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.' "
I'm curious... would 'C' be seen as a Common Carrier in this case, much like ISPs ?
If not... could they be 'liable' for any of the more shady/outright illicit material passing through them from B to A as they've willingly and knowingly become part of this Rodi thing ?
( Not to be confused with thousands of hacked boxes through which spam/viruses/etc. get sent, as I doubt most owners of those boxes aren't willingly and knowingly part of a spam/botnet )
Really though, this doesn't sound so anonymous anyway. All the **AA has to do is set up a bunch of "C" machines, and keep logs.
I do appreciate the ability for anonymity though (despite my dripping sarcasm), despite the fact that 99.99% of people will just use it to anonymously pirate things. I think the main use I can think of for actual anonymity is for use in political situations; to report ethics violations of the bad-guys, to point out crapulence in the government, etc.
-Jesse
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
Every few weeks news, another modified version of BitTorrent comes along which promises better search or less tracking. From the standpoint of a person operating a legal BitTorrent site, all of the things that these guys are stating as a feature, I would definitely not want. I most certainly want to track my users, run up statistics and use all of that to better inform my users of how well certain files are doing. I know many are just interested in making new anonymous p2p apps for warez, but their unending focus on it can't be helping the stigma against such p2p apps. Many will say "but! but! the opressed political activist in China! what about him?!" yeah.. I'm sure the teenage mp3 sharer really cares about that guy with his new anonymous p2p warez sucker.
What about if you use multiple C's, and encrypt the data using a key only know by A and B (possibly even a public private key pair)? That way: A - doesn't know where the data is going. B - doesn't know where the data came from. C - doesn't know what the data is. Neither one of these would have enough evidence to sue another (unless they somehow work together).
He makes a point. While bittorrent has been under fire from the RIAA and the like, many of us (myself included) feel that this is inappropriate. The argument being that Bittorrent is just a way to more easily share files.
Rodi,however, seems to add the ability to conceal your identity. I would have to side with "the man" on this one as this feature does nothing but facilitate illegal file sharing via anonymity.
In a way, it makes it harder to attack Bittorrent. As an analogy, it's legal to own a handgun even though guns can kill, but it's still illegal to put a silencer on that gun.
A goal is a dream with a deadline
There's a lot of technology and marketing that can put IP addresses to good use. Just like how I don't like being in the phone book because I don't want my address spread around despite not having anything illegal in my apartment, I don't like my computer address being spread all over the place either.
(not to mention things like if one of these p2p networks happens to get released with a security flaw, there's suddenly a road map to hackers for every IP address connected to the system where they can potentially exploit the user.)
If A's address is hidden from C, how can C send IP packets to A, performing the "middleman" role?
Generally speaking, you can easily, right now, but probably not for much longer, spit out IP packets with addresses that are incorrect. Hence it makes sense that this is a system for hiding A's address from B. However, somewhere along the line, A's address has to be known by someone otherwise the packets will never be routed to A.
Now B's address is quite probably hidable from C. The transaction would go something like:
A to C: Would you proxy packets to me? Please, pretty please?
C: Sure kid, knock yourself out.
A (without a correct sender IP address) to B: You don't know who I am, but would you mind sending file "Star Wars III: Revenge of the Lucas, The Good Version" to C.
B: Sure, here's the file.
B (without a correct sender IP address) to C: You don't know who I am, I understand you have someone who wants this file. Here it is.
C to A: Here's the file you requested.
In the above, C's address isn't hidden. A's is, from B, but not from C. B's is, but A knows about it. For A to be the eventual destination of the file, someone must know A's address, otherwise the packets will never get there.
As for the FBI intercepting this traffic, they really have few options. It's unlikely what A's doing is illegal, and there's no smoking gun with respect to B. If they are C, they cannot find out B's address so will not know who's copying their content. They know A's address, but A isn't copying anything.
Incidentally, before anyone comments, I'm commenting on this as a technical solution. I do not endorse this as a way to facilitate copyright infringement, something I'm generally opposed to. A quick look at my posting history will confirm this.
Indeed, I'm actually relatively unhappy with what's being proposed as, unfortunately, the primary reason it appears to have been developed has been to facilitate copyright infringement. Right now, as I said in a previous post:
The best way to destroy a technology and ensure it cannot be used for good is to make its primary purpose bad and/or easy to legally attack. The kind of thing being proposed here today will make ever more draconian legislative attacks on Internet users a reality. We need a new approach.You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Yes, because the pirate is not closed, it is down for upgrades. You can read it here (in swedish :P): http://pirazine.blogspot.com
(yes this can be compared with sex)
There is no massive commercial worldwide network of multi-terabyte servers where you can can download anything you want. No sirree.
And there certainly aren't any error recovery tools that have been developed for this hypothetical network, that have, in the last five years, solved all the previous complaints about dropped posts and incomplete binaries.
There's nowhere you can search for binaries and download a file to import into hypothetical clients for this hypothetical network, instead of having to update indexes.
And there aren't providers who decode binaries and provide direct downloads to copyright infringing material via HTTP. And provide services on ports besides 119 to get around ISP blocks.
Not that the network exists in the first place. The only place you can get stuff is shitty P2P networks with spyware-ladden clients and blocked ports. There is no Usenet^Wnetwork like this.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?