thejynxed wrote:Peercache poisoning works just like DNS poisoning. Very easy to tell clients to connect to the RIAA itself if the peercache is manipulated to have only anti-p2p peers cached as active nodes.
which would be immediately obvious to anyone
Thusly, it is impossible to trust any peercache server hosted by known media companies or anti-p2p establishments. See the media.net example for a good reason why.
you mean for example someone who is an active campainger for macrovisions rights to attack p2p networks? well they "gave him permission"... but the only person currently fighting for p2p (in the form of blocking) is clearly not trusted? someone who actively supports macrovision and netsentry is "trusted" but you think that someone who actively fights them is not? makes sense...
As for blocklists, I take what Bluetack provides and roll my own customizations into it. That is what the Blocklist Manager is for.
well that's fine then, while you're there you see how many ISPs are willing to say "we'll half of the internet, but allow specific IP Addresses you ask us for permission to connect to" - there is no ISP that does it because that is utterly stupid, what is worse is doing that and not telling people that you are doing it
Spurious arguments made by people too lazy to take the effort to tweak the lists to their liking, or even to take the time to learn how to do so.
good job you maintain block lists but we have no clue, where do you think every single one of the flooders on dynamics that bluetack blocks come from? certainly not their own lists... you'd look stupid if it turned out they came from our block lists wouldn't you?
Or to even provide people with a tutorial on how to do so on their own sites.
good job we don't have the most popular winmx tutorial for peer guardian in existence or you'd really look stupid, especially if the above were true as well
I have no sympathy, and feel the burden is on YOU to prove that the peercache servers in question are legitimate, not the other way around.
no, the burden is on you to prove that you are not a pedophile, do it or you will be found guilty and treated like the pedophile you are...
that statement is utterly stupid, there is absolutely no evidence proving something therefore it must be true?
here's some proof for you: the fact that there is absolutely nothing linking me to any anti-p2p companies? or let me guess the fact that something is clearly the case doesn't make it true?
of course the huge number of things I have done to keep a p2p network running, to fight against the anti-p2p companies and the fact that i am soely responsible for keeping a very large p2p network alive... they clearly are nothing, but the fact that I was added to a block list which is very openly unreliable and admits they are completely unreliable with absolutely no justification given... well that proves it, i must be anti-p2p
I'd like to see what bluetack have done that is pro-p2p, I have seen MANY anti-p2p actions and no pro-p2p actions, for example when given a list of macrovision IP Addresses the first thing they do is try to claim that the clearly macrovision IP Addresses are nothing to do with macrovision so they can stall as much as possible, then when macrovison have had enough time to change most of their IP Addresses bluetack finally block some of them (mostly by blocking some more huge ranges of innocent users)
there is a lot of evidence showing bluetack to be anti-p2p, and I see no evidence showing otherwise
there is also a lot of evidence showing me to be pro-p2p, and absolutely no evidence at all to try and claim otherwise
it's clear who should be on their block lists, and their website is located in a data center that they themselves have classed as anti-p2p...