Slashdot Mirror
MediaDefender's BitTorrent-Based DOS Takes Down Revision3
Sandman1971 writes "Over the long Memorial Day weekend, Revision3 was the target of a malicious Denial Of Service Attack which brought R3 to its knees. After investigating the matter, it was discovered that the source of the attacks came from MediaDefender, the famed company hired by the MPAA and RIAA to try and stop the spread of illegal file sharing. The kicker? Revision3 was taken down for running a bittorent tracker to distribute its own legal content."
Looks to me like MediaDefender is in clear violation of at least two subsections of 18 USC 1030. Where is the federal criminal investigation?
Revision3 taken down by curious Slashdotters, and the popcorn you're eating has been pissed in. Film at 11....
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
THEINTERNETS (Reuters)- Following the DOS attack which brought Revision3 to its knees, the site was once against the target of a DOS attack by the popular news site "Slashdot" as thousands of nerds flooded the site at once hoping to find fodder to use against their arch-nemeses the MPAA and the RIAA.
Careful What You Wish For....
OMGLAWYERSUESUESUE! Seriously, I hope they get even more crucified because of this. Performing a DOS is a clear violation of law in all states, and since it crosses the borders, its a clear felony.
1. Make a cheap site with gazillions of adds. 2. Piss of MediaDefender. 3. ...
4. Profit.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
Looks like they're also the target of a vicious Slashdotting. ;)
I look forward to the indictment, conviction, and imprisonment of the executives of their operation.
Failure to achieve these things will not reflect well on the fitness of the rulers to rule.
Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
Ha ha
Revision 3 should have just sued, and sued BIG. By discussing it so glibly, and in such detail, on their blog they're jeopardizing their case. A huge financial hit would hurt the RIAA's cronies a LOT more than a little negative publicity from a blogger.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Can't RTFA. They're slashdotted.
(Mirrordot seems to have died and the wayback machine doesn't have it.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
One can hope, but I doubt it. Revision3 might see it as bad publicity, even though they're not the ones who did anything wrong, and they'd risk further massive DDoS attacks in retaliation if they did file a lawsuit. Cases take a long time to come to court, and all MediaDefender needs to do is destroy their solvency before that happens. Dead companies tell no tales.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
and then slashdot linked to them.
... you can hear is R3's lawyers leafing through the 2008 Mercedes catalog.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Remember, not just a lawsuit! DOS is ILLEGAL and they can sue for damages. So that means a criminal case and a civil lawsuit. I bet they'll lose both. You know just once I'd like to see any presidential candidate comment on news like this and say they're going to put and end to the complete bullshit the RIAA and MPAA are pulling.
Btw in other news, Slashot DDOSes revision3.com apparently.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
for joining our efforts.
Together we can smythe the evil filesharers.
kind regards, MediaDefender
...the rulers are vampires and therefore do not reflect at all.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
How did mediadefender get enough computing resources/bandwidth to launch a DOS? Did they launch it out of their own datacenter/domain, or do they have a network of locations?
No, I haven't read the article because the link is not coming up right now.
... or still taken down by MediaDefender's DoS. I can't read what Revision3 says about this on their blog.
;)
Disclaimer: I am new here
they'd risk further massive DDoS attacks in retaliation if they did file a lawsuit.
That would be the best thing that could happen. Judges have absolutely no sense of humor about people who pull shit like that.
Really wondering why the headquarters of the MPAA and the RIAA are still standing; and the offices of their lawyers as well. The power of millions of pissed-off nerds - enough to fill a few pages with comments but not enough to start blowing shit up..
Sure, R3 may disolve before it can file a civil suit, but I imagine the US goverment will hold together long enough to bring criminal charges against MediaDefender.
DOS attacks are a felony. People go to jail for committing felonies.
R3 can sue, in addition to the criminal charges brought forward by the state, in order to recoup any damages sustained by the attack, but even if they don't, MD still has to face the federal government for breaking the law.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Not to mention any discovery in this matter can and WILL be used by states who are currently investigating mediadefender for performing investigations without proper licensing.
Hard.
