Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

BitComet Banned From Growing Number of Private Trackers

Discuss Slyck's latest news
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

Postby bkman » Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:52 am

It is good to see you questioning the stance you held in your article, Tom, but I feel that there is still some confusion.

The only way that a private swarm can be polluted by outsiders through BitCommet is this situation (assuming default BC settings):

1.) Private tracker goes down for 10+ minutes.
2.) BC users on that tracker engage DHT tracking for that torrent. This does not compromise the tracker on its own.
3.) Somone uploads that private torrent to a public dump site.
4.) BC users who download from the dump site are disallowed acesss to the tracker, and if they are still trying after 10+ minutes, they can connect and download from the users in step 2, and only them.

The above situation is possible, but it would not be all that commmon. It is hardly a case of "BC letting thousands of illegal peers into private swarms".
User avatar
bkman
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:24 am

Postby nJectid » Tue Dec 13, 2005 3:47 am

Dude, it has been a couple of days since I last signed on and checked some Slyck News, and I must say that this subject has got quite a few responses.
Good article Tom.
It's a pirate's life for me.
User avatar
nJectid
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:04 am
Location: your mom's house

Postby soronery » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:00 am

dannybhoi wrote:
who_me wrote:1. gay attack on grammar.. very defensive arent u?


No. Being sarcastic. I hate bad english. Period.


Then
dannybhoi wrote:Prove your statement. Show me figures. If a site is extortioning money from members, then there is an issue...


Actually, it's "extorting" not "extortioning". There's a hypocrite in everyone of us, isn't there?

Grammar aside, I think it's a futile attempt banning BitComet just because they think that people use BitComet to cheat. What makes them think that people can't cheat using other clients like Azureus and MicroTorrent? If these private trackers want to drive users away from them, because it's exactly what they are doing, it's their business. BitComet is here to stay and I will always use it.
soronery
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 7:43 pm

Postby Dormant707 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:06 am

soronery wrote:
dannybhoi wrote:
who_me wrote:1. gay attack on grammar.. very defensive arent u?


No. Being sarcastic. I hate bad english. Period.


Then
dannybhoi wrote:Prove your statement. Show me figures. If a site is extortioning money from members, then there is an issue...


Actually, it's "extorting" not "extortioning". There's a hypocrite in everyone of us, isn't there?


Nobody is perfect mate. And what I was referring to was pathetic English. Correct in the word extorting, but no hypocrisy intended. I am just sick and tired of the cellphone texting method of writing English! A friend of mine teaches in London, and he told me that he has barely literate fourteen year olds in his class, many unable to write in a comprehensive manner.
Dormant707
 
Posts: 5067
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:03 pm

Postby LaX » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:12 am

soronery wrote:Grammar aside, I think it's a futile attempt banning BitComet just because they think that people use BitComet to cheat. What makes them think that people can't cheat using other clients like Azureus and MicroTorrent? If these private trackers want to drive users away from them, because it's exactly what they are doing, it's their business. BitComet is here to stay and I will always use it.


Its not that they think people use BitComet to cheat, its BitComet that ignores the 'flag' that keeps DHT on for private torrents. Azureus and MicroTorrent doesnt ignore the 'flag'. If an Azureus or MicroTorrent user downloads a private torrent with DHT on, the torrents 'flag' disables DHT for that torrent, while BitComet doesnt.
dannybhoi wrote:A friend of mine teaches in London, and he told me that he has barely literate fourteen year olds in his class, many unable to write in a comprehensive manner.

Cant argue with that, my Mom always complain my essays have past, present and future tense all in one and words were all messed up :oops:
User avatar
LaX
 
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 7:02 am
Location: One of the multiverses you're not in

Postby Dormant707 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:16 am

Lax wrote:
dannybhoi wrote:A friend of mine teaches in London, and he told me that he has barely literate fourteen year olds in his class, many unable to write in a comprehensive manner.


Cant argue with that, my Mom always complain my essays have past, present and future tense all in one and words were all messed up :oops:


Lax - you can articulate yourself quite nicely for your age. What I am talking about, are kids who can barely articulate themselves with a pen (or a keyboard for that matter). It is fine to make mistakes - it was pointed out to me that I was using a non-existant word! But, when you cannot write in an intelligible manner, well that is when I get a bit annoyed.
Dormant707
 
Posts: 5067
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:03 pm

Postby LaX » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:20 am

If only you were my teacher. They matter tense and agreements so much they give me bad grades. I do improve though :D
User avatar
LaX
 
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 7:02 am
Location: One of the multiverses you're not in

Postby Dormant707 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:23 am

LaX wrote:If only you were my teacher. They matter tense and agreements so much they give me bad grades. I do improve though :D


Ah, but a teacher is a different matter. It is their job to discipline you, to get you to where you need to be. Just work hard and you will see the results.

