Slashdot Mirror


New Service Converts Torrents Into PNG Images

jamie points out that a new web service, hid.im, will encode a torrent into a PNG image file, allowing it to be shared easily through forums or image hosting sites. Quoting TorrentFreak: "We have to admit that the usefulness of the service escaped us when we first discovered the project. So, we contacted Michael Nutt, one of the people running the project to find out what it's all about. 'It is an attempt to make torrents more resilient,' Michael told [us]. 'The difference is that you no longer need an indexing site to host your torrent file. Many forums will allow uploading images but not other types of files.' Hiding a torrent file inside an image is easy enough. Just select a torrent file stored on your local hard drive and Hid.im will take care the rest. The only limit to the service is that the size of the torrent file cannot exceed 250KB. ... People on the receiving end can decode the images and get the original .torrent file through a Firefox extension or bookmarklet. The code is entirely open source and Michael Nutt told us that they are hoping for people to contribute to it by creating additional decoders supported by other browsers."

30 of 297 comments (clear)

  1. The race is on... by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    The.Black.Hole.1979.dvdrip.xvid.torrent -> goatse.png
    ... you know you want to.

    .

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  2. If I were a congressman, what would I do? by cellurl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I still think the solution is to change TPB to a TpayB. Allow us to pay $1 for a movie and allow studios to save face and jump in. More hiding like this will just put the Congressmen in action to filter. If this path is chosen, we will all be living in wifi-caves before long.

  3. What? by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No "steganography" tag yet?

    Slashdot, I'm disappointed in you. :P

    1. Re:What? by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


      It's hidden in their header png.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:What? by slim · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not steganography. It's an explicit PNG encoding of a torrent file. It's not a PNG of a kitten with a torrent hidden within so a casual viewer wouldn't realise.

    3. Re:What? by rawr_one · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't get why they can't just use the old trick of hiding a zip file in an image file.

      Seems simpler, technology-wise, to me than encoding a torrent file as a PNG image, and all you would have to do to get the torrent file is change the extension on the file. Also seems safer. Unless this trick wouldn't be possible with .torrent files, that is?

  4. Still limited by rnelsonee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hosting a bunch of images doesn't do any good unless you have a text (or at least searchable) description of what you're downloading. Without context, warehoused information is useless. And these PNG files are just different representations of the same quasi-legal information (that is, they're still colored bits.

    1. Re:Still limited by lxs · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obviously you have never visited 4chan.

    2. Re:Still limited by tooyoung · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hosting a bunch of images doesn't do any good unless you have a text (or at least searchable) description of what you're downloading. Without context, warehoused information is useless.

      Yes, someone should invent a method for posting images on the internet and associating text with them.

  5. wait wait wait... by Rooked_One · · Score: 4, Funny

    you mean the pirates are going to continue to beat out "the man" and get away with it?

    I'm just utterly shocked.

    1. Re:wait wait wait... by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All "The Man" needs to do is modify the image. Which is rather common practice anyways.

      1. Insuring images are scaled properly.
      2. Reconverted so the images will fit in the Database.
      3. Insure you just have the image not a hack.
      4. lossy compression to save storage space.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  6. Just make sure your image hosting site... by lobiusmoop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    doesn't re-scale or tag your uploaded images first!

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
  7. Why browser plugins? by JSBiff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "The code is entirely open source and Michael Nutt told us that they are hoping for people to contribute to it by creating additional decoders supported by other browsers."

    Ok, ok, I do understand that a browser plugin adds some convenience, but how about a stand-alone version (native executable, or maybe something like a Java, Python, Perl, or Lisp program [which would be cross-platform]), which I can just run either as a GUI, or even a command line. . .

    png2torrent in.png out.torrent

    (heck, the original torrent filename might be stored in the png, so you might only need to specify the input file, and optionally an output path/filename if you want to change the name or extract to a different directory).

    Maybe a drag-and-drop icon on the desktop - drag the png to the icon, and it automatically creates the torrent on the desktop.

  8. PNGs?! by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 5, Funny

    OMG, who uses PNG files?! The compression routine is rubbish! I'm going to use this technology, but I'm going to convert the files to JPEG before I upload them. When people see how much smaller the file is that they have to download, they'll quickly move over to my way of thinking.

  9. An example.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's an example. It's the OpenOffice.org 3.1.0 win32 torrent taken from the OO.o site.

  10. Re:What's the point? by value_added · · Score: 3, Informative

    Say, MIME ...?

    I think you mean base64.

    As for hiding it, I think that's sort of the point behind this scheme.

  11. Re:Won't work well by slim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All sites hosting images will just be required to filter for those images which have torrents inside (it shouldn't be hard, just try to decode the torrent, and if you succeed, reject the image).

    Which just makes for an arms race, and one where the pirates can be more reactive than the authorities. Create new encoding methods, encode into different formats (MP3, JPEG, HTML, whatever).

