Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Blocking Pirate Bay Links In Messenger

RemyBR writes with an excerpt from an article at El Reg: "Microsoft has confirmed that users of its instant messaging app will not be able to send each other links to popular torrent site The Pirate Bay, citing malware fears. 'We block instant messages if they contain malicious or spam URLs based on intelligence algorithms, third-party sources, and/or user complaints. Pirate Bay URLs were flagged by one or more of these and were consequently blocked,' Redmond told The Register in an emailed statement."

198 comments

  1. algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints... by LordAndrewSama · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know which of those three I'll bet on being responsible for TPB being blocked.

  2. who cares by ooocmyooo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    does anyone care for that company anymore? are there people still using MSN? o.O

    1. Re:who cares by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      A lot of those who were using MSN have since moved to Skype, which is now also owned by MS...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:who cares by ooocmyooo · · Score: 1

      i still prefer irc :)

    3. Re:who cares by sqrt(2) · · Score: 3, Interesting

      MSN/Live Messenger, yes. It's incredibly popular in Asia, especially South Korea.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    4. Re:who cares by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm pretty sure that's StarCraft - not messenger

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    5. Re:who cares by X0563511 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OTR.

      Seriously, they should be using OTR within a non-retarded client. All these problems magically go away, and you get privacy out of it!

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A lot of those who were using MSN have since moved to Skype, which is now also owned by MS...

      Allthough MSN is still surprisingly big in terms of usage, hundreds of millions of active users according to ComScore and the like (much bigger than Skype), the real big trend is that the users moved to Facebook for what they used Messenger for (chatting and updates). And btw. Facebook Chat blocks Pirate Bay too. All the major IM services have been running automated malware blocks for a very long time. I'm surprised people are surprised that Pirate Bay is on the list (regardless whether you think it is "right" or not).

    7. Re:who cares by mikael_j · · Score: 4, Informative

      In Sweden it is, AFAIK, the most popular IM client (although a lot of people have recently taken to using Facebook's built-in XMPP-based chat).

      You see, ICQ used to be king of the hill. Then in the very late 1990s and early 2000s lots of kids with no knowledge of computers or how horrible MSN Messenger was compared to the competition were going online and using the, at the time, IM client included with Windows. The ICQ users mostly switched to MSN or used a multi-protocol client to stay in touch with everyone. Eventually everyone stopped using ICQ and what was left was a country of MSN users.

      So why wasn't it AIM or one of the other services popular in the US that became popular? Well, AIM came from AOL which never really operated anywhere but in the US. ICQ was popular but was beaten by MSN since MSN came pre-installed with Windows. This btw, explains why MSN is "popular" outside the US, early adopters used other services but when the "regular people" came online the one IM client they saw was MSN. ICQ was "for geeks" and AIM and YIM had pretty much no chance since neither AOL nor Yahoo! had much market presence.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    8. Re:who cares by maxwell+demon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't worry. Microsoft's backdoors will not work well until about the fifth version. :-9

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    9. Re:who cares by bn-7bc · · Score: 0

      Agreed, irc is better than most im platform, only problem is, you can never convince a noon geek (eg family abroad) to use irc, thei already have an messender account and don|t want another client.

    10. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, ICQ also had the spam annoyance.

    11. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The bundled Windows Messenger and the downloadable MSN Messenger weren't quite the same thing.

    12. Re:who cares by delinear · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many of those hundreds of millions are still actively using the instant messenger component, since I notice logging into Hotmail seems to log me into web messenger (at least by default) and I assume those instances also count towards this total.

    13. Re:who cares by mikael_j · · Score: 3, Informative

      True, but they could both connect to the same network.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    14. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MSN Messenger was never included with Windows. You always had to download it separately. There was a messenger app included with Windows but no one ever used it.

      People gravitated towards MSN because it kicked usability ass compared to ICQ. While many have fond memories of ICQ, few really miss it. MSN Messenger has no serious problems, nor did it ever. There's no sense in which it's "horrible" compared to the alternatives, and plenty of people with *lots* of knowledge of computers used MSN as soon as it appeared. It depends what you mean by "knowledge" though. The word is often used here to mean "agreement with me on OS choice".

    15. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Before the likes of Steam got their built in messengers working properly (back in the days when you tried to squeeze every last bit of power out of your system), lots of gamers used Messenger over ICQ as it seemed less resource intensive and more friendly to alt+tabbing. Of course that didn't last for long, MS decided the way to proceed was function creep and bloat, but by then lots of gamers had turned their non-gaming friends onto MSN and it stuck.

    16. Re:who cares by prionic6 · · Score: 1

      Well, AIM came from AOL which never really operated anywhere but in the US.

      Just a few points to add: AOL was fairly widespread in Germany, and with it the AIM. Also, when AOL acquired ICQ, they connected the networks.

      It's probably all WhatsApp and Facebook IM these days, although I stopped using IM networks.

    17. Re:who cares by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      And now....In Soviet Russia,

      I C Q!

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    18. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No... In Soviet Russia, Q Cs I. /facepalm

    19. Re:who cares by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      One small factor: having a username, rather than a user number.

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    20. Re:who cares by am+2k · · Score: 2

      a lot of people have recently taken to using Facebook's built-in XMPP-based chat

      Facebook is no more XMPP-based than the iPod is dock connector-based. The XMPP interface is just for external access, they don't even route stanzas (the XMPP packets) properly between two users using this interface (all the parts the internal chat system doesn't support are stripped out).

      MSN also has an XMPP-interface now, btw. It's pretty similar in functionality to Facebook's.

    21. Re:who cares by shione · · Score: 1

      The cause of ICQ's downfall was that each subsequent version got bloatier and bloatier. MSN messenger now is bloaty too but when it first came out it was a very lean and practical messenger like google talk is now. Early versions of MSN messnger were good and didn't have any of the junk gimmicks, giving even people with knowledge of computers good reasons to jump over to it. MSN messengers crapware started around v4 as I recall but before that it was a decent im. ..that was back in the day when microsoft was complaining about there being ten billion im protocols and that they would support a standard. Once they had pole position they went awfully quiet about it.

    22. Re:who cares by nahdude812 · · Score: 1

      Isn't MSN the default homepage for IE? So some possibly significant portion of those active users are just people who don't know or care how to change their homepage. I know when I still worked at a place with Windows servers, the older class of servers would open MSN as soon as you fired up IE to download some software patch, so I myself am probably responsible for hundreds of those "users" without ever even attempting to use MSN.

