Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Bay Shuts Down Tracker, Switches To Distributed Hash Table
think_nix writes "The Pirate Bay has shut down their BitTorrent tracker. Instead TPB is now using Distributed Hash Table to distribute the torrents. The Pirate Bay Blog states that DHT along with PEX (Peer Exchange) Technology is just as effective if not better for finding peers than a centralized service. The Local reports that shutting down the tracker and implementing DHT & PEX could be due to the latest court rulings in Sweden against 2 of TPB's owners, and may decide the outcome of the case."
How do you get rtorrent to load a magnet link (preferably by pasting it into it's window) ???
The docs aren't too clear on this. I've tried and then pasting the magnet link at the "load>" prompt. But no luck.
F......
Proving that technology is always one step ahead of copyright law.
Caffeine is my anti-drug!
Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
First "Pirate Bay" and torrents and now Hash?!? What next, cocaine?!
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
So they go from hosting a tracker to hosting a bootstrap node that gives clients access to the DHT swarm? In short, in the eyes of the law (and probably of the general public), they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, because they seem to do try their hardest to stick it up to da man.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Pirates are like ants and always find a way around obstacles and tend to attract more pirates to use the same path.
Removing a single tracker, no matter how widely used it was won't deal much harm. This may lead to the removal of other trackers in the future, but peer exhange and DHT are pretty much a good subsitute in my opinion.
I wouldn't go as far as saying that DHT&PEX is "just as effective" as using a tracker. I've found that with DHT enabled, a typical home router can get swamped extremely quickly and cause it to either crash or stop accepting new connections. With DHT disabled, I don't seem to have this problem.
This isn't just specific to me and my router; my friends have also experienced similar problems that were solved by disabling DHT.
The question then becomes: does the md5 hash of a file, being linked to a swarm of peers with the files themselves, become symbolic of the property that is being pirated ("stolen") in a convincing enough manner to implicate the hashtable host? It seems to be a stretch.
Using DHTs instead of a tracker is real nice and all, but you're still stuck with the same problem: you have to host some information on a server, namely node information that allows you to bootstrap into the DHT, and information that allows you to get the resource you want.
Both of these are taken care of in the torrent file and hosting the torrent files for illegal content is still the same, tracker or no tracker. The bootstrapping problem is basically unavoidable, but you could have, say, a single machine or set of machines at TPB that would bootstrap you to the DHT they're on, without explicitly holding any information about illegal content.
The second problem, well, it's harder to solve that way. From my understanding, the bittorrent DHT (http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0005.html) uses the torrent's infohash to locate the node containing the information on the peers currently serving that given torrent. Since you don't know the infohash without the torrent file itself, searching for a given torrent isn't trivial, although there have been some advances in that area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_%28protocol%29#Decentralized_keyword_search).
Magnet links are nice, since they remove the need to host torrent files and work as direct links to the necessary peer information, but I'm not entirely sure having a link labeled after obviously illegal content is that much different from hosting a file containing a few hashes. :)
As far as I know, the tracker has not been shut down but merely moved to OpenBitTorrent. There are various posts on SuprBay confirming that fact. The (PirateBay) trackers themselves were shut down since august and OpenBittorrent is now the official tracker. I remember reading another post where someone did some research and ran a few traces, which confirmed (at the time) that the trackers were running on the same IP address. Here is another post worth reading.
As for OpenBitTorrent, it has been 404-ing since I tried to open that website. However a google cache exists as early as November 14th. On the cached page it is explained that the tracker operates solely on the info hash and thus knows absolutely nothing about the contents itself. Presumably in an attempt to elude copyright cops. Adding new torrents to that tracker is as simple as adding the tracker address to your newly created .torrent file. The tracker will automatically start tracking the info hash when an announce is made.
grows yet another head. Good luck trying to keep up, MAFIAA.
" just as effective if not better for finding peers", then why did they wait for the ruling to change over?
why not just switch over a long time back??
especially if they are better..
This is a legitimate issue, regardless of whether the protocol is doing what it's supposed to do or not.
interactive hologram, or it didn't happen.
Thank you guys, in the name of technology.
One of the reasons why BitTorrent didn't suffer the legal fate of Napster, Kazaa, etc is that BitTorrent only handles data transfer, not search, and has significant noninfringing uses.
Having trackerless torrents however doesn't help the noninfringing uses, only infringing uses. (If its non-infringing, just host a tracker damnit!), thus trackerless client features start to get very dangerous from a legal perspective for the developers.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Comment removed based on user account deletion
and any case the legal system can possibly raise against them will depend on an extremely specific set of conditions. If not, Google would be every bit as guilty as the Pirate Bay
Some jurisdictions require search services to take down links to allegedly infringing copies in order to maintain safe harbor protection. I don't know about TPB's native Sweden, but the United States is one of them (17 USC 512). Google acts on copyright owners' takedown requests. TPB on the other hand proudly refused to do so, and any assets it had in "takedown" jurisdictions were vulnerable.
It looks like someone is still confused there about copyright treaties like the Berne Convention.
It is perfectly legal to download and re-distribute the copyrighted material when the copyright owner gives permission. MPAA, RIAA, Disney / Microsoft don't want that discussed. And when formerly copyrighted material has its copyright revoked, either by the rights holder or by the passage of time. For example, the early Elvis recordings are now in the public domain in many countries because the copyright on that particular edition has expired.
Further, in some countries, fair use extends to copies for personal use. So while it may give you the warm and fuzzies to Repeat After Bill his every word, consider that the Internet is a global network and not just limited to your block.