"Move it's own media files" means they were probably using it for jamming operations against other trackers. Meaning they hacked the server, went to other bittorent sites, said "hey, we've got tasty files here, but only 91% of complete garbage", used revision3 as their server so everyone thought it was kosher instead of, say, Media defenders IP range, and when revision3 kicked them off their servers decided to reconnect and DDOS'd them. Because the input bandwidth was intense for the fubar'd uploads and they had just been cut off of their primary source, they used all available bandwidth to reconnect and DDOS'd.
What's going to happen here is a combination between defamation of character suites and hacking lawsuits. Those are the kinds of suites that put people out of business and in jail.
The RIAA and MPAA just shot themselves in the head on this one and their shell company is going to go tits up due to it. That's going to have a concussive effect on the other shell companies which will have a bad effect on their anti-piracy campaign.
signed,
The Rest Of The Planet
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
did they EVER think about what the reaction to this stupid move might be in the underground scene ? hm ? a stupid shill company dosing some cultural element (p2p) that belongs mainly to underground culture. do i need to remind you, that underground crowd houses many elements that can take down, hack into, play with cia, nsa, whatever-big-agency sites, servers, services ?
what kind of utter stupidity is this ?
Read radical news here
After recovering from a malicious DOS attack over the weekend by Media Defender, R3 is again under the DOS siege from the infamous slashdot effect.
It wouldn't be too big of a stretch of one's imagination to believe they use the same tactic against other trackers.
Maybe if the likes of PirateBay, Mininova and others looked more closely at their traffic patterns and found some "common problems" (such as web traffic from MediaDefender), there would be grounds for civil if not criminal proceedings against MediaDefender.
What IP#'s or subnets or networks does MediaDefender use?
Or better yet...
Maybe we should all run trackers with fake movies being shared and watch for MediaDefender DOS'ing us and create an ever larger case against these twits?
I just absolutely felt compelled to send email to MediaDefender, I so much hate MPAA/RIAA using illegal tactics. So, anyway, here is the email I sent them: Hi there! I just wanted to congratulate you on your brilliant stunt of a highly illegal DOS (Denial of service) attack on Revision3. Perhaps you should have checked earlier that they were seeding their own legal products? Then again, DOS attacks are illegal even against illegal trackers so this could be a bit unfortunate for you. If FBI can link you to DOS attacks on other trackers then you could face serious legal issues. So, I just want to congratulate you once more, this was such a brilliant move by you and I hope you'll do something equally stupid again in the near future! ;)
Yours truly,
-Nita
-Nita
they'd risk further massive DDoS attacks in retaliation
So presumably, if it's okay for MediaDefender to DDoS a company in "retaliation" for reporting them to the Feds, then it's okay for me to roll up outside MediaDefender's offices and tear it down with a backhoe, in retaliation?
Coral cache link, anyone?
For once, I'd actually like to RTFA...
Not because it's Slashdotted, but because I'm 99% sure it'll get blocked by "Smart" Filter... :/
I was able to grab the blog post:
As many of you know, Revision3's servers were brought down over the Memorial Day weekend by a denial of service attack. It's an all too common occurrence these days. But this one wasn't your normal cybercrime - there's a chilling twist at the end. Here's what happened, and why we're even more concerned today, after it's over, than we were on Saturday when it started.
It all started with just a simple "hi". Now "hi" can be the sweetest word in the world, breathlessly whispered into your ear by a long-lost lover, or squealed out by your bouncy toddler at the end of the day. But taken to excess - like by a cranky 3-year old-it gets downright annoying. Now imagine a room full of hyperactive toddlers, hot off of a three hour Juicy-Juice bender, incessantly shrieking "hi" over and over again, and you begin to understand what our poor servers went through this past weekend.
On the internet, computers say hi with a special type of packet, called "SYN". A conversation between devices typically requires just one short SYN packet exchange, before moving on to larger messages containing real data. And most of the traffic cops on the internet - routers, firewalls and load balancers - are designed to mostly handle those larger messages. So a flood of SYN packets, just like a room full of hyperactive screaming toddlers, can cause all sorts of problems.
For adults, it's typically an inability to cope, followed either by quickly fleeing the room, or orchestrating a massive Teletubbies intervention. Since they lack both legs and a ready supply of plushies, internet devices usually just shut down.
