dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
5

mike0z
@teksavvy.com

mike0z to pickles02

Anon

to pickles02

Re: Voltage decision is in

but what about the future? I just searched for don jon (which was actually a good movie by voltage standards) and its currently a very active title and looks like it has been for several months. Does the current court ruling set up shop for a massive copyright troll campaign this year based on this movie? Surely a lot more people have downloaded don jon than "balls to the wall" or whatever straight to DVD steven segal film they were monitoring in 2012 for the current court case..

And how did canpire record the IP's? Did they have some sophisticated automated software that automatically filtered and recorded all teksavvy ip's? or did they have a few dudes working 9-5 staring at u-torrent writing down ant @teksavvy.com ip's? i guess well never know, but it seems wise to not download movies if you are a torrent user for the time being, or at least avoid voltage titles.
Expand your moderator at work
Amur_
join:2010-12-10
Kitchener, ON

Amur_ to mike0z

Member

to mike0z

Re: Voltage decision is in

said by mike0z :

it seems wise to not download movies if you are a torrent user for the time being, or at least avoid voltage titles.

I think some strategy could be used by those who are intent on downloading. The most obvious to me is don't use torrents that are popular; wait a few weeks and select a torrent with fewer seeders.

It's been my impression that these companies have their sights set on seeders, not leechers. If that's correct, then I would constrain my upload speed on a torrent that I was worried about, and remove it from my library as soon as it completed.

Finally, use Peerblock. It's not a perfect solution, but like my other suggestions it might improve your chances of not getting a letter from one of these companies.

A paper on torrent monitoring: »www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~tpc/P ··· itor.pdf
quote:
From our experiments, we derived a number of interesting properties of monitoring, as it is currently performed: e.g., that monitoring is prevalent for popular content (i.e., the most popular torrents on The Pirate Bay) but absent for less popular content, and that peers sharing popular content are likely to be monitored within three hours of joining a swarm. Finally, we found that publicly-available blocklists, used by privacy-conscious BitTorrent users to prevent contact with monitors, contain large incidences of false positives and false negatives, and recommended that blocklists based on empirical research [18] are used over speculative ones.
Nemo888
join:2005-12-25
Canada

Nemo888

Member

Peerblock is completely useless. Likely to give you a completely false sense of security.

When this all come out most of us went to VPN which is infinitely harder to breach by copyright trolls. I used private internet access, but lately I don't even bother. 100$ is less nuisance than an speeding ticket.

Check out the VPN reviews here.
»torrentfreak.com/vpn-ser ··· edition/
Amur_
join:2010-12-10
Kitchener, ON

Amur_

Member

said by Nemo888:

Peerblock is completely useless. Likely to give you a completely false sense of security.

That seems to depend on what you want to accomplish.
»forums.peerblock.com/rea ··· ?8,11334
quote:
So to sum up, what IPs you want PeerBlock to block is up to you. If you hope to be able to commit copyright infringement with certainty that you'll not be caught, you'll be disappointed. If you simply want to use it as a "firewall" to some certain addresses, it'll do the job.
This from Reddit:
quote:
Peerblock and peerguardian block ip ranges. Those ip ranges contain known swarm poisoners as well as legitimate peers. They do not block unknown swarm poisoners, and there are new unknown swarm poisoners that pop up every day, as well as known swarm poisoners vanishing everyday. Because of this, Peerblock and peerguardian are useless in terms of anti piracy protection. Nothing free is useful in anti piracy protection. You need to purchase a vpn hosted in a offshore country with lax copyright laws that do not keep user logs. I recommend private Internet access vpn for 40 bucks a year.
and...
quote:
It does nothing for you when it comes to protecting your privacy in a torrent swarm. Your IP address is in the swarm the instant you start downloading the files with said torrent. Anyone tracking the IP addresses in said swarm will get your ip even with peerblock running. Because they don't even have to connect to you specifically to get your ip from the swarm. This renders peerblock useless in this situation.

Now if your goal is to keep yourself from seeding to bad peers and the like then as I understand it peerblock is a nice tool that is appropriate for that.

To keep your IP out of the swarm you must use a VPN/Seedbox and make sure they do not keep logs.
I sit corrected. Peerblock may help improve your torrent experience, but it won't do anything to keep your can out of the pokey.
pickles02
join:2011-04-19

pickles02 to mike0z

Member

to mike0z
said by mike0z :

but what about the future? ...

And how did canpire record the IP's? Did they have some sophisticated automated software that automatically filtered and recorded all teksavvy ip's? or did they have a few dudes working 9-5 staring at u-torrent writing down ant @teksavvy.com ip's? i guess well never know, but it seems wise to not download movies if you are a torrent user for the time being, or at least avoid voltage titles.

