steve19726
bum
Premium
join:2002-01-17
Chicago, IL
clubs: | reply to tcharp
Re: Peer Guardian
Let me get this right.. if the block list of ips are public ally available, wouldn't the bad guys have them too? plus, as the user said before me, a software firewall can do all the things pg can do and more.. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to tcharp
said by tcharp  :I have a question about this little program. I've seen so many recommendations for it, but from what I can see it only blocks a specific list of addresses AND a simple firewall test shows that my IP is easily accessible when running this thing, so the question really is, "What does it do?" because I don't think it does what it is advertised to do. Any ideas, -TC What it claims to do (protect your privacy) seems to be at odds with its defined intent. I gather that the intent is not to block your IP address from view on the Internet, but to block listed IP addresses from accessing your P2P client. Presumably to foil the dogs of the RIAA/MPAA from finding out that you are trading copyright protected files; which has nothing to do with "protecting your privacy", and everything to do with trying to cloak activity which subject to legal sanctions.
I suspect that trying to identify, and block, all of the IP addresses being used by the dogs of the RIAA/MPAA in their effort to enforce their master's rights is an impossible task. It is probably safer to just stick to sharing files which you have a clear right to share.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
ambigously gay uno
@verizon.net
| reply to HereHear
well, it doesn't protect your privacy... is that really hard to understand? must have something to do with that silly ip address thingy showing up to others regardless of the holy supplanter.
oh yeah, pg is coded in c++ I think, what a bunch of caca to begin with. have fun with that source code.
hmmmm, anyway, I suggest opiation coupled with ATHF episodes, and some food... then, you're good to go! like those j. d byrider commercials.
come on people! our latin friends would not be pleased! you must do that carpe diem thing (the *real* carpe diem thing, the one where you do stuff now and don't care about the future consequences, not that caca doodoo from the dead poet's society, the movie industry just wants to confuse you)
just like the PG heretics! |
|
HereHear
@acesso.on
| reply to tcharp
The name, it's all in the name.
"Peer" + "guardian"
As in: it helps you protect yourself while connecting to p2p.
All it does it block ip addresses, that is correct. But it is the blocking of these ip addresses that protects your privacy, and, keeps your downloading performance from being hindered, while using a p2p protocol.
But the smart people that developed it, were smart enough not to limit to a p2p ip filtering application, and made it work as a full-fledged ip blocking application.
It's not as good if used on a machine used for general purposes, because the ip blocking lists can never be perfect. But, if you hypothetically have a machine only for p2p downloading, then it's a very good idea.
The program itself is a good idea. The thing that one has to worry about is the fact that it is dangerous in the wrong hands, or even vulnerable to well placed evil intentions. |
|
Doctor Four
My other vehicle is a TARDIS
Premium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX | reply to tcharp
One of the WinMX cache servers used in Vladd44's PIE
Patch is on Bluetack's (and likely PG's blocklists). If
you're using any blocklist and WinMX, the address to
exclude is in Exodus Communications range, and is
209.67.209.50. |
|
unizoid
join:2004-06-01
Vancouver, WA | reply to tcharp
I don't have a problem w/ blocklists/host files generalities, if PG hampers a site uness, *allow* *disable* *edit* np
& I've used serveral apps not ness for P2P etc, that have thrown up a problematic hostfile entry now and then. |
|
some guy
@milwwi.ameritech
| reply to erthwjim
quote:
Let's compare peer guardian to a condom, although it doesn't offer 100% protection, it still does offer some protection. And granted maybe a lot of those IPs are fake or just useless, but then again, some protection is better than none. An antivirus program isn't 100% effective, but it's still useful and most would recommend its use. I would say the same thing is true of peer guardian.
let's take it farther
let's say pg is a condom with a tiny hole in it. even the biggest pg fanboy is willing to admit it isn't 100% perfect. does a condom with only one hole protect you better than a condom with 2 holes in it?
of course not, lousy protection is lousy protection, the matter of degrees is irrelevant |
|
Coolpplse
join:2005-09-21
| reply to Qumahlin
quote:
Now on to proving it sucks. Do me a favor, prove to me it DOESN'T.