That's what happened to us. Another device on the internet flooded one of our servers with an overdose of SYN packets, and it shut down - bringing the rest of Revision3 with it. In webspeak it's called a Denial of Service attack - aka DoS - and it happens when one machine overwhelms another with too many packets, or messages, too quickly. The receiving machine attempts to deal with all that traffic, but in the end just gives up. (Note the photo of our server equipment responding to the DoS Attack)
In its coverage Tuesday CNet asked the question, "Now who would want to attack Revision3?" Who indeed? So we set out to find out. Internet attacks leave lots of evidence. In this case it was pretty easy to see exactly what our shadowy attacker was so upset about. It turns out that those zillions of SYN packets were addressed to one particular port, or doorway, on one of our web servers: 20000. Interestingly enough, that's the port we use for our Bittorrent tracking server. It seems that someone was trying to destroy our bittorrent distribution network.
Let me take a step back and describe how Revision3 uses Bittorrent, aka BT. The BT protocol is a peer to peer scheme for sharing large files like music, programs and video. By harnessing the peer power of many computers, we can easily and cheaply distribute our huge HD-quality video shows for a lot less money. To get started, the person sharing that large file first creates a small file called a "torrent", which contains metadata, along with which server will act as the conductor, coordinating the sharing. That server is called the tracking server, or "tracker". You can read much more about Bittorrent at Wikipedia, if you really want to understand how it works.
Revision3 runs a tracker expressly designed to coordinate the sharing and downloading of our shows. It's a completely legitimate business practice, similar to how ESPN puts out a guide that tells viewers how to tune into its network on DirecTV, Dish, Comcast and Time Warner, or a mall might publish a map of its stores.
But someone, or some company, apparently took offense to Revision3 using Bittorrent to distribute its own slate of shows. Who could that be?
Along with where it's bound, every internet packet has a return address. Often, particularly in cases like this, it's forged - or spoofed. But interestingly enough, whoev
"In another RIAA sponsored incident, the owner of a small hardware store was injured in a hit-and-run yesterday by a car load of the RIAA's mercenary thugs. Going by the name 'MediaDefender' these so-called vigilantes mistook Mr. Revision3 for one of the business owners along Internet Way that don't pay protection money to the RIAA. One of the thugs was reported as saying 'Well, he had a store front so we just assumed he was on the hit list.' A full investigation is underway."
If any individual did any of this they would be facing jail time and fines.
Lets put the people who work for media defender in jail.
Theft of services.. network abuse... call it whatever...
Just put these bastards in jail already.
Revision3 refers to longstanding misuse of its severs by MediaDefender, before the current DOS attack. What exactly they were doing isn't clear to me. Anybody know? And is it a crime?
Depends. If the backhoe has Microsoft stickers, you're probably ok. If the backhoe is the JCB GT sports model (120MPH+), you'll be gone before the press - err, police get there.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
There is a hint that the FBI was contacted, but WTF. This is outright criminal behavior by Media Defender. Why is this not getting some real high level attention and a press report from the FBI? We got constant press reports for that stupid run away bride, does Media Defender have to attack a hospital or fire station and kill off a few people for this to become important?
MediaDefender seems to think it's just fine and dandy to DOS other sites because they don't approve of what that site's doing. Why don't we all go over there and take a real good look at what they have to say for themselves. Let's see how they like being Slashdotted.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
So, how just long have you worked at Comcast...?
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
I operate a tracker to distribute my music. It's more efficient than direct HTTP downloads, so it saves on my hosting bill.
The point really needs to be rammed home to law enforcement and elected officials that there are many perfectly legitimate, and in fact socially beneficial uses for peer-to-peer file sharing.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
According to CNET article http://news.cnet.com/coops-corner/?tag=cnetfd.blogs "At this point, Revision3 says it's not planning to file a lawsuit. Not because it doesn't have a case but pursuing a court remedy would likely cost a lot of money."
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice; in practice there is.
Sounds like MediaDefender wants to take down *any* competition to their clients, illegal or otherwise.
Sue the b@stards, and the puppet masters behind them for astrobucks.
My rights don't need management.
The idea MediaDefender is nothing more than a disposable front-end, therefore, is entirely possible and would make a lot of sense.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I know that, as its name suggests, RICO was written to punish degenerate minorities, not good upstanding american corporations; but how much more mafiatastic does mediadefender have to get?