    23. Re:who cares by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      And btw. Facebook Chat blocks Pirate Bay too. All the major IM services have been running automated malware blocks for a very long time. I'm surprised people are surprised that Pirate Bay is on the list (regardless whether you think it is "right" or not).

      I know that Yahoo used to block Photobucket URL links in Yahoo Messenger, both in IM and chat. Never cared much for Yahoo's "Flickr" photo upload/hosting service. I guess the rule is that it's OK to block competitors' links (or anything/anyone else) as long as you're confident that the competitor in question is unlikely to be able to field a sufficiently-large/threatening legal phalanx of lawyers and rented politicians (because politicians rarely, if ever, stay bought).

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    24. Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say that 99.9% of my contacts in Canada use MSN.

    25. Re:who cares by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      ICQ became a bloated piece of crap that was hard to use, and didn't support things like voice/video chat in a timely fashion. It crashed often, leaked your IP address, didn't work well with NAT routers (no UPNP support) among other things.

    26. Re:who cares by Arker · · Score: 1

      I think your memories are a bit distorted. ICQ was a great IM at first but the clients went to crap and after awhile you couldnt even get the old version to use. That's why I switched, to a multi-client IM, and a lot of the early adopters went that route. Then we had people on icq, yim, msn and aim on our lists. Mine had a good preponderance of yahoo for years before msn took off, ymmv. Also strangely enough AOL actually has and has had decent penetration in several non-us markets; UK, Australia, and Germany I know off the top of my head have done ok, but yeah I guess they probably never even tried in Sverige.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    27. Re:who cares by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      you can never convince a noon geek

      Was that a typoo? If not I have some googling to do...

    28. Re:who cares by amiller2571 · · Score: 1

      irc is the best. The only problem is that I'm the only one who is ever on my channel. Most of my friends only want to use Skype, which I really hate.

    29. Re:who cares by amiller2571 · · Score: 1

      I Believe XP was about the 7th or 8th version, not the fith

      Win 1.0, 2.0 3.0, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP
      It was the 8th, if I didn't miss any

    30. Re:who cares by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      He is talking about MSN as in instant messaging app (Live Messenger these days), not about MSN the homepage.

    31. Re:who cares by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      Well, you got 2000 and ME backward: Windows 2000 was released 7 months before Windows ME. And they're not really even the same OS; Windows 2000 was based on NT architecture and was a business-edition OS; Windows ME was based on the 9x architecture (and is the last OS to have been; Microsoft abandoned it and built XP on the NT core after the massive screwup that was Windows ME).

      But if you're going on Microsoft's numbering scheme, you had versions 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11 (Windows for Workgroups), and 3.12 (which was basically the version of 3.11 that had international support baked in).

      The Windows NT family was started at NT 3.1, and ran parallel to the 9x versions in a business-oriented edition (rather than a consumer-oriented edition).

      Windows 95 was version 4.0 (the corresponding version of NT was just called NT 4.0), Windows 98 was version 4.1, and Windows ME was version 4.9.

      Microsoft built Windows 2000, which was version 5.0, on the NT core (but it was a business-oriented edition of Windows); as I said, they then trashed the 9x architecture, and the first consumer-oriented version of Windows to be built on the NT core, Windows XP, is actually version 5.1.

      So, it really depends on what you want to call a version.

    32. Re:who cares by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You did. You managed to miss Windows 3.1, Windows 3.11, Windows NT 3.51, Windows 95 OSR2, Windows NT 4, and Windows 98 SE. (To exclude NT, you have to remove 2000 from your list too as that wasn't a consumer OS).

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    33. Re:who cares by TechnoCore · · Score: 1

      I'm from Sweden. My friends began to move from MSN to Skype around four years ago.Now I have basically no one on the MSN list. Last 4 companies I worked at use Skype internally. So I think you might be wrong, MSN is not the standard IM client is Sweden. At least not in the computer games industry or in internet technology businesses :)

    34. Re:who cares by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I've noticed that quite a few of my geekier friends have Skype accounts (as do I) but most people I know still seem to cling to MSN or have transitioned to just using Facebook.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
  3. Goog.gl by dataxtream · · Score: 2

    I guess Microsoft has never heard of goo.gl

    --
    PressTV - The News Channel the UK Government doesnt want you to watch

    1. Re:Goog.gl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A lot of these applications resolve the address's through url shortening services and check where they really point to.

    2. Re:Goog.gl by thereitis · · Score: 1

      Here's how you fix that: http://trick.ly/

  4. Skype Next? by Martz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now Microsoft owns Skype, I wonder if they'll be applying the same intelligent algorithms to voice and video conversations.

    Messenger usage must be diminishing, a lot of people seem to use Facebook for IM these days. Anyone more serious about IM who doesn't use Facebook probably uses a different network/client anyway. One which they do control.

    1. Re:Skype Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that it will be hard to get around.

      pirate bay.se/links/here/dot.jpg will likely fly right past their filter.
      This is Microsoft here, remember.

      Or, you know, just paste the directories and tell them it is on TPB. Those directories could be for any website. Blocking them would be like blocking basic sentence structure because it can be used to attack people.
      So, Microsoft, stick, candle, lit, butt up, a, your.

    2. Re:Skype Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      you cant just take text-based algorithms and "apply them" to voice and video ;) the domains are completely different.

      let's face it...all text communication on the internet is basically being recorded, and text-based data mining techniques are sufficiently advanced by this point that microsoft can succeed at this sort of blocking.

      the only way to retain any measure of privacy on the 'net is to communicate via voice and/or video. not only is voice and video orders of magnitude more costly to store and analyze, but current algorithms, while having made significant progress, still fail miserable at discerning anything meaningful from arbitrary data streams.

    3. Re:Skype Next? by Noughmad · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not that it will be hard to get around.

      pirate bay.se/links/here/dot.jpg will likely fly right past their filter.
      This is Microsoft here, remember.

      Yeah, I remember using MSN a long time ago. We would have to change the file extensions in order to send .exe's and .mp3's. Fun times, when it took so little to feel like a hacker.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    4. Re:Skype Next? by iosq · · Score: 1

      And when file sending frequency made that annoying, you could just set HelloWorld.exe as the virus scanner.