What is likely at the heart of the matter is the issue of whether decentralized communications networks shall be allowed by control-freaks in various companies or their subservient governments. If it's not centralized, it's hard to track or censor.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
the fact that the site has the word Pirate in the name, while not helpful, is certainly not enough to convict them on.
You had better be right; otherwise, Disney would be in trouble for sites related to Pirates of the Caribbean. Under current WIPO rules, it might be easier for eBay to take down Thepirat eBay.
But not ahead of a "contempt of court" charge.
I cant click on the links because my company block tpb.
Can someone repost the article on csmonitor or somewhere, pretty please.....
Give me more cow bell
Check the definition of "prohibit". It WAS around before the US used it, you know.
Noncommercial sharing of copyrighted works is prohibited under the latest interpretation of copyright laws from the beneficiaries of said law.
Copyright law is broken by those who benefit from said laws by extending it for no recompense to the public according to the P2Pers.
cf: drinking alcohol is prohibited under the ammendment prohibiting drinking and the ammendment is broken by other ammendments according to those who want to drink.
Why does the court system care how the data is distributed? If I still point my web browser to TPB, search their website for Movie_HD_1080p, and then it gives me some sort of seed/value, then in the eyes of the law the are still providing the same service. Is this any different from a law standpoint if they switched from an ftp server to an http server to a https server? The basic premise being "still providing access to copyrighted material."
The law needs to operate on very black and white terms, and things like the Pirate Bay are operating in very new, and very gray, legal territory
The law doesn't need to see everything in bold outline, black and white, It is really quite good at pattern recognition.
Detecting half-truths and evasions.
The geek's convoluted schemes and half-baked lies have never served him well in court. The geek is drawn to Pirate Bay for convenient access to an infringing file. That is its only reason for existence.
Magnet link is an URI, your browser is supposed to send it to it directly.
It's interesting that TPB takes this stance now when it has become too expensive and hard to keep their trackers working, and while having legal issues shot against them from everywhere. DHT and PEX have been around for years with no significant improvements. This isn't a change because "the technology is ready now", but because the ship is sinking.
DHT and PEX support has been very slow to creep in to clients. It makes sense from a user popularity and user access perspective to resist switching fully to these systems until external pressure forces the issue, otherwise swaths of the community will get pissed and smear your site as refusing to conform to basic standards.
This is basically how every major jump in p2p technology has been implemented. P2p is forever a reactionary technology.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
There's no need to get into technical jargon about "md5 hashes of a file", ".torrent file just links to peers" in The Pirate Bay's case because it's so blatantly clear their main purpose is to enable users to spread copyrighted material.
Your company shields you from TPB but exposes you to Slashdot? What kind of hell-hole do you work in?
You can't stop the signal.
Cut the head off
Grows back hard
I am the hydra
Now you`ll see your star
If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
I predicted this was going to happen (no torrents, just DHT hashes). Even posted it on slashdot. It will be interesting to see how the courts see it.
I think you misunderstand. The point of TPB, as far as I can see, is martyrdom, in the name of awakening public awareness to their political agenda.
The thing is, you get more awareness if you go down as slowly and as painfully as possible. Thus the machinations.
So, as an end user do I have re-add all my torrents into my client?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Now let's all move to I2P and we can all forget about this little thing called copyright enforcement.
Pirate Bay would probably survive even longer if they made a strict rule
- no torrents allowed that can be purchased in stores.
RIAA/MPAA would have little argument for suing if the material is limited in scope. I've often considered creating a tracker with that rule, such that you can get the latest movie or TV episode if you missed it, but once the DVD is released (typically during the summer months) then no more free ride.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
What is need now is distributed indexing, search and feedback on file quality. That is currently the last centralized component and therefore the most vulnerable point of failure. Poor implementations of indexing/search currently exist (they are inferior to other P2P systems like emule and gnutella) but a good commenting distributed commenting system remains elusive.
Will files that have not completed downloading when this switchover takes place continue to download or will I have to start over and download the torrent file again?
Oh oh that looks like the final death blow to mldonkey :(
Why oh why must it die? It's the only bittorrent/edonkey/ftp/http download manager for headless/remote servers there is. And it’s freakin’ great software.
Please, is there anyone who knows a replacement? Or who can write OCaml? We need to save it! Or at least have a replacement that can do the same things.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
The post I replied to is actually correct, technology will undermine every effort to regulate copyright infringement (except for the most draconian ones which would strip us of so many freedoms that getting the torrent we want would probably become uninteresting). For example, one could create a torrent for an encrypted file with the description "this might be BlockBusterMovieAvailableInStores or it might be a personal video I made of a speech about BoringPoliticalIssue". And then release the key only after a certain period. Bingo! Your tracker has been used for copyright infringement.
Anyway, if you are only running a tracker, there is no way you can really know what is the content of the files in the torrent unless you download them yourself. Your tracker can be used by people without regard to your attempts at regulation, unless you're going to dedicate a lot of effort and bandwidth to download everything and check it.
> that TPB will be setting the precedent for every other site.
You missed the whole point there. Given what I meant, they would only be setting precedent for sites which violently refused to cooperate to prevent copyright infringement (since that is the reason "nothing can save them").
So what RIAA and others need to do, is buy big iron to create torrents with the same hash but useless content, and start spreading them around. The confusion that can ensue could be big.
I speak England very best
Whats next? Distributing Hashish
Hulu
If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
utilize rather than legalize
To bring in a different slant on your post, do you realize that most of the jurisdictions in which TPB is currently being pursued are civil, rather than common, law venues? Is your concern about precedent flavored with your being from a common law environment (Slashdot being US-centric, blah, blah...)?
OTOH the distinctions between common and civil seem to be slowly blurring as time progresses....
Are DHTs those magnet links you see popping up..?