Slashdot Mirror
BitComet Banned From Private Trackers
An anonymous reader writes "Slyck news is reporting that because BitComet does not recognize the 'private flag' on torrents originating from pirate BitTorrent trackers, this client is being banned from these communities. Private trackers are finding their torrents spread via the private DHT layer, allowing leechers to bypass ratios and download content freely."
Is there a way to change the 'user-agent' of bitcomet to make trackers think it's another client?
And that means what in English?
Actually, it becomes a bit clearer when you read TFA. Apparently there are private torrent sharing communities that don't want to broadly distribute files, just share amongst themselves. This one BitTorrent client, BitComet, does not respect the keep-out signs, so such communities are having to be more proactive about keeping BitComet users from trespassing.
Or at least that's what I think it means.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
Does this strike anyone else as an ironic, considering that all the people that are downloading *aren't* the owners of the content to begin with?
First slashdot article I've seen for a while that has read like total gibberish. Anyone got a link to what half those terms mean?
Does anyone with a slashdot id under 5000 understand it?
...but it isn't. I'm part of a private tracker group that banned Bitcomet 3 days ago... I've been using BitComet since, and nothing at all has changed. I'll change clients when things actually change.
The title says "private trackers", but the text says "Pirate trackers" once... Is this a typo, or fruedian?? :)
Every living creature on earth dies alone.
Private torrent communities are the lifeblood of the BitTorrent scene. They are the only thing standing between BT and the sort of vast, content-less wasteland of Kazaa/Edonkey type systems. Yes, that means individual users need to be held accountable and poor quality clients that enable cheaters and leechers will unfortunately have to be banned. Such is life.
BitComet does not recognize the 'private flag' on torrents originating from pirate BitTorrent trackers
Ye means 'pirate flag', ye rumpity old skalliwag! Th'old skull and cross bones! Yarr!
People who think they're a good idea really oughta read up on Pareto Efficiency.
I call bullshit. The tracker itself can be privatized simply by doing authentication based on IP address (several bittorrent communities do this). Even if you get the torrent file that uses the tracker, it will deny you access.
Bittorrent private trackers are sites that depend on a healthy share ratio for success. If you download something, it's tracked, and you must then upload a comparable number in order to stay a member of that site or receive certain benefits of membership. This creates a healthy environment of seeders--not like many public trackers, which have an inordinate amount of leechers. Bitcomet doesn't recognize or follow the conventions that enable such private trackers to exist. It can bypass that, and enable anyone to download from a private tracker site without worrying about a ratio. This is extremely detrimental to the private tracker. I'm in favor of this move by the private trackers; Bitcomet is misrepresenting itself as a fully-functional BT client.
Gosh someone accessing their trackers for pirated movies and software WITHOUT their permission. I guess circumventing the adwords on their registration pages is a big no-no. Oh the horror...
Does this strike anyone else as an ironic, considering that all the people that are downloading *aren't* the owners of the content to begin with?
That's a very bold generalization to make. It is almost RIAA-esqe.
There could very well be a family wishing to share a large collection of digital family videos that they have taken at holidays and birthdays, for instance. They want them to remain fairly private while sharing the content that they own.
BitTorrent has many, many legitimate uses. It is completely incorrect to claim that all users who wish to limit the sharing of their data are pirates.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Well what'd you expect from something running in a Java VM? I've seen 150mb of RAM go to Azureus, Eclipse and the JVM while using me computer. Not that it matters a whole lot when you've got a gig of RAM.
Insert Sig Here
Azureus is the best for multi-platform.
But for Windows, uTorrent is the best. It's small (115KB), uses not alot of RAM (~5mb) and has most of the features that Azureus has! It even has a bandwidth scheduling function.
The hip way to get your IP. No ads, ever.
BitComet was also found to ignore the "evil bit."
In so doing, they block anyone with a dynamic IP.
Don't you have to log in to a web site to use private trackers? So when you log in it updates your IP address on the seeder's list, or however it works. I wouldn't think dynamic IP addresses would be a problem.
1) Buy better hardware. The java footprint is negligible on a modern machine.
2) Get a better platform. Java on Windows sucks because Windows sucks. Java on Linux isn't bad at all. There are plenty of low-overhead clients for Linux/Unix (rtorrent, ctorrent, ktorrent) but most people use Azureus because it's better.
What is the DHT Layer? I would consider myself as being torrent savvy, but I have no clue what this means.
... DHT is a networking protocol that enhances the scalability and efficiency of decentralized networks by creating a virtual index rather than broadcasting search queries. Decentralized networks that utilized DHT technology are able to search and locate files significantly faster than networks that do not use it.
? t=10991
A little bit of research later...
DHT stands for Distributed Hash Table
source (non-authoritative): http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=772
DHT is a layer added on top of the BitTorrent network to assist in Azureus' performance. BitTorrent is a distinct networking protocol, of which is specified by creator Bram Cohen. Anything existing outside of those specifications is not BitTorrent.
source (non-authoritative): http://www.unitethecows.com/forums/showthread.php
(So DHT is not part of the bittorrent specification; At least, it wasn't in May 2005, but who knows now...)
So basically, my understanding now is that the DHT Layer is what allows for the decentralization of torrents. Thus, by not respecting the "private" flag, the clients can leech all day without it affecting their ratio. Slap me if I am wrong or missing something, but aren't most (re:99.999%) of these "communities" that care about leechers, ratios, and keeping their torrents to themselves going to be trading/torrenting copyrighted content/material? Call me crazy, but I just have this hunch that this isn't exactly the latest Knoppix torrent. And then you can call me crazy again, but I must ask why we care what these "communities" ban or don't ban?
But then again, this is slashdot where anything that approaches conservative or rational gets modded down by the mob.
Censorship is obscene. Patriotism is bigotry. Faith is a vice. Slashdot 2.0 sucks.
It's the only client that has the 'Protocol Header Encrypt' option which is very useful for those of us who's ISP's use services like P-Cube software. The P-Cube service engines are VERY capable of doing IP selective throttling and BitComet is the only solution I've found that can has an option that can get around it.
This is the message from one of the private trackers I frequent:
# Show 2005-12-10 - BitComet
We are following the example led by other private bittorrent trackers and we have banned all BitComet clients. Perhaps having so many sites banning it will encourage their developers to do something about it.
The reason why: BitComet, like Azureus, allows the sharing of peers via a DHT system. Azureus implemented SecureTorrents into their client, which we coded into our tracker. BitComet followed and implemented a similar private flag. Unfortunately, the BitComet authors decided not to code what they said ("BitComet will not add DHT Network as Backup Tracker even all the trackers can not be connected later, and will also disable Peer Exchange between peers") and instead ignore this flag after a period of time.
If the BitComet developers create a new version which behaves as it should, we will happily change our stance on this. But at the moment, BitComet is not welcome here.
If you want a replacement client, we recommend Torrent and Azureus.
Uh, so thieves are angry that other thieves are stealing their lot? how funny..
Here are the bittorrent stats seem by my mldonkey bittorrent client for the last month(non-stop)
According to this they are banning 60% of bittorrent traffic... not a intelligent move IMHO.
BitTorrent Total Uptime: 29 days, 20h:10m 2578216 seconds
Brand Seen
Total 88212 (100%)
BitComet 52601 (60%)
BitLord 30318 (34%)
Azureus 2392 (3%)
Mainline 839 (1%)
BitTornado 466 (1%)
MLdonkey 433 (0%)
ABC 345 (0%)
uTorrent 334 (0%)
Shareaza 206 (0%)
Azureus uses SWT, and can, like Eclipse, be compiled to native binaries using GCJ (or various other native Java compilers). Such binaries are often far faster and less memory-hungry than JVM-run Java applications.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
That doesn't mean that it will be banned. As long as Azureus follows the private flag, all will be well. Azureus can use the trackerless system all it wants as long as the tracker isn't marked as private.
At least give downloading Linux distributions as an example. The one you gave was tortured so effectively I have to wonder if you work for the White House.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Maybe the video-trading family example is weak. I'll offer you a real example instead: Mandrake Club. Mandrake Club members pay an annual fee for access to expanded versions of the Mandrake distribution. This depends on the level (read: cost) of your membership. In all cases, the content that members can download is different from the freely-available Mandrake content. Now, why would Mandrake or its club members want non-members using their private bittorrent distrubution method? In this case, they certainly own the content.
"Grandma, we love you, but it's about time you seed some vids of your own!"
If this "private" flag relies on cooperation from clients, then it is broken.
To be fair to the poster, these trackers are private for a reason. Well, more than one actually, but it's not so a bunch of people get together to share pictures of the trip to NYC. More like, they want to restrict how many leechers are trying to get access to all the free copyrighted material.
/. induced bias screen.
If you've surfed private trackers, you'll know there are VERY few legitimate files on these sites. Of course, the occasional demo or freeware is posted, so everyone can get them quickly, but a large percentage of the files on these trackers are not legal files. Anyone who denies this has their eyes covered in some sort of awesome
Oh, right! That is a laugh. A family sharing their home videos over bit torrent. Can you name ONE family doing that? Can you name ONE family even CAPABLE of doing that?
The Jenkins from Idaho, for instance. Then there are the Maxwells and the Crenshaws in Leeds. Don't forget the Ogdens in Oslo, and the Buzzonis in Turin.
I'm sorry, that's more than one family!
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Even though I do have 2Gb of RAM and appreciate using it fully, the footprint of most big java applications is far from negligeable (or it's negligeable in the Firefox "hogging 200Mb of RAM and holding on to it is negligeable" meaning (*)) and given the choice I do and will use an alternate software to a Java bloatware.
(*): I do use Firefox though, mainly because I'm addicted to the extensions and sheer flexibility of that bastard (which are more important to me than the issue of seeing it tear through 10% of my RAM), sorry Operaists but even though I do like Opera the lack of many (mostly useless) features I get through firefox' extensions prevents me from using it as my main browser
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
Why those bitcommet users, they just cheat to get content they didn't pay for. HOW DARE THEY, I should call the MPAA/RIAA depending on what you are sharing. The number of private trackers that share legal content can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I mean why would say a linux distro give a fuck who gets their content and at what share ratio? There are probably enough die hard fans to keep the seeds populated without enforcing it with ratios.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Then they shouldn't use a public p2p network then...
They aren't. By including the private flag in their torrent file they expect it to be a private p2p network. BitComet however doesn't acknowledge the flag. It is much the same as a search engines that doesn't acknowledge robot.txt.
WHY someone would not want to share amongst everyone.
Because some people don't like sharing with people that doesn't share back and the best way to make sure that everyone is sharing back is by making it a private community.
Peer-to-peer sharers thwarted in their ability to control who participates in sharing by a peer-to-peer protocol.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
It amuses me to read all the slashdotters that have no concept that just because these people may be pirating software, there are standards for behavior. It's this same lack of understanding that drives some "ne'er-do-well" to come up with a Bitcomet. These people who claim there is no honor among pirates are the very people who would use this as a rationale for using this client.
Just because you're pirating doesn't mean that there aren't any community standards, kids. You CAN and WILL be excluded if you break the social contract.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
The thing with BT is: if you have say 10 seeds, then your torrent is fine. If you have even 1 seed, it won't die. It doesn't matter that some folks leech and then run. So, the core premise of these private sites is bunk. Worse, it's immensely counterproductive. DHT can keep a torrent alive and supplied with seeds. Barriers to access mean fewer downloaders, hence slower torrents and fewer seeds. I wouldn't be surprised if torrents on these sites died at least as often as on fully public sites.
Really, it seems to me that these folks want some sort of private domain to boss around and feel elite. The rest is just their rationalization.
There is a "standard" implementation. It's called the Mainline network for BT and is part of the standard client, as well as many other BT clients. The problem is Azureus created their DHT network first, and is loathe to drop it for the "official" version since it is less robust.
So clients behave in one of two ways, like Azureus, or like Mainline.
As far as it being advantageous, the problem is that private trackers don't want to be publicly accessible, which DHT would do, and BitComet ignores that fact. For public torrents, it's great.
Still IMing in the stone age?
Okay, Admittedly, I'm taking a logical leap here, let's hope that I land on safe ground.
Doesn't this Private Flag seem a lot like the Broadcast Flag? It prevents people from getting content. So, in a way, you've just legitimized DRM for the movie industry. Haven't you?
I know it sounds like an odd argument, but you're essentially wanting the same abilities that the RIAA/MPAA want -- to control the distribution of content. And when a client doesn't respect those rules, you ban it. How silly is that? You want to pilfer xbox games and mp3's, yet, you don't want to give others the same rights that you claim for yourself.
Didn't you get the memo? There's no honor among thieves.
Besides what's to stop BitComet from doing something like this:
#define USE_PRIVACY_FLAG 1
Since all you need is one client it might be possible to modify the original BitTorrent client to achieve the same ends. All it takes is one misbehaving client to publish the torrent to the DHT and then many people can leach.
Good going losers. You've just started an arms race in the BT community. There's no way to prevent the forking of clients now into incompatible clients.
Kind of defeats the purpose of being "private" tracker once you post it on slashdot doesn it?
Huh? That doesn't make sense. DHT just allows you to share with other people not on the tracker. A private tracker can refuse to track anyone they dont want to, for example if you're not logged in. No one is talking about getting anyones passkey, you should keep that safe. However, if you have DHT enabled, you can share with other people not on the tracker, using your own bandwith. It doesn't hurt the tracker in any way and its not stealing anyone else's bandwith, so it shouldn't be any concern of the tracker who you share with.
Visit my website! Click the ads! Yay!
The 'private' flag was introduced probably by Azureus when they made their own DHT. People should have banned it (it = Azureus) right then and there because adding the 'private' flag broke every torrent in existance that wanted to keep private.
Mainline/official supports their own DHT, but only uses it if a torrent is explicitly marked as trackerless. This is probably best for sites that want to stay private, but people have been bitching that "if the tracker goes down, I can't download. Therefore DHT rules."
So personally they can all go to hell for breaking our stuff. (Well, except for mainline).
Grab a seat yourself...
A large number of people on the internet who use stuff like BT to download legit software really don't give a rat's ass about dickhead movie/software pirates.
I use BT to get ISOs for Linux distros and other legal free data. I don't like the fact BT gets whatever negative publicity the *AA like to throw out to the public due to people using it for illegal acts, and I'm sure there are others who feel the same.
Get a job, buy the movie/CD/software. Don't like the prices? Buy second-hand. Don't like that? Complain to the *AA/developer and/or don't buy it. Stop acting like a 12-year old with a cable modem.
Hey, that gives me an idea. Let create a new P2P app and call it "Grandma". Just imagine a few years later of kids using this software. Eventually, one of them gets busted in court and goes before the judge...
;)
"Your honor, Eric is being prosecuted for supporting Grandma!
Ya, right, that will go over well with the court.
Life is not for the lazy.
They've implemented some content-inspection filtering (privacy issues?) and in the last week or so, my bittorrents stopped working completely. Most of my friends are affected, some are just severely throttled to 3kB/s while some are fine.
.torrent files from websites unless the .torrent file itself is small enough to get through in the first couple of packets before the block takes place.
I'm completely blocked and can't even download
The only way around it so far has been to use BitComet or Azureus with encrypted BT headers enabled.
I had called and got them to admit it although the people I talked with where morons...one guy was like, "well I noticed my own WinMX stopped working but it works on my friend's computer so I figured it's my own fault". That was his story to initially blame me for the problem.
Btw, I wasn't an abuser. I was trying to download an Ubuntu AMD-64 ISO for the past week before running tcpdump and seeing the traffic look like it had some delayed blocking. Then I googled...
Why the hell would someone want to restrict themselves to a small group of file sharers ?
:)
Mate. You've obviously never been a member of a serious, hardcore BT site. Restricting membership and being strict about ratios works because
a. it keeps the leeches away. It really does.
b. the speeds are fantastic, since everyone is very interested in seeding for weeks and weeks.
c. one quick request in the forums and you're guaranteed to find ANYTHING you want. no matter how obscure the album/performer/version. If you're serious about music, this is the best thing about private trackers.
And no, I won't tell you which sites are like that, I value my invites
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. -- G.B. Shaw
While this looks a little more specific.
And this might just be close to a bullseye. I think I'll curl up with this one myself.
fD
I have a total transfer limit each month. It's fairly high. But if I put up a big torrent, I simply can't upload it to all the hit-and-run kids by myself. This isn't a huge problem for me because when I've put a few copies up I'll simply stop seeding or put on some absurd limit (have fun uploading at 512b/sec).
However on the big public sites this almost always means the torrent dies because nobody else has any incentive to seed. I might as well have uploaded the thing to my own webserver. The idea of private sites which track ratios are to prevent this very thing and it works very well.