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."
Exactly. If a normal member of the public did something like this, they'd be facing jail time.
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
Corporations aren't normal members of the public. Except they're treated as such in court. So that the people who run them don't get treated like normal members of the public.
Twinstiq, game news
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.
ROFL... You must be new here. Allow me to welcome you to planet Earth. Expect no useful action against Media Defender. And again, welcome to our humble planet...
>>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
Except then RIAA could have just paid up and fixed their scripts and moved on.
The FBI investigation is going to turn up more dirt and likely will lead to lots of discovery. Imagine the connections between organizations proper discovery could come up with. Also imagine the work needed to comply. "Ok, RIAA turn over all correspondence you have had concerning enforcement for the last 3 years".
This does not mean Revision 3 can't sue for damages. But letting the FBI get the ball rolling is the first step. And if the FBI do lay charges then the money part gets a lot easier.
This appears to fall under the definition of cyberterrorism under the same section, as proscribed by the USA PATRIOT ACT as well.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
Exactly. I highly doubt R3 would have contacted the FBI if they were hosting illegal content. They use bittorrent as a method of distrobution for legal content.
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.
Yup, just like every single contractor on the second death star - every mediadefender employee knows what they're doing. F*ck 'em.
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
1. Copyright infringement isn't normally a crime. You're using the word "illegal" and "guilty" carelessly here.
2. Committing a crime to retaliate in response to another crime is still wrong, and committing a crime in retaliation for a mere civil infraction doubly so.
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.
You argued the lesser point with the troll and missed the greater one.
Why does the legality of Revision3's hosted content matter?
Is MediaDefender an agent of the federal government, granted extra-legal powers by Congress to commit these otherwise-illegal acts? Are they chartered by a state government? Has their operation been nationalized by the military, or perhaps they possess a letter of marque and reprisal?
No?
Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
Sounds like MediaDefender wants to take down *any* competition to their clients, illegal or otherwise.
I think the world would be a better place if every individual acted according to their conscience. Why else have a conscience?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
So, let me get this straight...
MediaDefender uses back doors in web server software to plant fake torrents. Then if those fake torrents are removed, and the back door closed, they DDoS the server?
Wow. Entrapment, AND attacking the network.
Doesn't matter. Even if there were other, illegal torrents there, it's against the law to take down servers with DoS attacks.
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.