Slashdot Mirror
Is Rodi BitTorrent's Replacement?
tilleyrw writes "From ZDNet Blogs: 'Rodi is a small-client P2P application, written in Java, that improves on BitTorrent by allowing both content searches and full anonymity. It's released under the General Public License (GNU). Even your IP address can be hidden using Rodi through a process called "bouncing." That is, if A wants a file from B, they get C to agree to stand-in on the exchange. B gets C's IP address, not A's. Through IP Spoofing A can even hide their identity from C. Rodi can also be used from behind corporate firewalls and LANs using Network Address Translation (NATs), something most home gateways have.' "
First Post?
Other anonymous filesharing systems currently avaliable/in development
MUTE
ANTS p2p
GNUNet
and not specifically filesharing, but the I2P anonymity layer allows for anonymous bittorrent amongst other things.
Of these, I've found I2P is excellent, although requires a little time investment in setup, and MUTE seems quite promising - speeds are reasonable for an anonymous p2p system, but the user base is currently tiny. I've not had too much luck with ANTS, and haven't tried GNUNet
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
Sorry, the correct link is here
1) There is no significant protection here. A and B have to agree on a proxy. All the MPAA/RIAA has to do is a have a list of acceptable intermediate nodes C that are owned by them and not easily traceable to them, and push them out on the network. Now there is end to end encryption, but the MPAA knows who is talking to whom.
Combine this with periodic searches as a client for restricted content, and you've got a list of people offering probable restricted content.
They can even get trickier and start advertising content with filenames that sound right (but of course really just say "you're busted, neener neener"). In this case they act as B, the machine with the content, and they can have a very selective list of intermediate nodes (C) also controlled by them. In short, with a small farm, maybe 30 boxes, the MPAA is right where they are with Kazaa and other P2P applications.
2) There's nothing new here. This is just a stripped down version of anonymous remailers/onion routing, sans encryption.
3) The latency overhead of hopping to a node in between will be significant (as seen with tor), and probably kill the app. Not to mention the assymetric encryption overhead.
In short, it raises the bar a little, and for that is a good thing, but I'm afraid it's not raising the bar enough to make a difference for people who want to download copyrighted content (sorry).
That is, if A wants a file from B, they get C to agree to stand-in on the exchange. B gets C's IP address, not A's. Through IP Spoofing A can even hide their identity from C.
Therefore even if the **AA sets up a bunch of C computers, we can still hide from them. They evidently thought about this.
That one of the biggest BitTorrent trackers in the world, The Pirate Bay has just closed...
Once my client is closed, then bye bye.
And after that, you change the MAC address on your router and request a new IP from your ISP.
For total fragmentation of data (that RIAA/MPAA can collect) you close your client before you finished downloading, do the new-ip-trick, and restart your client.
rinse and repeat.
ISPs are not common carriers. Thus, it's possible that they could be liable for what goes over the network. There have been court cases that have gone both ways. In response to this uncertainty, Congress set up a safe harbor at 17 USC 512. It makes things clear, but requires ISPs to take some steps to comply with it.
For this sort of application, the 512(a) exception seems best. 512(a) protects C from liability stemming from C's transmitting, routing, or providing connections for, material through a system or network controlled or operated by or for C, or by reason of the intermediate and transient storage of that material in the course of such transmitting, routing, or providing connections. Note that 512(a) does not protect C from liability stemming from anything else it does.
In order to qualify all of the following requirements have to be met:
(1) The transmission of the material was initiated by or at the direction of a person other than C;
(2) The transmission, routing, provision of connections, or storage is carried out through an automatic technical process without selection of the material by C;
(3) C does not select the recipients of the material except as an automatic response to the request of another person;
(4) No copy of the material made by C in the course of such intermediate or transient storage is maintained on the system or network in a manner ordinarily accessible to anyone other than anticipated recipients, and no such copy is maintained on the system or network in a manner ordinarily accessible to such anticipated recipients for a longer period than is reasonably necessary for the transmission, routing, or provision of connections;
(5) The material is transmitted through the system or network without modification of its content.
(6) C must have adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of C's system or network of, a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of C's system or network who are repeat infringers; and
(7) C must accommodate and not interfere with standard technical measures. "Standard technical measures" means technical measures that are used by copyright owners to identify or protect copyrighted works and--
(A) have been developed pursuant to a broad consensus of copyright owners and service providers in an open, fair, voluntary, multi-industry standards process;
(B) are available to any person on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms; and
(C) do not impose substantial costs on service providers (such as C) or substantial burdens on their systems or networks.
(8) C must be an entity offering the transmission, routing, or providing of connections for digital online communications, between or among points specified by a user, of material of the user's choosing, without modification to the content of the material as sent or received.
(9) C must be a provider of online services or network access, or the operator of facilities therefor, which is inclusive of (8) above.
(10) C must comply with applicable subpoenas and court orders.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Why not just use TOR???
TOR
Gah!!! I have moderator points, and there's no -1 (stupid) moderation option. I am not surprised that a lone idiot (that would be you, Elwood) spouted nonsense. I AM disappointed that the moderation system resulted in a +4 (and probably a +5 by the time I finish typing) rating for the parent post. Sigh, overrated just doesn't cover it. Okay concrete thinkers, forget the A, B, and C example. Each participant can specify how many hops they want. So generalize to an B (leacher), C, D, E and F (seeder) example. Only C has B's IP address. And only E has F's address. And as far as C knows, there's an A involved. And as far as E is concerned, there might be a G. The upshot is that any intermediary isn't aware of whether it's dealing with the seeder, the leacher, or another intermediary. And I believe the law of the land is still "innocent 'til proven guilty."