Slashdot Mirror


MPAA Opens Anti-filesharing Website

PontifexPrimus writes "The MPAA's new advertising campaign against movie piracy has a home on the internet. Did you know that 'Network users have a back door to your hard drive while you're online, thereby seeing your personal, private information, such as bank records, social security number, etc.'? Learn about the dangers of filesharing!"

10 of 775 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What really happens by The+Mayor · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, the Windows Media Player has had several known buffer overflow problems. A carefully chosen media file could therefore exploit this buffer overflow to execute malicious code after the buffer overflow error is encountered. Although I am unaware of any such bugs in other media viewing software, I am sure that they exist.

    --
    --Be human.
  2. Re:Umm oops? by AndyFewt · · Score: 3, Informative

    Maybe they're using that same ISP that the RIAA uses (Tomorrow's Solutions Today, Inc), but after further investigation, they are on Ware(z)net, but of course we'll have to put this bit of information in (not that they have learnt from the RIAA but..) Windows 2000 - Microsoft-IIS/5.0 and for those who havent checked netcraft, it's also running on the same ip as mpaa.org

  3. MP3 exploit exists in Windows XP; Video at 11 by Ho-Lee-Chow · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a more serious MP3 buffer exploit in the Windows Shell of Windows XP (including SP1). All you have to do is hover the mouse pointer over an MP3 or file with a corrupted ID3 tag to trigger the exploit. Sure, that may not be the easiest way to spread a virus or a backdoor trojan, but what about code that simply formats your hard drive? I'm sure there are plenty of trojan EXEs that will gladly re-format your HD; now what if hovering your mouse over an MP3 could have the same effect? That would be a great method for "destroying" filesharers' PCs a la Senator Orrin Hatch.

    Microsoft is quite innovative in the field of security. They find ways to open up exploits in all kinds of data formats that were previously thought to be safe: MP3s, WMAs, E-mail, etc. (Okay, that was a bit of a troll and extremely unoriginal, but what the hell.)

  4. homophobic by TerraFrost · · Score: 4, Informative
    it seems as if half of the MPAA / RIAA's case against piracy is that everyone is out to rape you. after all, all p2p apps are really trojans designed to steal personal information, and even your own friends are out to get you. that last part is refering to the RIAA holding parents, grandparents, and roommates responsible for piracy committed on their computer, even though they may not have been the source of it.

    also, the respectcopyrights.org website was mentioned sometime ago on slashdot:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=72066&cid=6504 160

  5. Re:From the site by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ah, Spider-Man. Now that is a pirated movie:

    The original scriptwriter sued Sony for ripping off his script.

    Marvel sued Sony for hijacking the character of Spider-Man and trying to make it sound like a Sony creation.

    The actual creator of Spider-Man, Stan Lee, sued Marvel for not getting his fair share of the movie profits.

    That is all allegedly done by Sony, a MPAA member, and Marvel, a major comic book publisher.

    The above allegations, if true, are a drop in the bucket of all the things the members of MPAA and RIAA and done in the last few decades to rip off artists, each other, and the general public. It sounds to me like they need to clean up their own acts before they start worrying about the security of file-sharers' PCs.

    Bells are ringing: Mothra, Mothra! Every heart is calling: Mothra, Mothra!
    Come on, Tok Wira, these sharks have gotta pay! New Kirk calling Mothra, we need you today!

  6. Sort of... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 5, Informative

    While you're rgiht that Linux is not perfectly secure, you must admit that those are rather different classes of vulnerability. The two Windows ones were a remote root exploits in the default configuration, and a root exploit that could be easily used by a webpage/email. The Linux ones were mostly DOS vulnerabilities, most of which would require substantial access (ie, a shell account or more) to exploit, and many of which are not present in a standard configuration (eg, you have to have NFS turned on).

    I would say that considering the kinds of vulnerabilities we're talking about, Linux's track record is at least as good as Windows' in this department.

    --
    I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
  7. Re:Because without KaZaa.... by dubious9 · · Score: 4, Informative

    OK, now I'll respond to the 2 vs. 7 post and i'll entitle it: "Lies, damn lies, and Statistics."

    First off, you've got the kernel source, and anybody can look for bugs.
    Second, you are encouraged to report bugs in linux so that they will be promptly fixed. Microsoft asks that you inform only them and if you tell the world, then Microsoft will likely get mad at you.
    Third, what is the bug comparision total over the long term? A lot of the bugs you stated were similar and one was a vendor driver problem and only one gave the user root access.

    In conclusion, bug count totals are meaningless when used in comparison, much like counting lines of code. They only speak of the quality of the code along with other factors.

    The fact is linux is designed with security in mind, and windows is not. Even microsoft people say so. Linux is updated much more frequently than windows, and new kernel roll outs are simple. Windows is closed source and bugs reporting is discouraged and may be illegal under the DMCA.

    I would then expect Linux to have more bugs reported, but that says nothing about the number of bugs present in windows. And as other posters have said the linux bugs are predominately unlikely to work remotely, and even if they did, only a couple are root cracks the rest are DOS bugs.

    --
    Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
  8. Interesting statement in their "Terms of Use" by MarkusQ · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Studios may at any time revise these Terms and Conditions by updating this posting. You are bound by any such revisions and should therefore periodically visit this page to review the then current Terms and Conditions to which you are bound.

    They could revise the terms at any time and I'd be bound to them!

    Yikes!

    I'd better take their advice and periodically go back and get a fresh copy of their terms. What do you think...is every 100ms is periodic enough? Of course, if they could change them at any time I might miss a short lived change. Maybe I'd better check back every 10ms.

    -- MarkusQ

  9. Wow, RESPECTCOPYRIGHTS.ORG. by Jason+Scott · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, good to know someone has a parody site up at DISRESPECTCOPYRIGHTS.ORG, huh?

  10. Godwins law by junklight · · Score: 4, Informative

    Godwins law doeesn't say anything about winning or losing - it merely states that at some point in any heated internet discussion someone will mention the Nazis. At this point the conversations/argument no longer has anything useful to be said and has most likely become a slanging match.

    There is nothing about winners or losers.

    Read all about it: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?GodwinsLaw