I doubt that legal action will stand up, unless it's for negligence, in which case it will just be a civil action. From the information presented above, this sounds like a bug, rather than an intentional act.
What -is- probably illegal is Media Defender's intentional vandalization of R3's servers. The original faking planting of seeds was intentional, done through exploiting a flaw in R3's systems, and could easily be expalined as intending to harm R3. That ought to be chargable.
I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
"DOS attacks are a felony. People go to jail for committing felonies." jail, pfft that will never happen all they will end up doin is paying damages to revision3 for it.
MediaDefender claims that they have taken steps to ensure this won't happen again. "We've added a policy that will investigate open public trackers to see if they are associated with other companies", promised Grodsky, "and first will make a communication that says, hey are you aware of this." Since when is being a "company" required to legally run a BitTorrent tracker?
Try this instead: Determine if the tracker belongs to you. No? Then you don't have the right to abuse it in this way.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I'd like to try out this new BitTorrent-based DOS. I'm still using MS-DOS 5 and it takes too long to copy files.
Unless you can find some leaked documents from the higherups authorizing it, or some people come forward and admit it.
No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
...the least we could do is provide a Coral Cache link to the blog entry.
A DoS violates Federal Criminal Law. Copyright is generally a Civil statute and is prosecuted via lawsuits.
What MediaDefender did is therefore being investigated under criminal law.
They are, I hope, filing criminal charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse act, as well as filing a civil suit demanding damages.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
DOS attacks are a felony. People go to jail for committing felonies.
hehehehe. You do not read the news, do you? Spying on Americans without a warrent IS felony. Outing a CIA agent IS a felony (and treason). And....
Let's try the hacker equivalent of that:
Black-hole Media Sentries ISP, and every ISP they switch to.
Does anyone have a blacklist that tracks their servers?
They ARE out to get you simply because They are in it for themselves and they don't care about you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NET_Act The United States No Electronic Theft Act (NET Act), a federal law passed in 1997, provides for criminal prosecution of individuals who engage in copyright infringement, even when there is no monetary profit or commercial benefit from the infringement. Maximum penalties can be five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines. The NET Act also raised statutory damages by 50%.
The judge can take your stuff if you do bad things. I suspect that MediaDefender has stuff that they don't want the judge to take. That's why they probably won't retaliate with a DoS attack. But more interestingly, this kind of controversy is going to give the victim (and maybe the FBI/DOJ) an enormous, supergigundous, maximo-stupendous opportunity to discover every last little method that MediaDefender uses to do business. MediaDefender will probably not relish the exposure of its business practices.
- Why Free Music?
I only have the scores to two of the songs so far. At the time I composed them, I couldn't read music, so I did it all by ear, and by memorization.I stopped playing for a while because I got real depressed shortly after recording my album. That lead to me partially forgetting how to play Sahara, and completely forgetting how to play As Yet Untitled.
But I'm working on transcribing the scores from my recordings. It's taking me a long time, but eventually I'll be providing Lilypond source for them as well.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
so I guess the gives the Shareaza community the green light to DOS Discordia into oblivion?
> This appears to fall under the definition of cyberterrorism under the same section, as proscribed by the USA PATRIOT ACT as well.
:(
Nooooo! You're tempting me to like the PATRIOT Act
Is it just me, or is the "Successful Campaigns" mouse-over broken on their marketing page? Ironic...
Kan jeg få en pils, vær så snill?
Internet attacks leave lots of evidence. In this case it was pretty easy to see exactly what our shadowy attacker was so upset about. It turns out that those zillions of SYN packets were addressed to one particular port, or doorway, on one of our web servers: 20000
If you know the source address[es] of the attack, why not block that address on the routers or firewalls until your ISP can block them upstream?
This might be a valid argument if they'd DDoS'd a site containing any unauthorized content.
http://www.xkcd.com/354/
you do realise that writing your software in such a way that it automatically retaliates if it's 'pissed off' is just as intentional legally as doing it manually, right?.. it doesn't make any difference if this was inititated by an employee unthinkingly switching on the doling out of 'punishment' to websites frustrating their efforts to annoy people with fake materials without first checking if the website is owned by a reputable company or just an automated response which didn't require further human interaction, the response was programmed/executed in a systematic fashion.. that doesn't add up to being negligent when it comes to checking whether they should be bullying this person or not, it adds up to intentional bullying, period.