I just got results from my exams (I am studying part time - correspondence) - got 78% and 87% for the two exams that I wrote. It was a nice feeling - especially as the 78% result was a big surprise. I did not feel that I had done well in that exam. :D
Dormant707
 
Posts: 5067
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:03 pm

Postby BasicTek » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:16 am

SlyckTom wrote:But you want to know how to identically configure...so you also block TorrentIt, and enable DHT. BitComet's DHT kicks in. Assuming you have the private torrent, you can then share peers...but only from that one individual.


I'm still a little fussy on 1 point that Drake brought up.

When a DHT enabled client of a private tracker, times out, and then connects to other DHT clients say from a public tracker. Does this enable clients of the public tracker to download from the entire private swarm or just the user(s) with DHT enabled?

If it's the entire swarm I can see why private tracker owners wouldn't like this. But if it's just that user then as I stated earlier what's the big deal?
"The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy." - Woodrow Wilson
User avatar
BasicTek
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:59 pm
Location: Somewhere warm

Postby Dormant707 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:33 am

BasicTek wrote:If it's the entire swarm I can see why private tracker owners wouldn't like this. But if it's just that user then as I stated earlier what's the big deal?


I agree - what is the big deal? I suppose it comes down to the fact that the owners of private trackers lose control of their little empire?
Dormant707
 
Posts: 5067
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:03 pm

Postby who_me » Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:56 am

or there files that they have avaialble first become available publicly which means less member/profits(?)
:lol:
who_me
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 6:49 am

Postby Anonymous » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:18 am

ParaNoidDroid wrote:People go to the trouble of implementing DHT to give torrents more freedom and some mock-elitists wanna opt out cos they dont wanna share with leechers unless they pay to leech. Leaky torrents bad for business

dannybhoi wrote:
BasicTek wrote:If it's the entire swarm I can see why private tracker owners wouldn't like this. But if it's just that user then as I stated earlier what's the big deal?

I agree - what is the big deal? I suppose it comes down to the fact that the owners of private trackers lose control of their little empire?

who_me wrote:or there files that they have avaialble first become available publicly which means less member/profits(?)
:lol:

Theres private sites and theres private sites. Why in gods name would ya tell the world bout ya PRIVATE tracker if ya just wanna share with ya special circle of friends and keep what ya doing secret? They dont wanna keep it secret and anybody who knows anything bout the torrent scene knows the names of these sites and where to find.You people wanna donate for privilidged access to the latest releases while they SELL YOUR UPLOAD to LEECHERS they claim they are tryin stop by bannin bitcomet? didnt thinkso. Boycot these idiots who charge for warez and make you distribute it for em to the paying leechers.
Anonymous
 

Postby SlyckTom » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:27 am

Does this enable clients of the public tracker to download from the entire private swarm or just the user(s) with DHT enabled?


Only those clients with DHT enabled, and only those client trying to reach the downed tracker.

If it's the entire swarm I can see why private tracker owners wouldn't like this. But if it's just that user then as I stated earlier what's the big deal?


There is no real big deal since it takes a rare set of circumstances for it to occur. Its obvious to me now that private operators have only told half the story - not the full technical rational.
Follow us on Twitter @SlyckDotCom
Join our Facebook Fan page
SlyckTom
 
Posts: 5713
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:22 pm
Location: New York City

Postby eisa01 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:43 am

SlyckTom wrote:
Does this enable clients of the public tracker to download from the entire private swarm or just the user(s) with DHT enabled?

Only those clients with DHT enabled, and only those client trying to reach the downed tracker.

I'm not sure about that, one site I'm using have had 'leaked' torrents, where outside peers enters the swarm. From what I've understood, this is because a BC clients starts connecting on the DHT, and then uses peer exchange to to tell the outside swarm of the private swarm.

Or, someone copies the peerlist and feeds it to their own tracker...
eisa01
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 8:03 pm
Location: Norway

Postby Dormant707 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:46 am

SlyckTom wrote:
If it's the entire swarm I can see why private tracker owners wouldn't like this. But if it's just that user then as I stated earlier what's the big deal?