    5. Re:Skype Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, duh, MSN has been replaced by free BBM and free texting. It still sees some use though. I use it to communicate with my clients most days, as text lag is widely variable when sending from UK to France :) Facebook IM is unusable for anything more than a quick hello. Out of hours, I might use Facebook to flirt, but MSN is way better for cybering :p

    6. Re:Skype Next? by Mathinker · · Score: 1

      OTR

    7. Re:Skype Next? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      We would have to change the file extensions in order to send .exe's and .mp3's. Fun times, when it took so little to feel like a hacker.

      It is still the same for Outlook and .exe at my place of work. When we developers need to send someone an .exe, it usually goes out in an encrypted .zip file (Outlook will scan the contents of non-encrypted .zips).

      Such crap is one of the reasons I prefer non-Microsoft products @home (except for Windows - I'm still tooo much of a gaming junkie to do without Windows).

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    8. Re:Skype Next? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      you cant just take text-based algorithms and "apply them" to voice and video ;) the domains are completely different.

      I believe the grandparent was talking about Skype's IM component, not the voice / video conferencing capabilities. I was quite surprised recently to discover that a lot of my non-geeky friends were completely unaware of instant messaging until they encountered it via Skype and Facebook - the IM was the main feature that they said they liked about Facebook, and when I asked what made it better than other IM systems it became clear that they thought that Facebook was the first thing to provide this kind of functionality.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    9. Re:Skype Next? by thereitis · · Score: 1

      Fun times, when it took so little to feel like a hacker.

      Obligatory printer beatdown ;)

    10. Re:Skype Next? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      so.. when will someone do "IP over skype-video" with a smartphone acting as the proxy?

      the point in that thought experiment is that as long as you can do cheap video calls, you can do relatively wide bandwidth file/data transfers and there's nothing the jackasses can do about it.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    11. Re:Skype Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should talk to your boss and have that turned off in outlook. It is configurable.

    12. Re:Skype Next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could probably defeat it with an underscore preceding the address. Office Communicator would always block links for us at work and that was the easiest way to get around it.

    13. Re:Skype Next? by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      Unlikely. That company is pretty rigid in its usage rules for IT. I've tried to negotiate a similar point before and got nowhere.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  5. I noticed the blocks. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Informative

    They also block all posts containing the string 'no-ip.org' - I've ran into it myself, as I use my home server on a no-ip.org dynamic IP to host the occasional game and transfer files via HTTP. I just have to specify it by IP instead to get around the block. I don't know exactly why Microsoft blocks mention of no-ip.org, but it is concieveable that it might be used to host malware downloads which are then advertised via IM-spamming, so there is grounds for some legitimate reason there. Even if it does inconvenience me personally.

    In the case of TPB though, there is no such excuse. If TBP hosts malware (And I'm sure there are a few files, given the volume there), it'll have to be something that requires downloading a torrent(/magnet) - and if you can't get infected just by visiting a browser-exploiting website, it fails as malware. Besides, anyone uneducated enough to follow IM spam links isn't going to know what a torrent client is. It seems far more likely that Microsoft are just doing a corporate favor for either an external company they want to maintain a good relationship with or one of their own divisions concerned about piracy.

    1. Re:I noticed the blocks. by ledow · · Score: 1

      Because what I *really* want in an Instant Messaging provider when I could use ANY of the dozens there are in the world (including a roll-your-own using Jabber), is for them to start reading my messages, deciding if they are appropriate and censoring links automatically.

      Fortunately, I use Pidgin, which lets me use any of the others right alongside it in the same program and not even care. In fact, I can't remember the last time I used an MSN connection (it's possible, because some of my contacts also use Pidgin and have 5+ accounts on different servers, but it wouldn't have been a deliberate choice on my part).

      And if I really HAD to use MSN to do that, then it's not hard to obscure or encrypt the conversation to bypass their pathetic filtering effort here. So all they've really achieved is to inconvenience their own customers (especially if no-ip is blocked too) at the behest of (presumably) some organisation that disapproves of a certain website, or some stupid algorithm that they don't appear to want to override.

      Fortunately, I don't trust these people with my IM or email any more, though I did for years. Seems a silly thing to do as IM is so competitive and in change at the moment (e.g. BBIM, etc.). Nice way to distinguish yourself from the competition.

    2. Re:I noticed the blocks. by X0563511 · · Score: 0

      Do your talking via OTR and all these issues disappear. You'll have to abandon MS's own failclient and grab Pidgin, or some other that works with OTR.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:I noticed the blocks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because what I *really* want in an Instant Messaging provider when I could use ANY of the dozens there are in the world (including a roll-your-own using Jabber), is for them to start reading my messages, deciding if they are appropriate and censoring links automatically.

      Fortunately, I use Pidgin, which lets me use any of the others right alongside it in the same program and not even care. In fact, I can't remember the last time I used an MSN connection (it's possible, because some of my contacts also use Pidgin and have 5+ accounts on different servers, but it wouldn't have been a deliberate choice on my part).

      And if I really HAD to use MSN to do that, then it's not hard to obscure or encrypt the conversation to bypass their pathetic filtering effort here. So all they've really achieved is to inconvenience their own customers (especially if no-ip is blocked too) at the behest of (presumably) some organisation that disapproves of a certain website, or some stupid algorithm that they don't appear to want to override.

      Fortunately, I don't trust these people with my IM or email any more, though I did for years. Seems a silly thing to do as IM is so competitive and in change at the moment (e.g. BBIM, etc.). Nice way to distinguish yourself from the competition.

      Well, they are "reading your messages" in the same way GMail is, that is; reading is perhaps not the righ word for what automated search algorithms do. All the big brand IM services (MSN, Yahoo, AIM, Facebook) have been running automated malware link block solutions for a very long time (also how they stopped the viral IM virus links that were a big problem once). I'm not saying it is right, but I'm more surprised Pirate Bay only recently got added to MSN blocklist (if it really is recent and not just a recent discovery), Facebook chat have already been doing this.

    4. Re:I noticed the blocks. by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      Including Google Talk? I've never seen from such tactics there, and XMPP is much more resilient to spam in the first place being default is no messages from users without presence notification. Finally the Google Talk clients from Google even have OTR built in.

    5. Re:I noticed the blocks. by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      This is why no-ip.org has a couple dozen alternative domains to choose from. Same idea with mailinator with sites that try to block you using mailinator e-mail addresses.