Conspiracy Theory:
1)"Accidentally" leave a backdoor open on your tracker
2)A few torrent uploaders take advantage of it
3)Mediadefender crashes your servers
4)Slashdotted
5)????
6)PROFIT!
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
2461 Santa Monica Blvd., D-520
Santa Monica, CA 90404
PHONE: (310) 956-3300
FAX: (310) 956-3391
Start your letter writing and phone calling campaign against Media Defender now.
Likely strategies for MD include: mount a vigorously frivolous SCO defense until the stockholders pull out, leaving ashes for R3; receive gigantic retainer from *AA for MD's services to buy R3 off or out; throw Dmitry and company to the dogs to get a more favorable precedent; and/or run the Chewbacca defense by a jury. It will be very interesting to see what happens to the perps after baldly admitting willful unauthorized access to R3's computers.
Whoever owns the other 10% of the anti-p2p "self-help" market is probably very, very happy right now.
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
For the lazy. Seems they run vmware. Maybe slashdot would like to say 'hi' to them at port 950.
129.47.130.104
129.47.130.155
129.47.130.53
129.47.131.106
129.47.131.208
129.47.132.160
129.47.132.211
129.47.132.58
129.47.132.7
129.47.133.10
129.47.133.112
129.47.133.163
129.47.248.125
129.47.248.207
129.47.248.2
38.103.50.152
38.107.160.10
38.107.160.12
38.107.160.13
38.107.160.14
38.107.160.15
38.107.160.18
38.107.160.19
38.107.160.22
38.107.160.23
38.107.160.24
38.107.160.25
38.107.160.3
38.107.160.6
38.107.160.8
38.107.161.68
38.107.161.71
38.107.161.72
38.107.161.74
38.107.161.75
38.107.161.76
38.107.161.79
38.107.161.80
38.107.161.81
38.107.161.82
38.107.161.83
38.107.161.84
One can hope, but I doubt it. Revision3 might see it as bad publicity, even though they're not the ones who did anything wrong, and they'd risk further massive DDoS attacks in retaliation if they did file a lawsuit. Cases take a long time to come to court, and all MediaDefender needs to do is destroy their solvency before that happens. Dead companies tell no tales.
They could do that for another 1/2 day or so in response to the lawsuit before R3 would have a court order putting a stop to it. Attempting to silence lawsuits with felonies is a HUGE no-no, and both the judge and the jury would hear about it, if only from R3's financial backers. The company might go down, but someone would still 'own' it and they might as well try and hit a multimillion dollar home run in criminal and civil court.
This would be roughly the equivalent of shooting a witness to your drunk driving case - it may well be bigger than the original offense.
And yours would be a valid argument if I had suggest that Rev3 be prosecuted.
The wayback machine doesn't have it? You mean this is fresh news!?!?
Sometimes the wayback machine will have fresh stuff.
And sometimes, by the time Slashdot gets around to linking stuff, it's not all that fresh anymore. B-)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Hold on now, I never signed that.
Here, let me get my pen...
My sig can beat up your sig.
Even with free lawyers from the EFF, the costs and risks of civil litigation could be substantial for what looks like a fairly small company. The alternative of focusing on maximising the free publicity and then keeping 100% of your effort on providing a great service might be a better business strategy. I'm just guessing, but if I was in Revision3's shoes I'd think long and hard before starting law suits that could easily tie up scarce resources. The upside could be big I suppose but it would be a gamble and also any payoff would surely be a long way in the future.
In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice; in practice there is.
The only thing these **AA thugs understand is brutal force. Someone needs to carbomb those fuckers.
I concede that one, since you do have a point there. Perhaps i should have said relevant to the article rather than valid..
Of course, i'm only saying it that way because the Mediasentry position (and some posters who are defending the RIAA, et al) seems to be that any torrent tracker is fair game (since they're apparently not used for anything other than warez trading, or deliberately threatening the American way of Life).
This is (imho) more a case of unwarranted vigilante justice than a copyright issue.
http://www.xkcd.com/354/
An organisation disrupts US IT infrastructure ... probably illegally, possibly maliciously ... and seems to be making their growing ability to cause this sort of disruption part of their business growth plan.