Explain to me why for the longest time it's block list contained sites like chicagobears.com, NFL.com, QVC.com...I could go on and on. Explain to me why it blocks what appear to be completely innocuous sets of IP ranges. Explain to me why it blocks alot of .gov ranges when the gov has nothing to do with any of the current piracy crap going on. Explain to me why it blocks NASA
Until you can explain to me where EVERY entry on the ridiculously long blocklist came from then I suggest not defend it since you obviously don't know why those ranges are blocked either.,
This is because ur an utter nonsense n00b that downloaded the Blocklist that blocks "ALL" including government websites!
READ what you DOWNLOAD before questioning why This is doing this and that is doing that! |
|
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
1 edit | reply to Ausds
said by Ausds :
A better argument to make is to download the source code and examine it.
If you have enough brain capacity, then you can prove (undisputable) that application is ineffective.
So far, NONE of you doubters have done that. All we've got is your opinions...Which means NOTHING in the real world as they aren't backed with any information.
This is why SafePeer plug-in exists for Azureus.
But of course, NONE of you twits knew that. If you
did, then the thread would shift into a different tone.
My overall point.
If you're going to argue something sucks, back it up with proof. um...why would any of us need to look at the source code to know it sucks? Obviously you yourself have not looked at it.
All peerguardian is, is a connection monitor/terminator. It sits and watches your network stack for specific IP addresses which it gets from a text file and if one of the listed IP addresses is found the connection is terminated and you get the pretty little message of so and so being blocked which in turns makes a uninformed user (such as yourself) feel safe. There is no need to look at the source code, because the source code contains nothing of value. The whole program is just one big IP blocklist (which if you really want to use their BS blocklist most firewalls support importing)
You can achieve this exact same functionality with ANY firewall on the market you do know that correct?
We aren't arguing that Peerguardian does a bad job of terminating the connections...it does fine.
What we are arguing is the fact that peerguardians blocklist is utter BS. It contains TONS of IP ranges that have NOTHING to do with media companies, etc. In fact for awhile it blocked the Chicago Bears website.
So I suggest before you go blatantly defending a product, you do some of your own research and don't bring up idiotic things like "OMG YOU GUYS DIDN'T LOOK AT THE SOURCE CODE YOUR ALL NOOBS!!!ONE111!!!!!"
Now on to proving it sucks. Do me a favor, prove to me it DOESN'T.
Explain to me why for the longest time it's block list contained sites like chicagobears.com, NFL.com, QVC.com...I could go on and on. Explain to me why it blocks what appear to be completely innocuous sets of IP ranges. Explain to me why it blocks alot of .gov ranges when the gov has nothing to do with any of the current piracy crap going on. Explain to me why it blocks NASA
Until you can explain to me where EVERY entry on the ridiculously long blocklist came from then I suggest not defend it since you obviously don't know why those ranges are blocked either.
--
Forum Posts:6500 |
|
Spore Cloud
I H8 Computers
join:2001-09-09
Burleson, TX
| reply to tcharp
The reason that I use it is because it blocks the IPs that are hired by people like HBO to stop or slow me down from downloading what I want. By blocking these IPs that send garbage data around on the torrent and fake seed I will be able to get what I want quicker because my client wont waste its time with any known bullcrap IPs.
Now im not going to even pretend that it will make you anonymous from "the man" like some people think, but for what I use it for it works quite well and is a whole lot better than using nothing and downloading alot of junk data. |
|
C_
Kill The Socialists
Premium
join:2001-03-19 | reply to tcharp
this thing is still around? |
|
Ausds
@net.au
| reply to tcharp
Looks folks, if you're unsatisfied with what PeerGuardian 2 brings, then don't install it.