    6. Re:I noticed the blocks. by ix42 · · Score: 1

      Unless Google has changed the meaning of its "Off The Record" button since I last used it, that just means they won't save the conversation for later viewing in the gmail interface (or in the gmail interface of the person you're talking to).

      They don't provide http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/ as far as I can tell.

    7. Re:I noticed the blocks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TPB hosts magnet links. I haven't heard of any malware contained within a magnet link. The users might host malware on whatever machines they're using to seed the torrents, but TPB itself is not.

    8. Re:I noticed the blocks. by allo · · Score: 1

      but normal people can easily change the domain for trashmail, but they cannot change their dyndns every other day. dns-names should be stable.

    9. Re:I noticed the blocks. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Most likely this is some kind of automated blocker which processes user "it's a spam!" requests, aggregates them, and tries to find any common subdomain... if enough came in with .no-ip.org (or thepiratebay.com), then it gets auto-added to the blacklist.

  6. i use linux for my pirating needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And don't have MSN even on my dual boot XP. Yeah, XP, who needs newer?

  7. URL shorteners, anyone? by Polizei · · Score: 5, Informative

    So they block URLs, marking them as spam. Use a URL shortener, like t.co / bit.ly / what.ever, so you can bypass the scheme.

    1. Re:URL shorteners, anyone? by oldlurker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So they block URLs, marking them as spam. Use a URL shortener, like t.co / bit.ly / what.ever, so you can bypass the scheme.

      No you don't, they actually resolve the target links, at least for the common URL shortener services. That said, it is not difficult to get past the block, and I don't think they even tried to make it hard, original intent was to protect normal users from getting malware, which was a big problem with IM earlier.

    2. Re:URL shorteners, anyone? by Polizei · · Score: 1

      No you don't, they actually resolve the target links, at least for the common URL shortener services.

      Well then, this gives one the opportunity to DDoS either URL shorteners or MSN servers. Imagine a 1,000,000+ shortened URLs within 5 minutes - make a HEAD request for each, now that's a flood!

    3. Re:URL shorteners, anyone? by sowth · · Score: 1

      If they wanted to protect users from malware, why would they make a feature where the user could inadvertently run remote code from a link?

    4. Re:URL shorteners, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Url shorteners? Bah. Why the complication? Just split it in two...

      http://thepi
      ratebay.org/torrent/...

    5. Re:URL shorteners, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or you could put a couple of spa(REMOVETHIS)ces in the middle of the url...

    6. Re:URL shorteners, anyone? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Inadvertently? The problem is the users doing it deliberately.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  8. since when by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    was MSFT concerned about malware, really? phttt!

  9. evil by ebonum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    msn messages are between sender and receiver. Microsoft has a duty to encrypt these messages so that no one else can read them. No one includes Microsoft.

    What next? Microsoft will start auto correcting my grammar? So that the receiver gets messages with everything spelled correctly and with correct grammar? Why not just start sending messages with what Microsoft thinks I want to say?

    Really. This should be the same as the post office. Stay the fuck out of my personal correspondence. If you can't do that, there should be a law saying you are spying and should be in jail.

    Honestly people. How can you tell China that deleting content is bad when an American company is setting this type of example? I'm tired of "Do as we say, not as we do."

    1. Re:evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Microsoft has a duty to encrypt these messages so that no one else can read them. No one includes Microsoft.

      lol.. what duty? they are a private company. they can do whatever they want.

      Stay the fuck out of my personal correspondence. If you can't do that, there should be a law saying you are spying and should be in jail.

      so stop using microsofts servers and they'll stop bothering you. use some other service. or setup your own jabber or irc server. Who exactly are you to tell them what to do with the data that you send to their servers?

      man.. you entitled fucks are really annoying. why dont you kill yourself?

    2. Re:evil by Hentes · · Score: 2

      I think the blocks are client-side and can be bypassed with some hacking so Microsoft doesn't read your messages.

    3. Re:evil by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

      From experience with no-ip.org being blocked in the same way, even when neither side is using the official MSM client (Does anyone?) the message is still blocked - so, no, it isn't client-side.

    4. Re:evil by GmExtremacy · · Score: 1

      How can you tell China that deleting content is bad when an American company is setting this type of example?

      Because saying they can't is an example of the appeal to hypocrisy fallacy.

      But they still aren't very good role models...

    5. Re:evil by Pandur77 · · Score: 1

      MSN Messenger is about as personal as postcards. I don't trust the postal service not to sneak a peak on those.

    6. Re:evil by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      msn messages are between sender and receiver. Microsoft has a duty to encrypt these messages so that no one else can read them. No one includes Microsoft.

      Not really - all their obligated to do is what is in the TOS - if you don't like that, don't use their service. It's that simple.

      What next? Microsoft will start auto correcting my grammar? So that the receiver gets messages with everything spelled correctly and with correct grammar? Why not just start sending messages with what Microsoft thinks I want to say?

      I hope not, based on my experiences with Word's spell and grammar checking...

      Really. This should be the same as the post office. Stay the fuck out of my personal correspondence. If you can't do that, there should be a law saying you are spying and should be in jail.

      Honestly people. How can you tell China that deleting content is bad when an American company is setting this type of example? I'm tired of "Do as we say, not as we do."

      Maybe because in China it's a government that is doing the censoring; whereas with MS it's a private company that offers a service and associated terms of service you can accept and use the service or reject and go elsewhere? You have no right to an expectation of privacy with a commercial service; beyond that in the TOS.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    7. Re:evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "MSM" stands for "Men who have Sex with Men". It's nothing to do with MSN, which is what's under discussion here.

      Though I suppose if you're an MSM, you could hook up with guys using MSN ;)

    8. Re:evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another example of a logical fallacy fail.

      Go back to College, philosophy fag. Go read about what an appeal to hypocrisy is, then go feel stupid.

    9. Re:evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... what exactly was wrong with what that? Saying someone's argument is wrong because they're a hypocrite is indeed a logical fallacy.

      I don't think you're being very helpful when you don't even explain what is wrong.

    10. Re:evil by GmExtremacy · · Score: 1

      It seemed to me like he was saying, "If you're a hypocrite, your arguments are invalid!" there. Otherwise, why couldn't you tell China those things? That sentence makes no sense to me. If that's what he meant, then that is indeed the appeal to hypocrisy (tu quoque) fallacy.