I don't think Voltage will be asking ISPs for more names and addresses until they've actually gone after some of the TSI customers they will soon have permission to contact. The judge noted his concern about privacy and companies not going on "fishing"expeditions. As for Canpire's alleged million IP addresses of downloaders, who else are they going to sell the list to until Voltage has shown that pursuing Canadian downloaders is worth the effort and expense?

There is a 3 year limitation on launching an action (asking for a court order for names and addresses counts as first step). That means that a current downloader who stops sharing files today cannot be prosecuted after February 2017. Anyone who downloaded/fire shared copyrighted material before the law received Royal Assent in June2012 would have a reasonable defence that they did so "unknowing" that it was an offence.

My bet is that major studios and recording companies will not go backwards and look to get money from past offenders in Canada. The negative PR from doing this could cost more than they would recoup. In my opinion, they will either ignore Canada (like Americans often do!) or come up with a different strategy (better offerings.cheaper prices at Netflix, etc.).
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON

resa1983

Premium Member

There may be a 3 year limitation on launching an action (legally), but realistically, anyone stopping downloading on TSI now couldn't be sued after 3 months, as that's how long TSI retains records for..

Probably about a year for the incumbents..

So, probably a large chunk of Canipre's 5 million Canadian IP addresses caught torrenting, is going to be thrown out as there'll be no info to get.
RobOutback
join:2011-07-18

RobOutback

Member

said by resa1983:

anyone stopping downloading on TSI now couldn't be sued after 3 months, as that's how long TSI retains records for..

That's what they claim. I wouldn't bet on it, though. A record of IP address, account name, and time connected doesn't take up much space. There's no maintenance reason for them to delete old logs. They may delete them after 3 months, but I bet it's not an automated process, and I bet that whomever does it may not even bother.

The 3 month claim is probably just their minimum retention period. Probably related to a backup retention period. That is, if they replace a server they'll lose the logs and just have the ones on a backup media for 3 months. But if they don't replace a server, logs may stick around for years.

I dunno, I'm just guessing based on how I saw maintenance and backups performed in Enterprise systems. We never deleted logs manually. The only stuff that got deleted were logs that had a maximum file size.
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON

resa1983

Premium Member

Marc has stated several times they only retain logs for 3 months for Billing purposes. Copytrolls can pound sand if they're looking for anything older. (The pound sand bit is from me, not Marc!)
RobOutback
join:2011-07-18

RobOutback

Member

I know that's what he's said. I'm just saying, don't bet your life on it. Logs have a way of sticking around if not explicitly deleted. The guy handling deletions probably doesn't have it as a top priority.
Expand your moderator at work
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

1 edit

JMJimmy to RobOutback

Member

to RobOutback

Re: Voltage decision is in

said by RobOutback:

said by resa1983:

anyone stopping downloading on TSI now couldn't be sued after 3 months, as that's how long TSI retains records for..

That's what they claim. I wouldn't bet on it, though. A record of IP address, account name, and time connected doesn't take up much space. There's no maintenance reason for them to delete old logs. They may delete them after 3 months, but I bet it's not an automated process, and I bet that whomever does it may not even bother.

The 3 month claim is probably just their minimum retention period. Probably related to a backup retention period. That is, if they replace a server they'll lose the logs and just have the ones on a backup media for 3 months. But if they don't replace a server, logs may stick around for years.

I dunno, I'm just guessing based on how I saw maintenance and backups performed in Enterprise systems. We never deleted logs manually. The only stuff that got deleted were logs that had a maximum file size.

PEPIDA is one reason why, but without getting into the legal end of things you've got a funny idea of what "not a lot of space" is.

250,000 users * (x number of requests in a period * IP length) + user's IP + datetime stamp.

X is variable but lets say on average users do 3,000 page views per month * 50 requests per page. You're talking up to 1.57TB of data/month for HTTP traffic logs alone. Add in P2P and those numbers climb very quickly and the resources required to maintain the logs become more and more expensive.
RobOutback
join:2011-07-18

RobOutback

Member

said by JMJimmy:

said by RobOutback:

said by resa1983:

anyone stopping downloading on TSI now couldn't be sued after 3 months, as that's how long TSI retains records for..

That's what they claim. I wouldn't bet on it, though. A record of IP address, account name, and time connected doesn't take up much space. There's no maintenance reason for them to delete old logs. They may delete them after 3 months, but I bet it's not an automated process, and I bet that whomever does it may not even bother.

The 3 month claim is probably just their minimum retention period. Probably related to a backup retention period. That is, if they replace a server they'll lose the logs and just have the ones on a backup media for 3 months. But if they don't replace a server, logs may stick around for years.

I dunno, I'm just guessing based on how I saw maintenance and backups performed in Enterprise systems. We never deleted logs manually. The only stuff that got deleted were logs that had a maximum file size.

PEPIDA is one reason why, but without getting into the legal end of things you've got a funny idea of what "not a lot of space" is.

250,000 users * (x number of requests in a period * IP length) + user's IP + datetime stamp.