  12. The REAL Da Vinci Code by Blixinator · · Score: 3, Funny

    Take a .png of the Mona Lisa and convert it to a torrent and it downloads several thousand hours of voice notes by Da Vinci... and porn

    --
    "The Y chromosome is genetic. The odds are very good that if you are male then your father was too." -Internet Commenter
  13. 4chan banned similiar images by Pingh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A while ago it was a common thread on 4chan to have torrents hidden within rar files appended to jpgs. This lead to massive amount of virus infected files being uploaded. 4chan banned images that it could detect rar headers within. I can imagine similar practices would be up and about on other image boards as well.

    1. Re:4chan banned similiar images by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nonsense. You just run it through the exact same torrent-data-extractor process that the end-user would use.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  14. Why not just use slashdot instead? by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It won't work as intended but not for the reason you say. Regardless of whether it's steganongrphyically encoded or not, this is just amtter of detectability to the eye.

    let's work through the logic:
            If a firefox plugin and retreive the torrent then so can any image hosting site. all reputable ones will decline to host those images. the torrents might be legal ones, but the image hosting sites will not see it valuable to their bussiness model to offer a service which might be hosting links to tainted goods.

          if the encoding is done is some way that while a firefox plugin can easily recover a code that represents a torrent but you can't tell from the code if it is a torrent (without say actually trying it out) then you will have to have some other signifier that the image contains a valid torrent and the identity of what the torrent contains (so you can search for what you want). ANd again the image sites will decline to host those.

    so you might as well just post hex encoded torrents and their plain language desciptions right to slashdot in the comments or in your journal. Anyone can then use slashdot's search feature or for that matter google with a site:slashdot.org search term to find them.

    so it seems like this has no value as a means of hosting torrents.

    Now it does have two uses one legitimate and one not. it could be just a conveinet way to pass around a torrent assoiciated with an image all in one handy container (kind of like a bussiness card printed on a mini-cd). nd it could be a way for someone to establish plausible deniability that they were posting a torrent. e.g. a blog post deploring the loss of revenue for Metalica with a picture of the band's latest almbum that happens to hide a torrent for that albumn. ("oh the irony, I just grabbed that image off google images and little did I know that particular one held a torrent. wink wink")

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Why not just use slashdot instead? by elashish14 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Parent is wise. It would be easy for any image hosting site to detect something like this. They would just have to scan it as they receive it. Nobody wins when you just encode it using a simple straightforward and one-time algorithm.

      What the authors need to do is provide some sort of key to decoding the torrent file. Instead of creating an entire image of it, they should instead take a standard image, and use some cypher method that would slightly distort the it (blur, stretch, etc.) in some way that would allow recovery of the torrent data. Then it wouldn't be obvious to the naked eye and you could just post the information necessary to decode the information from some other location. But is this worth the effort when torrents are still easy to find? Probably not yet, but in the future it may be.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    2. Re:Why not just use slashdot instead? by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 5, Funny

      Anyone can then use slashdot's search feature

      I take it you've never actually tried to use slashdot's search function.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  15. Why limit it to torrents? by Steve+S · · Score: 5, Informative

    I built a utility that can be used for the same purpose back in april. http://cosmodro.me/blog/2009/apr/11/smuggle-improved/
    It's a small flash movie that can encode files into pngs and decode them back. It's not limited to torrents, so you can encode any file that's less than about 16MB.

    --
    ------- Driver carries less than 64K of cache.
  16. Not really steganography... by TerranFury · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Steganography hides data in an innocuous-looking "carrier" signal; e.g., a photo from your vacation; it's about hiding in plain sight. These images are not pictures of anything, and very obviously represent just a bunch of bits shoved into an image. It's the difference between a spy sending the message "So, I hear the Yankees won the other day" to communicate "assassinate the prime minister" to his partner, and sending the message "ENCRYPTED: XLAIHOIUHLEGDHGDLHSLKJHDGS" to his partner. The former avoids suspicion; the latter arouses it.

    Better would be to just shove the torrents into some "reserved" or "metadata" portion of the image format, say somewhere in the header, or after the last byte of the image data (or similar; I'm not super familiar with the implementation details of these formats).

  17. !steganography by Chris+Pimlott · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This must be a different use of "hiding" that I'm aware of, which apparently means 'make it blatantly obvious that this image is encoding something'. The point of steganography is that the image doesn't appear to have any hidden data in it.

    So I suppose there might be some use for this, but it's not about to fool any hosting provider that dislikes torrents.

  18. full rounded pr0n by uncanny · · Score: 3, Funny

    So now, what this is telling me is that you can post porn videos INSIDE porn pictures? mind boggling!

  19. Forums can use it too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why can't a forum owner scan all uploaded images for torrents using the same technology?

  20. Similar to Spore by kevmatic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm suprised no-one has mentioned this, but Spore Creation files are PNGs with a picture of the creation, with the data needed to create it in the game hidden in the alpha channel. This scheme, obviously, just generates a blurry group of pixels, but I wonder if you could change it somehow so the png looks like its contents... Like text of what's in the .torrent.

  21. Re:Why bother to hide it at all? by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 5, Funny

    And if the xxAA gets the torrent from the image, they're illegally circumventing a technical protection measure!

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.