      And college isn't the only way to learn about logical fallacies.

    11. Re:evil by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      MSM might actually be more appropriate: Microsoft Messanger is the only component left of what was once the Microsoft Network.

    12. Re:evil by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's called "Live Messenger" these days, and is part of the whole Live branding exercise.

    13. Re:evil by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      It's called Windows Live Messenger, not MSN Messenger. The correct acronym is actually WLM now.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    14. Re:evil by Trogre · · Score: 1

      It's reasons like this that we should move to a more open IM system. Jabber, anyone?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  10. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by MasterMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You may think that it is some grand anti-piracy conspiracy, but Microsoft is right. TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware. There are people who use it to spread viruses and malware. It makes sense too - it's quite easy method to infect peoples computers.

  11. All 8 people were obviously upset about this by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 0

    All of the users, who also owned Xboxes, claimed "Microsoft is a dick" for doing this.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  12. So now they do domain blockings too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The official client also randomly blocks urls with .php? in them, aside from generally being a bloated piece of crap full of ads.

  13. Facebook too by firefrei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Facebook also blocks TPB links, and has for ages.

    Microsoft and Facebook can do what they want - people can't complain too much, they are the company's networks after all, they can do what they want. But at least it's good in reminding people that their messages aren't private, and that there is going to be at least some automated checking of the contents before it's granted clearance to be sent through unaltered. If you really want to use an IM platform that's completely under your control (and not at the risk of censorship), then host your own XMPP server.

    --
    I remember when Linux was good... too...
    1. Re:Facebook too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... or use IRC with DCC, encrypted if you wish.

    2. Re:Facebook too by badfish99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Microsoft and Facebook can do what they want - people can't complain too much, they are the company's networks after all, they can do what they want.

      Would people have the same attitude as you if the phone company started beeping out words that they objected to? Or if the postal service started throwing away mail because they objected to the recipient? After all, the phone and the postal network belong to those companies, so they should be able to do whatever thay want?

    3. Re:Facebook too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft and Facebook can do what they want - people can't complain too much, they are the company's networks after all, they can do what they want.

      Would people have the same attitude as you if the phone company started beeping out words that they objected to? Or if the postal service started throwing away mail because they objected to the recipient? After all, the phone and the postal network belong to those companies, so they should be able to do whatever thay want?

      Courts have held up again and again that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy over the phone and through the post office. The courts haven't caught up with digital messaging but they are slowly and methodically getting there. Of course you could do like the parent suggests and run your own XMPP service until the courts do catch up.

    4. Re:Facebook too by horza · · Score: 1

      With Facebook there is an expectation that all your information is public, even your private chats. With MSN it's always been implicit that private conversations are between just the two users despite passing over their networks. The fact they are tampering with your messages is rather a big deal. Once they have broken that barrier of trust, which they now have, a significant share of that market will now move to an alternative. Which is not really a problem for Microsoft, they aren't making any money out of providing the MSN service, and the users will fragment rather than going to any of their rivals which as pointed out aren't any better.

      Phillip.

    5. Re:Facebook too by metacell · · Score: 1

      Doesn't "reasonable expectation of privacy" just apply to wiretapping orders?

    6. Re:Facebook too by firefrei · · Score: 1

      You have to pay money to your phone company, so sure I have a greater level of expectation over them not screwing with my conversations as opposed to Facebook/MSN, for which I pay nothing. As for the postal service, in Australia it's wholly Government owned and hence comes under appropriate legislation.

      I don't know why you were modded insightful. No-one reasonable likes censorship but to think Microsoft/Facebook have to follow your rules even though you don't pay a cent for the server is asinine.

      --
      I remember when Linux was good... too...
  14. Es tu, slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's wrong with Slashdot these days?
    Recent articles: This one, Apple's free-to-use nano-sim patent, airline food tasting bad, probes of FB passwd sharing rumors...
    I've already seen them all on general news site nu.nl before they appeared here.
    A general, dutch news site. Reports on /.-style news faster than /..

    Seriously: what happened? Is a general news site deeper into tech news nowadays than /.?
    It can't be update frequency: after I read the story there, I see plenty of stories added here before the same story is finally posted.

    I dunno about you all, but I liked it when /. gave me news ahead of it hitting general news. Trailing... not so nice.
    </whine>

    1. Re:Es tu, slashdot? by oodaloop · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Maybe other sites are interested in tech news these days too. In 1997, your average joe didn't care about passwords, OSs, or other nerd stuff. Now, there's lots of people who want to know. So slashdot isn't the only tech news site anymore. Go have some more cheese.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Es tu, slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't really think of a time it's been faster since Digg and Reddit came out. Editor moderation and keeping stories to one or two per hour adds like 12-24hrs to the process of publishing a submission.

      But in exchange you get a comment area that's mostly literate and with people who still put thought and time into their posts, and then maybe a couple hundred other posts on top of that.

    3. Re:Es tu, slashdot? by Vernes · · Score: 1

      I reported this news a day before, a day later, I see this slowly drifting to the surface.
      Found mine via reddit.

    4. Re:Es tu, slashdot? by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

      Maybe other sites are interested in tech news these days too.

      Or maybe, if you're paranoid enough (like I am), you'll believe that the proverbial "they" don't want you going to SlashDot, because "they" want ALL of your news sources to be censored, filtered, and controlled.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
  15. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Why the fuck is this -1? Mods, please put your crack pipe down for a few seconds.

    TPB is indeed infested with viruses and malware - I don't care, because I know how to take precautions. For me, it's a minor nuisance. Joe Sixpack, OTOH, will regularly screw up his machine. And people here are always moaning how insecure Windows is - yet when MS try to take action, they are lambasted for "blocking free speech".

  16. Makes sense. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's face it people, TPB isn't exactly a shining example of virtue. They do not give a shit who's ads they serve.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Makes sense. by badfish99 · · Score: 1

      So: Microsoft censoring TPB is bad, but TPB censoring ads would be good?

    2. Re:Makes sense. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Well. Making sure their site doesn't become a mine field of bullshit browser hijacks would be great.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    3. Re:Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because most people on TPB are smart enough to have Adblock.