But all these excuses about placebo (and so on), means nothing.
A better argument to make is to download the source code and examine it.
If you have enough brain capacity, then you can prove (undisputable) that application is ineffective.
So far, NONE of you doubters have done that. All we've got is your opinions...Which means NOTHING in the real world as they aren't backed with any information.
This is no different if I said I developed a Playstation 2 emulator on the PC. I got it fully working without any performance hits.
No one would believe me until I released the source code, and see what I've done to resolve the performance issues of current attempts for PS2 emulators on the PC.
For this PeerGuardian case, saying something bad about an application, and not being able to prove or demonstrate it just goes to show their full of it.
ie : Nothing but opinion...
*sarcasm*
That's really gonna move me not to use PeerGuardian, isn't it?
*sarcasm*
Where PG2 doesn't work well, is with BitTorrent. This is because of the way its implemented (and if you numbskulls bothered to read the source code, then you would know)...
But most of you are simply too mentalily incapable of reading C/C++ code, as its easier to bullshit without backing up your opinion, than it is to look and pick at what's wrong. (You folks should seek future employment at CNN or Fox News...Better yet, on one of those lame-ass try-hard computer/tech magazine/site).
This is why SafePeer plug-in exists for Azureus.
But of course, NONE of you twits knew that. If you
did, then the thread would shift into a different tone.
My overall point.
If you're going to argue something sucks, back it up with proof.
If you just gonna blab some BS opinion without any facts to prove your point, then I'm gonna ignore you (And so will many, many others)...Just like I ignore Microsoft's BS when it comes to ANY of their public statements.
I agree with erthwjim on his point.
Everyone pays for Windows (those included with system adds $100 to total system cost), and yet they actually install more crap (more often, pay for it) to protect themselves.
You install Zone Alarm, AVG, Kerio Personal Firewall, Sygate Personal Firewall, etc.
All are closed source products...And yet, PG2 is open-source, allowing you to see the code and everything.
So what you twits are saying is that you would trust a company that could easily screw you all over, than you would with your own "download and C/C++ code reading" skills?
The open-source project has more to lose than a closed-source one...And yet, people trust the closed source one! Even though the open one allows you to see exactly what the app can and cannot do! Bravo. |
|
erthwjim
join:2003-06-26
San Diego, CA
| reply to tcharp
Let's compare peer guardian to a condom, although it doesn't offer 100% protection, it still does offer some protection. And granted maybe a lot of those IPs are fake or just useless, but then again, some protection is better than none. An antivirus program isn't 100% effective, but it's still useful and most would recommend its use. I would say the same thing is true of peer guardian.
Of course as stated earlier, usenet is the way to go. Sure it's leaching, but hey you can't get in trouble for uploading, and the speeds are always consistent. But usenet doesn't have everything and neither does P2P. Usenet you have to request, P2P usually has more variety. You want anonymous, use freenet, but it's slow as hell, and hard to find things.
And one more thing, if free is worthless than what does that make linux. People pay for Windows and it has a lot of problems, linux is free and it has less. As far as I knew the open source community (free) is a lot more innovative than the closed source community. |
|
twizlar
I dont think so.
Premium
join:2003-12-24
Brantford, ON | reply to tcharp
There wouldn't be a need for such crapp programs as PG if people would wake up and stop using lousy programs such as BT and DC++. Usenet > * kkthx
--
AMD Athlon64 3500+ @ 2521mhz - mountaincable.net wireless Intarweb |Ipods SUCK |
|
removed
Crisis Management Squad
Premium,VIP
join:2002-02-08
Houston, TX
clubs:
| reply to RandomWhim
said by RandomWhim :On second thought, don't use it. None of you use it please. Somebody has to get caught for illegal downloads so the **AA's don't come after PeerGuardian for working so well to thwart them. That's funny right there. Enjoy your false sense of security.