National security implications, anyone?
Eric Baird
Racketeering? protection money? WTF?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
I hate to feed the trolls, but just felt someone should point out for those who don't use Revision3 that this is incorrect, they produce original shows, such as Diggnation. (as far as i am aware, they do not have any user uploaded content or any non-original content at all)
There is no "original content". All music/TV/movies/video created in the last 10 years at least must be derivative works of major media company IP. 99.99% of the US population (and nearly as high a percentage of the rest of the world) is exposed/hears/watches/reads/is told about IP owned by the major media producers. It is nearly impossible for anyone to escape it.
Subconsciously, they process it and incorporate it into anything they create. Therefor all content is owned by, or is a derivative work of, the major media producers. With even government failing to acknowledge the truth and logic of this fact, the major media producers are *forced* to take extra-legal actions.
They have every right and no choice in taking these actions to preserve their business, capitalism itself, and justice. Until government and the courts acknowledge these facts, expect more attacks on distribution of content and IP that by all rights is owned by the major media corporations either outright or as a derivative work illegally appropriated and incorporated into unauthorized works that steal food from the table of honest, hard-working media creation and distribution business workers and executives.
They have the money and political connections to avoid any deluded wrong-headed attempts to twist the law to impede their God-given right to defend what is rightfully theirs and theirs alone by whatever means they decide is most effective. Any claims that any media created these days is not rightfully theirs flies in the face of the facts and are simply the whines and whimpers of thieves trying to excuse their larceny!
MediaDefender isn't filled with the kind of people that fear negative public opinion.
I'm sorry, but the only way to take these bastards down is with the law. Phone calls and letters don't have the kind of traction you're looking for.
Relax I just want some peanuts.
MediaDefender hacked Revision 3's servers and they think they can get away with it? Get out. How would they like it if we all decided to give them some payback by ddosing them and making up a lame excuse?
I hate Big Media. I hate MediaDefender.
However, I don't know of any hospitals or other critical infrastructure that is hosting a torrent tracker. It seems like a bit of FUD for Jim Louderback to say "But what if MediaDefender discovers a tracker inside a hospital, fire department or 911 center?". What MediaDefender did was bad enough (for once in my life, I'm rooting for the FBI here) -- it's not necessary to resort to these logical scare tactics.
Yes way to prove you are in the right when you attack sites just because they have content and use BT. DIE IN FIRE MEDIADBAGS.
Please try to spread some love around by advertising the following email addresses
sales@mediadefender.com
info@mediadefender.com
jobs@mediadefender.com
you can't do that... you still get the traffic at the router and it exceeds the physical limits of the wire. That's the point of SYN attacks is that they are at the router interface level, so the TCP stack itself in the nic takes the hit and no blackhole will help you because the packets never get thru to be processed.
DOS attacks really are a felony they're considered terrorist acts, and the antiterror division of the Justice Department is one that's actually gotten bigger in the Justice Department under this idiotic administration, unlike civil rights. Those lawyers need convictions!
SYN Flooding is one of the oldest DOS attacks around. The attack must have been truely massive to bring down the server... or the admins didn't have the protection in place for such an old style DOS attack.
Either way, if they can track the attack back to MediaDefender, then they have pretty good evidence to sue them, or at least get the FBI involved.
I think MediaDefender need to be taught a valuable lesson: just because other people break the law, doesn't mean you have the right to break the law in your crusade against them.
The may be found negligent and I don't follow the law enough to know if they could be sued for damages (I'd imagine) but I've heard enough to believe their attorneys will be able to argue against any kind of criminal intent (it was an accident after all, right?).
It sounds like the kind of mistake a group of coked-up middled aged MBA's (and their IT lackeys) might make in the midst of a cash-grab (which is all MediaDefender seems likely to be).
If anything, maybe this will cost them enough that they'll pull the plug and move on to whatever other slimy ventures might come their way. The same could be argued for the MPAA and RIAA but these organizations seem to have legitimatized themselves for long enough that some people believe they serve a purpose.
Quack, quack.
So you're trying to say that all of the music I compose isn't mine, it belongs to some company?
Fucktard.
traceroute from your border routers oughta get it.