  17. Windows 8 by Taantric · · Score: 2

    I worry about Windows 8 with the tight integration with all your personal email, data everything sitting on the Microsoft Live cloud. Your Live email, Skydrive, Photos, Windows 8 IE history, bookmarks, apps, the desktop settings everything is on the MS Cloud and transiting through their network. What is there to stop them from giving the same treatment to the your entire computing.

    1. Re:Windows 8 by c0lo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What is there to stop them from giving the same treatment to the your entire computing.

      Easy: Linux, Mac OSX, Open/FreeBSD. It's not like MS is the only choice nowadays.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:Windows 8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not worried about the iCloud or Google services though, right?

  18. So they block mentioning their own products too? by s-whs · · Score: 0

    "Microsoft has confirmed that users of its instant messaging app will not be able to send each other links to popular torrent site The Pirate Bay, citing malware fears. 'We block instant messages if they contain malicious or spam URLs based on intelligence algorithms, third-party sources, and/or user complaints. Pirate Bay URLs were flagged by one or more of these and were consequently blocked,' Redmond told The Register in an emailed statement."

    The worst malware I ever encountered is from microsoft (specifically windoze 95 and 98), I can remember the days, it took hours to get rid of all the problems and stuff it installed that I didn't want. I suppose they are also blocking all mentions of windoze 95/98?

  19. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by scarboni888 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Out of the many many years I've been using TPB only once did I ever download a torrent that was an infection. It tunred out they were getting blasted with numerous ups by someone intending to infect others. All the infections from that particular campaign were taken down within 10 minutes of reporting them. So far as I've been able to see the moderating on that board is quite good considering what it is.

  20. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by niftydude · · Score: 5, Interesting

    TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware.

    That may or may not be the case, but don't you think it is funny that now that tpb is becoming a legitimate source of music and video from independent artists, corporations with creative industry ties have starting unilaterally blocking tpb without worrying about the law?

    I guess they don't mind free advertising, but they HATE competition.

    --
    You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
  21. ooops by gciochina · · Score: 1

    I know who will remain last in the instant messaging usage statistics :)

  22. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by GmExtremacy · · Score: 1

    Yes. It does contain some malware. So? It also contains legitimate (non-malware, I mean) content. I'm not sure I agree with the entire thing being blocked just because some of the content is malware and some people are too foolish to tell the difference.

  23. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It won't make much difference, people will just type "www.theporitebay.org/xxxxxx" instead. Like all other MSN 'blocking' it will be just another Windows annoyance rather than an impediment.

    --
    No sig today...
  24. Magnet Links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't users just send the magnet links through the chat interface? Or god-forbid, email?
    They are just pure text, so no need for html's, right?

  25. Pointless Censorship by adosch · · Score: 1

    The obviousness oozes out of this article... for starters, who uses MS IM anymore? FB and gtalk have pretty much squeezed those out with mass appeal unless you have a multi-client and are holding onto it for legacy reasons. Secondly, much like anything else that has made national headlines for 'the solicitation and is a hub of means to access of copyrighted material' should probably be abandoned and use something else people.

  26. Re:So they block mentioning their own products too by Pandur77 · · Score: 1

    Windows ME = Worst malware I've ever had on one of my computers.

  27. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Part of the issue is that most users don't update their browser plugins. There has been a rash of Java exploits stemming from malicious code embedded in some banner ads (partly because users just don't update Java). The exploit causes redirection to another site and drive-by installation of malware.

    TPB is serving whatever ads they get paid to serve and don't really care to identify and remove the malicious ones.

  28. I'm surprised and shocked... by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

    ....that anyone still uses MSN Messenger.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
  29. Of course it's evil by coder111 · · Score: 2

    Unless your messages are GPG or PGP encrypted when they leave your PC, you cannot be sure they are not intercepted, read, spied on, modified, data-mined and used to target ads, etc. It doesn't matter which company handles them. If you want your messages to be between sender & receiver- use proper encryption. There is no other way and there never was. Small shop Linux admins can cat /var/mail/ebonum just as well.

    Now Microsoft has no duty to do anything. They provide messaging service for their own benefit & profit, not yours, with features they think benefit THEM most. Even if they include some encryption, it will be closed-source, lame and with backdoors. If you want to use their service, you have to accept these terms. If you don't- use something else. Jabber is still there, and so is IRC.

    Ugly thing is that 99% of people using MSN will not know about these issues nor care about them. But that's just people. Unless it affects their salaries or pensions or benefits or religious sensibilities or beer prices, 99% percent of people will not care about it.

    Oh, and even if you have GPG, you can still have a trojan or a hardware keylogger on your PC, so you'll never be 100% safe & secure. But you can tilt the odds somewhat in your favour.

    --Coder

  30. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're right. And you know another site that is full of avenues for spyware and malware? Facebook. They should block all links to Facebook too. In fact, I'd contend that Facebook is an exponentially more threatening vehicle than TPB.

  31. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 1

    And many direct download links may or may not contain viruses, urls may or may not point to websites with malicious scripts. I say we block all of these as well, what do you think?

    I use Messenger with my friends, people I know. I've seen some of them get their accounts hijacked and send out scam links, but I've yet to see a Pirate Bay scam operation.

  32. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by blind+biker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware.

    I've been a Pirate Bay user for at least 5 years now, and must say, your statement is BS: tpb has an excellent community that actively comments on the torrents. tpb is probably the strictest torrent site out there. Only http://1337x.org/ comes close in terms of the quality of the torrents that _remain_ on the site.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  33. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Xest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware."

    So are Google and Bing.

    Out of Google, Bing, and TPB one of these sites has a trusted users flag from whom you can trust that content is unlikely to be infected. Guess which one of these sites it is.

  34. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Inda · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure they're talking about torrents, just malware infected banner adverts.

    In all the multi-years I've been in the scene, only twice have I downloaded dodgy files. First was off an anon-FTP dump, that contained the Chernobyl virus (CIH). The second was at TPB. It was a harmless scripted ASF file. Thanks Microsoft; not only did you create the method, you created the solution (MSE).

    TPB is the least of my malware worries.

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  35. It occurs to me... by f3rret · · Score: 1

    That it would probably be simple as hell to circumvent that blocking.
    Either use one of the many alternative domains for TPB or use one of those url shortening services.

    Alternatively, don't use messenger or find other way of referring to TPB via it.

    Or as someone else mentioned, just copy and paste the magnet links, it's not like TPB actually USES the the torrent files anymore.

