:01 AM »

Ohh its practicaly possible and its easy to do it.
http://www.ipp2p.org
http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/ (i found this one now, i will test it on some friends in near future

)

death to emreee... i mean P2P..

lada · « **Reply #40 on:** June 28, 2005, 03:53:14 AM »

sure but 95% of users will be gone.

Stop with phylosofi and try it in reality.

How many people will keen searching some P2P if 3rd software doesnt work ?

I used to try in one small network.. cca 100 homes and it eliminated 99% of P2P.

Non of users were inventing or searching something better. Home users are simply lame w/o skill.

baaa baaa baaa it doesnt work . buuuuuu buuuu...

thats all they can do

So it realy doesnt matter if someone will develope new protocol, because boarder firewall will be patched much faster that their software.

lada · « **Reply #41 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:23:02 AM »

lol .... providers doesnt try to block P2P.
All they are trying to do is to manage bandwidth. Once they will want to block P2P, it will be gone.

Non of them have balls to block it and announce it, because they are not sure, if other ISP will do the same or if they will take " advantige" from that.

However 2 of 3 biggest operators here already done it.

edit.: yes both of them implemented this new feature silently

lada · « **Reply #42 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:26:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by FaliFan
P2P will be gone? In your dreams.

man you beat me with this argument. i see that you have quite good overview about IP networks....

hmm ok

lada · « **Reply #43 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:41:17 AM »

Did you even read and understand article, whitch i posted ?

edit: yeah filtering Viruses on firewalls is quite common.... If you have some extra $20.000, you can buy one at http://www.checkpoint.com/

Vulcan might have some tips ?

lada · « **Reply #44 on:** June 28, 2005, 04:56:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by FaliFan
Yes, and viruses are still getting through. More new viruses are being made now than ever before. Thanks for proving my point.

ummm you speak about popular things from media w/o understanding background.

And i guess that you also use windows

edit:

Quote

Now tell me this Lada: Name one, ONE victory for the legislative branch or ISP's against "malicious" internet use. Just one will do. Btw. "victory" in this case is defined by us having less of it now than we had yesterday.

Scroll back on the first page and look at my notes about legislative and P2P.

Every single company over here included into contract with customer, that they can disconnect him if his presence will make troubles with services for other users.
This mean: If you will messing around infrastructure devices, you will be disconected.
if your presence will make service useless for other costumers, then you will be disconected.

So basilacy. if some tard turn on P2P or he get some virus and start to open 1000`s of connection every minute, then they can simply disconnect you. All they need is 2 costumers who will complain that their services is somehow slow.

Why should be goverment bothered with P2P ? We are not police state nor pradise of lobist. We are paradise of cartels