X is variable but lets say on average users do 3,000 page views per month * 50 requests per page. You're talking up to 1.57TB of data/month for HTTP traffic logs alone. Add in P2P and those numbers climb very quickly and the resources required to maintain the logs become more and more expensive.

Teksavvy doesn't log page views, so you're completely wrong. They only log time of the PPP connection, the IP address assigned to you, the total amount of download/uploaded byes, and minutes you were connected.

That's only a few bytes of data per user per day. At most, a few megabytes in total per day. It would take them about a year to fill up 1GB of space, which is inconsequential.
Expand your moderator at work

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz to RobOutback

MVM

to RobOutback

Re: Voltage decision is in

Except they have hundreds of thousands of users, and log usage data regularly (even if they don't compile it regularly). TekSavvy's usage checker has a checkered history (heh) because their usage database ended up with huge numbers of records, requiring large amounts of computing power to handle.
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to RobOutback

Member

to RobOutback
said by RobOutback:

Teksavvy doesn't log page views, so you're completely wrong. They only log time of the PPP connection, the IP address assigned to you, the total amount of download/uploaded byes, and minutes you were connected.

That's only a few bytes of data per user per day. At most, a few megabytes in total per day. It would take them about a year to fill up 1GB of space, which is inconsequential.

All ISPs would have to log each request - otherwise how would the police be able to prove that a pedo downloaded an image/video. They couldn't do it by simply saying they were connected at a given time, they couldn't even do it if they logged page views as they could be browsing with images disabled or without the plugins required for video.
Expand your moderator at work

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to JMJimmy

Mod

to JMJimmy

Re: Voltage decision is in

said by JMJimmy:

All ISPs would have to log each request - otherwise how would the police be able to prove that a pedo downloaded an image/video. They couldn't do it by simply saying they were connected at a given time, they couldn't even do it if they logged page views as they could be browsing with images disabled or without the plugins required for video.

The police seize computers and then do forensic analysis of the storage which includes deleted files etc. It's not done by logging individual page views etc.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

1) Encrypt the drive.
2) With enough RAM you can forget about having a swap file (in Windows anyway) so there's no traces there.
3) Put anything you consider sensitive into a separate encrypted container (either a container on the encrypted drive, or a separate outboard encrypted drive).
4) Secure erase Trash folders
5) Use Tools like Eraser (Win) to wipe/overwrite unused disk space, and to erase files.
6) Keep the machine off except when you're actually using it (that would typically be 60%+ of a day). This protects the encryption keys from memory scavenging.
7) Secure erase application log files and MRU lists (CCleaner can do this Mac/Win)

8) For the paranoid, use the computer in a Tempest rated room (and wear a tinfoil hat while you do).

shrugs
@videotron.ca

shrugs

Anon

said by MaynardKrebs:

8) For the paranoid, use the computer in a Tempest rated room (and wear a tinfoil hat while you do).

Tempest rated room does nothing if there is a bug in it to capture frequencies emitted from the keyboard.
(used to work in this cloak and dagger stuff for gov to prevent the Russians from capturing what is typed from across the street, or a dark van with tinted windows, or if they crawl up next to your igloo at that secret arctic radar station).

You need zero emission on the computer itself and that contained within a tempest rated room. Then you are golden. Unless the person behind you has a shoe-camera and the shoelace eyelets are really camouflaged camera lenses. But then we would take out the tinfoil and cover people shoes instead of their heads. Tinfoil hat stuff is for kids. Once you get into tinfoil body dressings then I know you are serious.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to MaynardKrebs

Mod

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

1) Encrypt the drive.
2) With enough RAM you can forget about having a swap file (in Windows anyway) so there's no traces there.
3) Put anything you consider sensitive into a separate encrypted container (either a container on the encrypted drive, or a separate outboard encrypted drive).
4) Secure erase Trash folders
5) Use Tools like Eraser (Win) to wipe/overwrite unused disk space, and to erase files.

That's exactly the kind of thing that police treat as "suspicious".

And then they will start digging deeper.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to shrugs

Premium Member

to shrugs
said by shrugs :

said by MaynardKrebs:

8) For the paranoid, use the computer in a Tempest rated room (and wear a tinfoil hat while you do).

Tempest rated room does nothing if there is a bug in it to capture frequencies emitted from the keyboard.
(used to work in this cloak and dagger stuff for gov to prevent the Russians from capturing what is typed from across the street, or a dark van with tinted windows, or if they crawl up next to your igloo at that secret arctic radar station).

You need zero emission on the computer itself and that contained within a tempest rated room. Then you are golden. Unless the person behind you has a shoe-camera and the shoelace eyelets are really camouflaged camera lenses. But then we would take out the tinfoil and cover people shoes instead of their heads. Tinfoil hat stuff is for kids. Once you get into tinfoil body dressings then I know you are serious.

4:40 in the clip

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· cUvTM5pk