    --
    Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
  36. antitrust anyone? by stewsters · · Score: 1

    Next we should block torrent outright. That should put a kabosh on those guys trying to download Linux via torrent.

  37. Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? If so, by what authority can Microsoft block legal access to legal content? While I guess it is possible that people are spreading malware through Microsoft Messenger, only a fool would follow a link from someone they didn't know or who was anonymous. Even so, do people really need Microsoft to be big brother and protect us from the chance of accessing something containing malware? Censorship is censorship.

    1. Re:Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Their service, their rules.

      I'm not hip to them censoring anything, but, malware barfing torrent sites don't particularly raise my eye brow. IFF, of course, they're not blocking other torrent sites.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    2. Re:Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Their service, their rules.

      I'm not hip to them censoring anything, but, malware barfing torrent sites don't particularly raise my eye brow. IFF, of course, they're not blocking other torrent sites.

      If Microsoft can block Pirate Bay, for whatever reason, then what is to stop them from block Apple or Redhat or any other site that they determine is "harmful" to their users? Censorship is censorship. It is a very slippery slope when anyone in power claims censorship is for the good of the people.

    3. Re:Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? by Yosho · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft can block Pirate Bay, for whatever reason, then what is to stop them from block Apple or Redhat or any other site that they determine is "harmful" to their users? Censorship is censorship. It is a very slippery slope when anyone in power claims censorship is for the good of the people.

      Nothing is stopping them. It's their own private servers and they can do whatever they want. Ever been to a forum that censored certain words or banned users for inappropriate behavior? The first amendment only applies to the government. It is perfectly legal for private organizations to control what data people send through their servers. As for whether it's moral or not -- if you don't like it, take your business elsewhere. There's no slope at all here.

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
    4. Re:Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft can block Pirate Bay, for whatever reason, then what is to stop them from block Apple or Redhat or any other site that they determine is "harmful" to their users? Censorship is censorship. It is a very slippery slope when anyone in power claims censorship is for the good of the people.

      Nothing is stopping them. It's their own private servers and they can do whatever they want. Ever been to a forum that censored certain words or banned users for inappropriate behavior? The first amendment only applies to the government. It is perfectly legal for private organizations to control what data people send through their servers. As for whether it's moral or not -- if you don't like it, take your business elsewhere. There's no slope at all here.

      Actually, it's not. It is my message to you that they are scanning and then determining to send through or not. In other words, in a public venue, the internet, they are acting to censor my speech. Microsoft is free to limit or expand their own content, but do they for somebody else's content? That is the question.

      If I am a MSN Messenger user, I have a contractual agreement with Microsoft regarding my messages. Now, I am sure that Microsoft has a policy, as do most providers, regarding content (must not be used for illegal purposes, etc.). I also, imagine that they have policies to protect their users from malware, again as many providers do. But, there is a big difference from blocking addresses from known spammers, etc. and actually scanning your email for links that could very well be legit. It also begs the question of what else does Microsoft scan messages for?

      I agree, though, that if people don't like it, they should take their business elsewhere. Which as far as MSN Messenger is concerned, that is exactly what has happened.

    5. Re:Does Pirate Bay also serve legal content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slickdeals bans links to fatwallet.com (the competition)

  38. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And people here are always moaning how insecure Windows is - yet when MS try to take action, they are lambasted for "blocking free speech".

    That's because it's what they're doing. The wider internet is full of malware, that doesn't mean you block the whole internet. You just block the URLs that are known to contain malware. Which is, incidentally, what they almost certainly do on other sites -- download.com is probably full of malware too, do they block the whole site? What about RapidShare or the like?

    It's very clear that this "Pirate Bay is unsafe" is just a pretense. There is no excuse for blocking an entire domain unless the entire domain contains nothing of value, and that isn't the case here.

  39. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You may think that it is some grand anti-piracy conspiracy, but Microsoft is right. TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware. There are people who use it to spread viruses and malware. It makes sense too - it's quite easy method to infect peoples computers.

    It depends on what you call "right". I would expect a messaging app to send any message, not block something that it thinks won't be good for me. What if I work for a studio and want to let someone know that our latest blockbuster has been pirated? Or if I am researching antivirus software and want to tell someone of a zero-day virus I have discovered?

    More importantly where does it end? When AI is good enough will I be prevented from discussing "dangerous" topics, like making explosives? Or dangerous political parties? Or making non-PC criticisms of religions? Will there be calls for email services to do the same? I want to be able to send any message and discuss any topic I want.

  40. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 4, Informative

    What do you think the whole MegaVideo take down was all about? (Hint.)

  41. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, essentially, you're saying, if we want to fight AIDS, it's better we outlaw prostitution and make access to them impossible instead of making sure everyone uses condoms?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  42. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by duguk · · Score: 1

    You may think that it is some grand anti-piracy conspiracy, but Microsoft is right. TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware. There are people who use it to spread viruses and malware. It makes sense too - it's quite easy method to infect peoples computers.

    Google is also infested with sites that contain malware. There are people who use it to spread viruses and malware. It makes sense too - it's quite easy method to infect peoples computers.

    It contains a lot more viruses than TPB ever could.

    Should Google be blocked too?

  43. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by samjam · · Score: 2

    Why would you want to MAKE SURE everyone uses condoms?
    Are you their goa'uld overlord or something?
    Or are you trying to cram your Ori religion down their throats?

    Invite them to use condoms by all means, but "make sure" - you certainly let slip your real feelings there. I think outlawing prostitution is a lesser degree of interference than making sure EVERYONE uses condoms.

  44. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iirc they do block RapidShare, or at least they did 5 years ago when I used MSN still.

  45. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by msobkow · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It depends what you're downloading. I've successfully downloaded ONE piece of software via TPB torrents that wasn't infected. I stopped even trying several years ago, because it was obvious the only reason people were posting "cracks" was to spread botnet infections to the unwary.

    So, no, unlike other media, I don't download and "try out" games like I do music and movies. I'm forced to go to a store to play around with a demo if I want a preview of a game.

    But that's ok. The reflexes aren't what they used to be, so I pretty much quit the twitch FPS and sports games. And once you eliminate those from your gaming sessions, you realize that the vast majority of the remaining games are free or dirt cheap if you buy them online or as apps.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  46. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    contains nothing of value

    That is highly subjective. One man's trash is another man's treasure. The fact that a given domain would exists at all means that someone took the time to set it up, so it obviously has value to at least one person. I'm stretching a point but isn't that the basic underlying argument behind censorship anyway? Don't look at this because it's garbage because I say it is.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  47. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by metacell · · Score: 2

    I agree... I want e-mail software that removes e-mail from spammers, but if a friend sends me an e-mail with a link to a spam site, I can decide for myself if I want to click the link.