This Simpsons line explains all of it:
Later, a full-force Bear Patrol is on watch. Homer watches proudly.
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.
-Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
-Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
-Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
-Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
-Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
--------[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
--------[Lisa refuses at first, then takes the exchange]
So.. Wanna buy a tiger protection system? 
--
AIM | B | irc.removed.us - #dslr | Give me a ring: 718-606-4100 |
|
RandomWhim
join:2005-05-25
Cedar Rapids, IA
| reply to tcharp
Amen.
"I'll save my disk space"?! If your hard drive is so small that 2mb will break ya...the effectiveness of PeerGuardian2 is the least of your worries. 
It has a very, very small system footprint, and it blocks a ton of nasty IP's.
On second thought, don't use it. None of you use it please. Somebody has to get caught for illegal downloads so the **AA's don't come after PeerGuardian for working so well to thwart them.
--
"People and Robots Who've Had to Watch Hobgoblins Crisis Hotline! Hello?" |
|
aurgathor
join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
·Verizon west (ex G..
| reply to tcharp
There are lots of paranoid people around here. 
Once I took a look at what was in PG, and didn't take long to realize what a big piece BS it was. For instance, do I need to worry about the Tasmanian Police department?! 
What many of you don't realize that they'll often use a regular Comcast/Verizon/etc., account, and and list from there what you share. When mediasentry was using their rngers bot on opennap servers, they had about 2 dozen or so distinct IPs with about half of them coming from home IPs. |
|
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
1 edit | reply to HarryPearTesticles
said by HarryPearTesticles:
Bah,saying peer guardian is non-sense is a load of crap.Like a few others that have posted here,i was running servers full of stuff before napster ever existed,and have experienced all the crap that is out there to experience.
If your using the right blockllist in peer guardian it will help a ton.I just switched pc's and havent installed pg yet on this new one,or i would show a log of the bad guys who i would bet none of you would like to see checking in on you,places like n.a.s.a.,six or seven different millitary facilities,mgm,disney,italian and uk goverment p2p agencies,a numerous amount of software and game companies a few thousand,sometimes more a day.I'm an avid user always have been,keep everything running 24/7/365,Have a run a dozen p2p/torrent sites,even have a new dc one coming up by sunday evening.
Personally i would rather have nasa,and the multi billion dollar companies,and the military basaes blocked,rather then having them tracking my every move and me not even knowing it."It is better to be safe then sorry folks" I say your a fool to not protect yourself the best you can,it wouldnt have been made for you to use if it was worthless,and surely it wouldnt be given away for free if they stood to gain something from thier supposed "worthless" product.So make your own choice's(obviously)and be safe,or go and take an even bigger chance of getting sued for more money then you can probly afford.
PearTesticle's.........Out.
LOL, this is such utter BS it's hysterical. You really think NASA was investigating your computer..LOL This is exactly why PeerGuardian is BS, because it tells you such things that are blatantly wrong
Try investing in a packet sniffer and find out what traffic is really coming to you etc if you really think NASA and "military bases" are scanning your comp
LOL is all I can say
--
Forum Posts:6500 |
|
jsouth
Jsouth
join:2000-12-12
Wichita, KS | reply to HarryPearTesticles
I have only one thing to say about this losers post and that is "Bullsh*t!!!"
--
BTK is guilty!!!! |
|
some guy
@milwwi.ameritech
| reply to tcharp
quote:
or i would show a log of the bad guys who i would bet none of you would like to see checking in on you,places like n.a.s.a.,six or seven different millitary facilities,mgm,disney,italian and uk goverment p2p agencies,a numerous amount of software and game companies a few thousand,sometimes more a day.
and who supplies the names? oh yeah, the guys who made the bullshit blocklist
who are you blocking? nasa? they sure are suing for a lot of movie and music infringement. the millitary[sic]? are they carpetbombing p2p servers now?
it's all paranoid nonsense purveyed by paranoid uninformed bozos like this pear guy |
|