There is no real big deal since it takes a rare set of circumstances for it to occur. Its obvious to me now that private operators have only told half the story - not the full technical rational.


I agree Tom. The private operators have agendas other than the technical issues. There have been a lot of posts that denounce private trackers, and others that praise private trackers. Opinion is divided on this issue, and I think that there is a lot of people who have grudges against the private operators.

The issue of charging for VIP status on private status is another issue in this matter, something that Scratch mentioned:


SlyckScratch wrote:Of course, everyone has free will to use or not to use, to donate or not to donate. In my opinion the torrent community is heading in an unfavourable direction - sites charging for access (VIP or otherwise) will get their heads chopped off and their bleeding skulls will be held up for the whole world to see.

And the propaganda will state that ALL torrent sites are like this - commercial piracy

Ugly isn't it?
Dormant707
 
Posts: 5067
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:03 pm

Postby BasicTek » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:40 am

eisa01 wrote:I'm not sure about that, one site I'm using have had 'leaked' torrents, where outside peers enters the swarm. From what I've understood, this is because a BC clients starts connecting on the DHT, and then uses peer exchange to to tell the outside swarm of the private swarm.

Or, someone copies the peerlist and feeds it to their own tracker...


This makes no sense to me. By making this statement you are saying that users without access to a private tracker can access say Azureus clients in the private swarm via bitcomet DHT? :?
"The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy." - Woodrow Wilson
User avatar
BasicTek
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:59 pm
Location: Somewhere warm

Postby LaX » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:49 am

This is down right confusing. Azureus uses a different DHT right?
User avatar
LaX
 
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 7:02 am
Location: One of the multiverses you're not in

Postby eisa01 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:50 am

Yep, other BC users from the outside swarm can access everyone on the private swarm, since they use peer exchange. Clients without peer exchange won't get into the private swarm, I think. That's how I understand it, could be wrong though.
eisa01
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 8:03 pm
Location: Norway

Postby bkman » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:27 am

eisa01 wrote:Yep, other BC users from the outside swarm can access everyone on the private swarm, since they use peer exchange. Clients without peer exchange won't get into the private swarm, I think. That's how I understand it, could be wrong though.


You are wrong. Peer-exchange should still be disabled due to the private flag.
User avatar
bkman
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:24 am

Postby eisa01 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:39 am

But it still enables DHT, so why shouldn't it enable peer exchange too?
eisa01
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 8:03 pm
Location: Norway

Postby bkman » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:51 am

The DHT tracker is added as a backup when the real tracker goes down, but that doesn't mean that the private flag is ignored completely. It is still listed as private and peer-exchange is locked in the torrent settings.

You can do a test to determine this yourself, if my logic is not convincing enough for you.
User avatar
bkman
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:24 am

Postby eisa01 » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:57 am

No need, I trust you ;)
eisa01
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 8:03 pm
Location: Norway

Postby LaX » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:58 am

Smart way to avoid defeat in an argument :P
User avatar
LaX
 
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 7:02 am
Location: One of the multiverses you're not in

Postby BasicTek » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:17 am

bkman wrote:The DHT tracker is added as a backup when the real tracker goes down, but that doesn't mean that the private flag is ignored completely. It is still listed as private and peer-exchange is locked in the torrent settings.

You can do a test to determine this yourself, if my logic is not convincing enough for you.


Well there you have it. If no one contests this point then Tom's edits now reflect the truth of the matter. The whole bitcomet DHT issue is being taken way out of proportion and people running private trackers risk loosing more performance by banning a client and all users that don't have DHT enabled then just leaving it alone.

Doesn't bother me I don't dl from private sites but I hate to see any type of P2P receiving poor publicity unjustly. :roll:
Last edited by BasicTek on Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
"The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy." - Woodrow Wilson
User avatar
BasicTek
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 12:59 pm
Location: Somewhere warm

Postby Serenade » Tue Dec 13, 2005 12:15 pm

I think the edited article presents the issue much fairer and will clear some misconception about the DHT. And the replies to this topic are educative, I sort of know you can't simply share freely through DHT but not in detail.

This issue doesn't affect me as I don't use private trackers. :)
Serenade
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:14 am

PreviousNext

Return to Slyck News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

© 2001-2008 Slyck.com