11393 - I think FiberConnexion is MD's friendly name. People get ASes to do business and typically don't park their domains with GoDaddy.
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
If the they turned up to court in the US to serve papers, they'd get collared by RIAA/MPAA/FBI/...
So they don't serve papers and don't turn up to court. So they can't sue.
Actually, MediaDefender added illegal content and only did the DoS attack when the illegal content was removed and the backdoor was closed as punishment for closing the backdoor.
So you're trying to say that all of the music I compose isn't mine, it belongs to some company?
Fucktard.
I'm not "trying to say" it, I'm stating it as irrefutable fact based on established court precedents that as little as 3 notes or chords in the same sequence as another copyrighted work is infringing.
You *do* have ears and are not deaf, correct? You *have* been somewhere where music owned and/or distributed by the major media corporations has been played within your earshot at some point in your life, right?
Well, by the court-established principal of "unconscious imitation" (not sure if that is exactly the correct term that was used by the court) if any 3 notes or chords in sequence of "your" work match any 3 notes or chords in sequence of any work you may possibly have ever heard owned or distributed by the major media corporations, then you, sir, are a criminal and a thief!
Due to the size and extent of the catalog of content and IP held by the major media corporations and performed in public over the years, it is not possible for anyone to create a work that does not infringe and steal food from the mouths of the babies of the hard-working media corporation employees, executives, and contracted artists.
How dare you starve babies by your greedy attempts to steal from honest businesses? Do you plan to stop your starving of innocent babies or to continue your sick, twisted behavior?
If you truly feel you *must* be involved somehow in the re-hashing of someone elses' music and content (which you mistakenly refer to as "composing", and possibly also as "creating" or "writing", rather than "copy", "illegally appropriate", or "steal", since it's an established fact no original creation is possible any longer), then please do the only decent thing and first turn yourself in to the authorities (which would be us) and we may allow you to live out the remainder of your pathetic, miserable, thieving existence as a "work for hire" "artist" for corporate media, at severely-reduced pay of course, to compensate our tremendous losses from your larceny.
Who knows, we may even allow you to keep enough to actually feed yourself if you work very, very, very hard for us, keep the lavatories spotless, and show us that you have truly turned forever from your criminal ways!
Media Defender PUT the illegal content (though it probably wasn't copyrighted, just a hash to a load of junk) on there.
So the Troll Parent is saying that if we put a gramme of cocaine on him we can shop him to the police for trafficking in drugs. 'course we'll have to kneecap him first so he doesn't get away...
Personally, I hope mediaDefender or anouther one of these slime ball companies accidentilly attacks a large company such as Blizzards trackers (Used to serve WoW Updates). That way, a large company such as them will have a unlimited supply of cash to go after these bastards
I wonder if MediaDefender's code is based on Microsoft.NET Framework v1.1.4322?
.NET Framework - System.Timer.Timers() where, if an unpatched server has been up for something approaching 49.7 days, the timers start firing as fast as they can be serviced, rather than when the programmer expected them to be serviced. It has to do with the number of milliseconds that can be stored in a 32-bit integer.
There is a bug in that version of the
So, MediaDefender could be correct in saying "every three hours", but if stung by this bug, it would easily turn into 8000/second if the servers had been up for 7 weeks.
Say, after a mass-reboot after deploying some new version.
Of course, the fact that they admitted to hijacking Revision3's servers has got me riled up. Bad Form!
Chivalry is not dead, it's just frequently misspelt. - M. Langley
DOS attacks are a felony. People go to jail for committing felonies.
You obviously haven't been paying attention since the 2000 presidential election.
It may well be illegal for sworn officers to torture peaceful citizens but it is morally unenforceable.
Doctor? Is that you?
(rot13) rpbzbab@tznvy.pbz
You seem to forget that the prosecution of such cases by the state are done by District Attorneys... and the Federal ones are verified Bush cronies (see the US Attorney Firing investigations). All the RIAA/MPAA/MD guys have to do is wave enuf cash and the case goes away... I mean the District Attorney decides "there is insufficient evidence to prosecute"
Note to all - Slashdot doesn't handle Unicode correctly. If you want to avoid getting these aTM apostrophes in your posts, copy and paste into Notepad first.
(rot13) rpbzbab@tznvy.pbz