Slashdot Mirror
Stanford Researchers Trying to Protect P2P Networks
dirvish writes "New Scientist has a story about efforts from researchers at Stanford to protect peer to peer networks from attacks that could be permitted by the proposed Berman Bill. Neil Daswani and Hector Garcia-Molina of the Database Research Department at Stanford University have mathematically modeled the Gnutella network to discriminate between nodes and supernodes. They then tested the nodes to find which rules could be applied to best avoid a malicious node on the network thus conserving bandwidth."
Maybe the goal of all of these legal machinations is to make it all so much work that it is no longer worth the effort to take the short cut.
Homer: Facts are meaningless, you can use facts to prove anything that's remotely true!
The riaa/mpaa are going about the whole P2P debacle the wrong way. Havent they learnt the lesson from what happened when they shut down napster? How many P2P services popped up in it's place? and they were even more sophisticated.
You can't cut the head off the p2p snake, you try and at least two or three take it's place.
RIAA/MPAA should be looking at other alternatives rather than going in guns'a blazin'
Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
I thought Freenet - http://www.freenetproject.org/ - is supposedly designed with DOS attacks etc... in mind.
/. effect after the 0.5 announce, but things are improving.
Yes, it apparently suffered from
Though they are researching ways to prevent attacks on the network, who says they're going to use it to actually protect them?
The chances are good that the researchers are going to want to keep their funding to their college from their corporate masters, and the knowledge is going to be given to the record companies to be used AGAINST the p2p networks.
It's one thing for the Industry to have legal sway to launch attacks... but I wonder if they realize the potential for retaliation that awaits them?
It seems the most vicious and lawful attacks are the ones that go _noticed. They also come along with large costs and could shut the whole network down. These attacks are from music industry and hollywoood based corporations. Not only that but they probably pay malicious hackers to carry out real attacks.
How to respond: find those loopholes and exploits in the legal system. Patch and re-open with a new and improved legal proof network. Continue the work at Stanford.
Analytic & algebraic topology of locally Euclidean meterization of infinitely differentiable Riemmanian manifold
The RIAA needs to figure out that they can capitalize on the piracy, because whether pirating music is ethical or not, it's going to happen. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the pre-release bootleg copies of The Eminem Show were really part of a stealth marketing campaign or something.
Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
"The P2P Piracy Prevention Act, proposed by Senator Howard Berman, is currently being redrafted following severe criticism and is not likely to be introduced in any form until January 2003 at the earliest."
So this basically means that it's being rewritten and filled with all sorts of terms that most of the people in the senate aren't familiar with, and that most of them could care less about. It's all about misdirection. People went up in arms about the original bill, because they understood what it was talking about. The redraft, will more than likely be the same identical document. The only difference between the two, is that the second will have 40 pages of filler information that is there to confuse and misdirect those reading it, so that it becomes more of a hassle to read and comprehend it, than to just pass it along. That's just my opinion anyway.
If you're looking here for something insightful or thought provoking, you're probably looking in the wrong place.
If the government makes a law that says you can't use missiles to blow up other cars in traffic, then the engineers have to abide by that law, even if they have access to plenty of knowhow and missiles. If the engineers want to blow up traffic with their missiles, they have to lobby legislators.
Explain to me again why similar logic should not apply to these stanford computer scientists?
If they are indeed working on systems to which the law does not apply, then that's one thing. That's scientific progress and appropriate technology policy needs to be formulated. But trying to tell legislators "we know better than you" is immoral.
No, I will not join the ACLU. IMO, they're just leftist bigots instead of right wing ones.
The EFF, OTOH, is someone I believe people on both sides of the aisle can support and so I do support them.
More importantly, Join the ACLU. The EFF has practices that unfortunetly go against practicality. The ACLU is an old and established group that fights for our rights. They do fight for our first amendment rights anywhere, including on the web. Lobbying againt the right wing republicans and ashcroft is a good thing
I belong to both. I first joined the ACLU, but then I noticed that while they do alot of excellent work, they get alot of their money and support from wealthy people in the media industries. It therefore seemed there were certain issues, relating to copyrights and intellectual property, for which the EFF seemed more aligned with my interests.
I think both are excellent organizations.
-- p
I could give a crap if this is considered simplistic trollbait, but the FACT that minorities and women overwhelmingly vote Democrat year after year proves I'm on the right side. Sure maybe they are all lemmings, but to completely buy that argument you would need to believe that women and minorities just aren't intelligent enough to be able go decide which party best represents them. Personally I don't buy that and think women and minorities sure as shit know which party represents them, and which party wants to kick them to the side of the road.
As far the guy above admitting he supports
Asscraft, well lets just say anyone who supports a strong central authority who wants to invade every nook and cranny of my privacy is not on the same side as me.
Isn't that the kicker though? The Republicans for all their "less government in our lives mantra" sure are hell bent on not only telling everyone what they can and can't do to their body, but they want a MASSIVE government agency perpetually monitor our personal space as well.
I could go on and on why I'm shocked why anyone but white farmers with no exposure to minorities vote Republican, but suffice to say the "every man for himself/less taxes for the ultra wealthy" doctrine that the Republicans offer up year after year disgusts me. We live in a Community and for better or worse are "all stuck in this together". The sooner we all start realizing that and work on things like Full national health-care and tax laws which benefits more than the wealthiest citizens(elimination of capital gains and inheritance tax anyone?) the better off we will ALL be.
Its not like the Democrats are some perfect party who never sell out or aren't tagging along with some of Bush's proposals (what do you mean we have to support some of this crazy homeland security stuff to get reelected?), but when push comes to shove I'll take the party that better supports women, minorities, non-Christians, and in general the labor class.
You Republicans are now free to accuse me of waging class warfare, but remember your the ones whose policies encourge it.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch