Slashdot Mirror


Safemedia's CEO Tells Congress He Can Stop P2P

palewook writes "Yesterday, Safwat Fahmy appeared in front of the House Science and Technology Committee. During Fahmy's testimony [PDF], he claimed Safemedia's "P2P Disaggregator" technology uses traffic-shaping systems and network-filtering systems that can destroy contaminated P2P networks. And their Clouseau product will make it impossible to send or receive any illegal P2P transmission on any installed network. However, Clouseau allows tunneling and SSH and never opens packets to determine file legality."

46 of 288 comments (clear)

  1. 'Bout time! by cowscows · · Score: 5, Funny

    Awesome! When he's finished with that, he can stop the AIDS epidemic in Africa, and stabilize Iraq. Then maybe next summer he can finally get that space elevator built using all the energy from the fusion power plant his company has just finished perfecting.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    1. Re:'Bout time! by QuantumRiff · · Score: 4, Funny

      Cmon, This is just a software company.. they can't do all that.. but I heard they will ship Duke Nukem Forever by Christmas...

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    2. Re:'Bout time! by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Funny
      "I think while we're at it we should outlaw sporks since I might gouge my eyes out in a senseless act of violence. In fact, maybe we should just outlaw all computers, that'd stop copyright infringement right?"

      Not to worry. I'm immediately at work now, to invent a Cato program, that will periodically, and without warning...repeatedly attack his program.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:'Bout time! by vegetablespork · · Score: 3, Funny
      I think while we're at it we should outlaw sporks . . .


      I oppose.

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  2. Huh by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't lying to Congress illegal?

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Getting caught lying to congress is illegal.

    2. Re:Huh by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Isn't lying to Congress illegal?"

      I'm sorry but I dont recall.

    3. Re:Huh by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 3, Funny

      Isn't lying to Congress illegal?

      Who cares? Just believe what you say. You do want it to be true, don't you? Well, with a little bit of a perfectly ordinary technique known as "wishful thinking," your wishes can come true, as far as your belief in them is concerned!

      You get to reap all of the benefits of sincerity, too.

    4. Re:Huh by stuntpope · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unless the President has full faith and confidence in you.

    5. Re:Huh by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Funny

      getting caught lying to Congress without paying requisite bribes and campaign contributions is illegal

    6. Re:Huh by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 5, Funny

      That depends on what the definition of "is" is.

    7. Re:Huh by Baddas · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pardon?

  3. Clouseau? What an odd choice for names. by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Kato! Ze network is rrrrringing!" *thwack*
    Clouseau was a terrible detective: any success he had was purely by chance. I can't help but wonder if this is a joke, just based on the name.

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  4. Sounds like a perfect WMND (..network destruction) by SatireWolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How long after they conquer the internet with their traffic shaping devices until the company starts ransoming P2P media companies? What do you think will happen once they 'shape' a WoW patch and the entire world goes into catalytic convulsions pre-disposing a worldwide geek uprising?

  5. I bet ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    the traffic shaping just looks for the 'Evil Bit' set in the TCP header

  6. Can he thwart terrorists too? by rrohbeck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looks like a good way to squeeze some decent money out of DHS.

    I'd ask him if he can filter out TOR.

  7. Hmmm. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the likely hood of this is about the same as the spam companies shutting down spam for good, or the virus companies ending viruses, or doctors ending illness.

    Basically, no chance in hell. The ingenuity of one little company pitted against every single person who wants them to fail? Look at AACS? Weren't they going to end movie piracy? How's that workin' for them?

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    1. Re:Hmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Look at AACS? Weren't they going to end movie piracy? How's that workin' for them?

      AACS is an impenetrable fortress, standing against the efforts of our piratical enemies! Do not listen to reports that our encryption has been breached. Like golden armor, our DRM will never be broached, never tarnish, and never fail. These movie pirates will surrender or die. They will surrender, it is they who will surrender!

      - Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf,
      AACS Information Minister
  8. er, huh? by Hettch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    articulo dice: "..(it) will detect and prohibit illegal P2P traffic while allowing the passage of legal P2P such as BitTorrent."

    So wait, it blocks P2P sharing, but not BitTorrent, or it only allows legal torrents? If I'm reading this correctly, it assumes all bitTorrent is legal, so therefore allows it to pass. Isn't BitTorrent that majority of file-sharing anymore? I can't see this tool being extremely useful.

    1. Re:er, huh? by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What you have to remember is that even though bittorrent may be the most common peer-to-peer system, it's difficult to target because it IS being used for legal stuff (at least 0.5% of the time!).

      On the other hand (nearly?) every other p2p system is completely illegal, often sharing anything you happen to have on your pc, in some cases including stuff you don't want to share, and as most of them are stupid enough to use unencrypted packets and the same port every time, they are stupidly trivial to block.

      Add a little marketing spin (99% of illegal p2p = 99% of illegal p2p networks instead of 99% illegal p2p traffic for example), and a cool name and you have something you can sell to the government.

    2. Re:er, huh? by BuhDuh · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Extracted from the link [pdf]

      Accuracy: Clouseau is fully effective at forensically discriminating between legal and illegal P2P traffic with no false positives (i.e., identifying another protocol as the targeted protocol) whether encrypted or not. It prohibits sending and receiving all illegal P2P files, and prevents the flow of copyrighted digital files from legal Internet services, DVDs and CDs to P2P networks where they are totally accessible to millions of users to pirate.
      Is it just me, or is this meaningless drivel, designed to impress?

      --
      Enlightenment? It's just a flush in the pan.
  9. Selling Congress snakeoil by grapeape · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What a crock. Even my mother knows that things can be distributed at different bitrates, different encoding and different formats. This has about as much of a chance of "solving" the vastly overstated p2p problem as I do of winning the lottery.

    1. Re:Selling Congress snakeoil by toleraen · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, you're mother sounds kinda geeky. Does that mean she lives in her own basement?

  10. But it's not illegal per se... by jeffasselin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Peer to peer traffic isn't illegal, is it? File sharing isn't either.

    File sharing of copyrighted works is. But how does he know which P2P traffic to stop without examining the content? What stops us from just encrypting everything anyway? Or it's just going to stop all P2P traffic without caring about its legality? Wouldn't that actually be illegal?

    --
    If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    1. Re:But it's not illegal per se... by haleq · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Peer to peer is not illegal, but i doubt that will sway such an idea. I mean, be honest most of peer to peer stuff is illegal, or at least shady (pornography etc). I'm sure just stopping all P2P is not beyond these sorts of people. The point about encryption is valid - theres not much he can do about that though. I guess thats what all teh l33t h4x0rs will turn to.

    2. Re:But it's not illegal per se... by radish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Peer to peer traffic isn't illegal, is it? File sharing isn't either. File sharing of copyrighted works is.

      Pedantic correction: File sharing of copyrighted works without permission is illegal. The emphasis is important because pretty much everything is copyrighted but in many cases the public has permission to share (e.g. linux distros, game demos, CC licensed materials etc).

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  11. I haven't read TFA by niceone · · Score: 4, Informative

    But as the URL is www.zeropaid.com/news/8825/Anti-piracy+company+ testifies+before+Congress+that+it+can+eliminate+P2 P+at+Universities I think the summary might have left out some important information.

  12. Well.. by BlackCobra43 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Lying is. Making misleading statements (like say, "Iraq has WMDs and purchased Yellow Cake uranium to make nuclear weapons!") clealy isn't, as recent real-life examples have proven.

    Snark aside, the same situation is happening here. He can destroy some p2p networks, at least temporarily. He's not perjuring himself.

    --
    I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
    1. Re:Well.. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I hate Clinton and I think those bombings were wrong. Yet you are incorrect that he did it for a few points in the polls, he did it to satisfy the Republican Congress, who had long accused him of being soft and demanded that he take action against Iraq. It was playing politics in order to get enough political capital to be able to accomplish things like the balanced budget. I just want to make it clear that while Clinton is responsible for those bombings, the hawks in government pushing him to do it were the Republicans in Congress.

      Of course the later cruise missle attack against "al Qaeda training camps" in Iraq and "chemical weapons factories" in Sudan were done solely to get Republican pressure off of him in the early stages of the Lewinsky scandal. So yeah, no love for fuckface Clinton.

      But you are still completely wrong that the invasion of Iraq is anything but a vastly worse sin than what Clinton did. You keep saying "try and make things better". Here's a hint: If you are going to try to make things better, then you need to have a plan to make things better. They had no plan, in fact they deliberately avoided making a plan and told anyone who suggested that they would need a plan to shut up. Ergo they were not trying to make things better. At best, they were wishing that things would magically become better.

      The level of destruction that Bush has caused in Iraq needs a whole fucking lot more than wishful thinking before it becomes anything other than what it is: The destruction of a country.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Well.. by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's nothing "morally superior" about trying to change things within a nation that isn't yours. If you don't like the actions of that nation's government, bombing the nation is one allowable reaction. Changing the government is the job of the people of that nation. If they're not willing to change their government, then it's only their own fault if they get bombed.

      Hmmm... It seems to me that Al-Quaeda make about that same argument as a justification for 9/11...

  13. P2P is not inherently illegal by kimvette · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don;'t even download TV shows (timeshifting, a legal use, albeit an untested/alternative form of timeshifting). I definitely don't download any music whatsoever - Instead of try-before-I-buy, i simply do not tempt myself any more, so I don't download music, I avoid listening to top-40 stations, and I don't and won't buy new music, aside from a select few acts I go out of my way to follow.

    However, I use P2P networks for downloading things such as Linux distributions, particularly opensuse and kubuntu. If P2P networks are broken up like this, they are interrupting totally legal activities and any ISP which engages in such traffic shaping should immediately lose their privileges/protections they enjoy as common carriers. By discriminating traffic they are no longer merely carriers deserving of protection against liability (for activities such as carrying terrorist communications, kiddie porn, and other illegal communications) because they are going out of their way to stop some illegal activities by blocking traffic, so they should immediately become responsible for blocking ALL illegal traffic. When a terrorist or pedophile or ebophile successfully sends illegal communications, the ISP should be held at the same level of responsibility as the purpetrators themselves.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  14. Re:Congress? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't Congress have other things they should be worrying about like the wars they allowed, Katrina,and the public infrastructure instead of worrying about business profits?


    Worrying about wars, Katrina or public infrastructure doesn't do nearly as much for the campaign war chest as worrying about business profits. I've said it once and I'll say it again (and again, and again...): if you want to know why things are the way they are in this country, follow the money.

    Aren't civil courts the ones set up to deal with things like this?

    Except that businesses don't like the civil courts. Civil courts cost them money. They are merely necessary evils. Criminal courts, OTOH, from the corporate perspective, are free. So why make laws like the DMCA, which, among other things, criminalizes some forms of copyright violation, within limits? Yup. Follow the money.

  15. Safe Media by Zironic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you go to the website of the people making the claim they can erase internet piracy you'll notice a few fun things.

    http://www.safemediacorp.com/Internet-Piracy/Dirty -Little-Secret.asp

    Basically it seems they are mostly targeting the mostly obsolete networks like Kaazaa, iMesh, Limewire and eMule. The fact that internet piracy has since moved on to the mostly legal bittorrent network seems to be lost on them.

    They also spout strange things like that the 2 billion songs sold on iTunes are being traded over P2P. I thought the point of iTunes was that it was heavily DRM'd?

    Read and enjoy :=)

  16. Re:Clouseau? What an odd choice for names. by sopuli · · Score: 5, Funny

    I heard that during his testimony Fahmy's left eye kept blinking uncontrollably and that at one point, while raving about Clouseau, he absentmindedly amputated his pinky while toying with his Leatherman.

  17. Re:Clouseau? What an odd choice for names. by Groovus · · Score: 5, Funny

    No kidding. I also find the irony of naming a tool for stopping copyright infringement after a fictional character from a movie/cartoon series which I'm surprised isn't trademarked in some way somewhat delicious.

    I guess it's a better name than Dreyfus though?

  18. Typo by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Typo in parent:

    Isn't lying to Congress illegal?

    It's a French word, easy to misspell. The correct spelling is, "de rigueur."

  19. Not intended to curtail intentional piracy by Chris+Daniel · · Score: 5, Informative

    The title is a little bit misleading; they're not talking about eliminating P2P altogether.

    The technology this fellow talks about in his testimony is pretty clearly intended to primarily protect users from doing things like sharing their entire hard drives (he names one example of a woman who shared a directory containing credit card information) and thereby becoming unwitting contributors to copyright infringement and identity theft. He comes right out to say that it doesn't target BitTorrent (even though everybody knows BitTorrent is used primarily for "piracy") at all, nor does it block tunnelling or encrypted traffic.

    Anybody who was trying to crack down on piracy in general would make a box that would effectively unplug the internet connection by blocking everything suspicious in the least. This is about curtailing inadvertent contributions to piracy and identity theft, to help better target the willing contributors (as he says, BitTorrent peers require identification and consent before participating in a network).

    Programs like Kazaa (I haven't used any of those for a while, so please forgive the lack of examples) often take users through a wizard to find things they want to share on the P2P network, or have a default of sharing all media files found, or worse, sharing the entire hard drive or user directory. Uninitiated users won't realise this, and might just want to download one or two songs -- they end up sharing their music collections with the world.

    This is about making it easier for the {RI,MP}AA and their government helpers to target the "problem users," and helping their image by cutting down on litigation against six-year-old kids, stay-at-home moms, and dead people.

    --
    Don't blame me -- I voted for Roslin.
  20. Don't question the magic! by IchBinEinPenguin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    technology which is designed to destroy contaminated P2P networks by draining the illegal content of those networks
    How is it going to detect 'contamination' by copyright material? AFAIK there's no watermarking yet. Maybe something like a signature database (ala anti-malware scanners?). Yup, I'd love to see the footprint of that little file.....

    Users simply plug it in the subnet as a bridge and it goes to work without altering their network topology."
    Without changing the logical topology perhaps. The physical topology is altered by introducing a whopping great single-point-of-failure and potential bottleneck.

    will detect and prohibit illegal P2P traffic while allowing the passage of legal P2P such as BitTorrent.
    ...
    "That is why our P2PD implemented in Clouseau never opens any transmission packets. Rather, we monitor the ever-changing and adapting myriad of illegal P2P protocols/networks and continually update our systems to block only these illegal transmissions."

    So... BitTorrent P2P good, other P2P bad?

    It must be using the Evil bit (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3514)

  21. Re:Sued merely for downloading? by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Catching the consumers is easier. Catching a producer takes a lot more effort because you're usually dealing with people that are adept at avoiding being caught. However, you can catch a few consumers, splash it on the front page, and people think you're actually solving the problem. See also: drugs, child pornography.

  22. Re:Clouseau? What an odd choice for names. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ed Felten wondered the same: see is Safemedia a parody?

  23. Quote from the SafeMedia website by guruevi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not in any particular order, lots of blah cut out:

    Virtually everyone who uses file sharing programs appear to use them exclusively to download infringing files.

    The only solution to making this free, copyrighted material unavailable to these masses is to eliminate peer-to-peer file sharing programs altogether.

    There is not and will almost never be a legitimate business or governmental justification for use of file sharing programs.

    Mission Statement

    SafeMedia's Coalition Against Internet Piracy (CAIP) is committed to increasing the understanding of the negative impact of Internet Piracy and advocating for the successful implementation of "Clouseau(TM)" by working with Congress and the administration; Departments of Justice, Commerce, and Education; and Copyright Holders and their Associations, Unions, and Organizations to drive greater government-wide efforts to address the serious issue of Internet piracy and the violation of the copyright laws and to recognize that there is now a solution (Clouseau(TM)) to the serious unresolved issue of Internet Piracy.


    Mmm... RIAA shill? Just block everything that it can't recognize? Basically a way to push their personal firewall application to have it installed by law? They can't sell enough of their product by themselves?

    Coalition Goals

    As Congress and copyright holders are in a stand-still watching the erosion of copyright laws, SafeMedia product solutions must emerge as the technological solutions to a political, legal, and social problem created by technology advancement.


    Somehow, those persons sound a lot like Hitler. The erosion of copyright law is not in the consumers advantage. With the current status of DRM, DMCA etc, the spirit of the copyright law does indeed get eroded and congress doesn't do anything about it. We as customers are duped by stupid businesses that don't want to change the way they work.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  24. Re:Clouseau? What an odd choice for names. by hal2814 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Clouseau was a terrible detective"

    I thought the same thing. It's like using the Rocky theme "Gonna Fly Now" during a sporting event. Rocky lost that one, folks. Playing that song in support of your team is the musical equivalent of loser talk.

  25. Yes, but that's what it's about. by twitter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I Can Stop Democracy

    If you can't have democracy without a free press, the above is correct. Destroying the internet won't stop "piracy", kiddie porn, or any of the other horsemen of the infopocolypse, it will only protect the corrupt from the truth. "traffic-shaping systems and network-filtering systems that can destroy contaminated P2P networks" are all the rage in China, and they could care less about music and movie sales. The free flow of information on the internet is starting to take it's toll on government and corporate propaganda. That free flow is the target of this and other attacks on the internet, because it makes corruption harder.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  26. Joke? by locokamil · · Score: 3, Funny

    The folks over at Freedom to Tinker seem to think Safemedia is an elaborate hoax.

    On the other hand, its CEO is testifying in front of Congress...

    1. Re:Joke? by timmarhy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      tell people what they want to hear and you'll have no problem getting them to listen. congress wants this whole copyright infringment/p2p thing to go away. they don't understand and don't want to, and this guy is telling them what they want to hear.

      problem is he's totally full of fucking crap.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  27. Re:Winning in Iraq by tuxic · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think you will find a genetic connection between P2P users and Swedes, to some extent, since a lot of people ... err, chefs? ;) .. up here, happily ignore peer to peer filesharing prohibitions, and they also aren't afraid of having FBI agents knocking on their doors if they do it, because:

    A) there are no FBI agents knocking on people's doors here
    B) if there had been, they would be sliced in a claim of self-defense by the almighty chef's kitchen knives
    C) knocked down on the floor by blue-eyed women's big natural boobs

    Remember, resistance is futile! Borg, the tennis player, will defeat the agents!

    Swedes aren't crazy.. wuhahahaha! Vi är inte galna, vi är smarta människor med högt intellekt!

    Okay, sorry. Couldn't resist. Mod me down all you want *hides in the corner of shame*

    --
    "People are stupid. Persons are smart" -- Agent K, MiB.