    Of course, if the software warns me and asks me to confirm when I click the link, that's ok too.

  48. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by fran6gagne · · Score: 4, Funny

    You could make a prostitute detector and equip it on cars so they don't start when they detect a prostitute in it. That way you can't bring one home and contract viruses.

  49. They've been doing this censoring for years by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 1

    I remember I couldn't link anyone to my googlepages site (when googlepages existed) or a file listing on a CMS (download.php)

  50. Defending Satan by concealment · · Score: 0

    I end up defending the Great Satan (Microsoft) here, but they're right: Pirate Bay has more viruses, trojans and other drive-bay attacks in its ads than the average site, by a factor of at least ten.

    I clean up a lot of PCs still, and the biggest vector of infection is still porn sites. The second biggest vector is The Pirate Bay.

  51. Still? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do people really still use Messenger? I thought everyone had converted to gmail/gchat and/or skype?

  52. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by jythie · · Score: 1

    That has been my general experience too, TPB has malware on it, but does a better then average job of policing it, which makes singling them out seem a little suspicious.

  53. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by mspohr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or ... Microsoft could just fix their software.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  54. Ha ha by assertation · · Score: 0

    I didn't even know Microsoft *HAD* an instant messenger.

    This is a bit like the guy who lives in his parents basement saying he will only date supermodels with brown hair.

  55. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by BlastfireRS · · Score: 1

    Not even. I'm sure eventually people will just start using URL shortening services to post links (if it becomes a larger problem of censorship, perhaps TPB will start generating them itself for users to share).

  56. finshing url on paper/doublelclick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paper contains fishing url according to my Kaspersky

  57. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may think that it is some grand anti-piracy conspiracy, but Microsoft is right. TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware. There are people who use it to spread viruses and malware. It makes sense too - it's quite easy method to infect peoples computers.

    So? Maybe I'm an anti-virus researcher and I want to find the stuff for work/school.

    Unless Microsoft detects in some way that my computer itself has been infected, and the malware is actually the thing that is putting the links into the chat program to infect people on my friend's list, I don't want them censoring my communications.

    Under MS' logic, the phone company would go around analyzing the voices and beeping out any mention of a telephone number, mailing address, or web site that is a scam. There'd be an uproar if the telcos were found out to be tapping our voice lines; what shouldn't there be an uproar for Internet communications?

  58. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're missing the forest for the trees.

    You're obviously a smart guy (or gal, whatever) You go on TPB with a functional and practised mindset that knows not to click on big flashy green "DOWNLOAD NOW" buttons or get sidetracked into the alleyways of specious online casinos and moron-plausible "DOWNLOAD OUR PROPRIETARY APP AND HAVE YOUR ILLEGAL FILES INSTANTLY! Run fisd23489.exe?". You download your torrent or magnet file or whatever and get the heck out.

    Grandma, whose singular remaining drive in life is the vehement downloading and installation of toolbars, bless her, visits thepiratebay. Her experience is going to be completely different from yours.

    These filters aren't protecting us, chummer. They're protecting grandma.

  59. shotting themselves in the foot a lot lately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft really is zooming in on their foot with a telescope attached to a nuke lately with their unilateral decisions. Bad decisions at every level, from the OS, to APIs, to the software they provide. Things that everyone has taken for granted slowly being made to either be incredibly hackish or next to impossible to do in new versions.

    Not good for a company that is in direct control over majority of the user space experience. If they keep on the path they are going ordinary users just might get fed up with the limitations being imposed upon them and migrate away from their software.

  60. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next up: MS starts using shorteners APIs to check URLs and blocks magnet: URI scheme.

  61. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by pclminion · · Score: 1

    It depends on what you call "right". I would expect a messaging app to send any message, not block something that it thinks won't be good for me. What if I work for a studio and want to let someone know that our latest blockbuster has been pirated? Or if I am researching antivirus software and want to tell someone of a zero-day virus I have discovered?

    "A company I hate makes a product that does shit I don't like! Instead of moving on with my life, I'll cook up insane speculative straw man scenarios and knock them down on the Internet!"

    It's amazing how people can turn mundane bullshit into some kind of critical issue. What if you need to tell some vitally information to somebody? Well, perhaps you'll pick up the fucking phone! There's a thought!

  62. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by KingMotley · · Score: 3, Informative

    Easy enough to solve, don't install Java at all.

  63. Then it is illegal by Hyperhaplo · · Score: 2

    ... but who is going to sue?

    All communications between two private parties need to be encrypted. It'll eventually be that way.. we're just going through the Dark Ages again, this time Technology is the focus instead of Religion (history.. repeating itself.. didn't anyone learn anything from the last Dark Ages?)

    --
    You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
  64. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's amazing how people can turn mundane bullshit into some kind of critical issue.

    So why make a big deal about his comment?

  65. But no one uses MSN Messenger...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is silly, no one actually uses MSN Messenger in this day and age, do they? I mean, I think I can hear your AOL and Earthlink accounts calling....

  66. dont do that in the first place people! by Wingfat · · Score: 0

    for one.. who sends out full links to a torrent/magnet file anyways? that would have to be the lamest idea around, unless you want to get caught.
    2nd - who using Pirate Bay anymore anyways? not people in the know... so many other better sites to get what you need out there.
    As much as I love Microsoft there is always a way around someone blocking you from what you want to do.

  67. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by g4b · · Score: 1

    yes, clicking bay links infected my pc too. because they made me download stuff with my bittorrent application and then manually starting something i really really wanted by browsing the directory and finding the exe with a twist.

  68. I call BS. Prove it or retract it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may think that it is some grand anti-piracy conspiracy, but Microsoft is right. TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware

    Name one. Better yet, link to one.

    You are so full of fecal material your blood is brown. Go scaremonger for the DHS.

    Microsoft is no doubt bowing to pressure from Hollydead (who can't compete and must enforce its monopoly on low-brow schlock), that it received via Federal Gov. Inc. (who needs Hollydead's shekels badly to help finance its part of Propoganda Fest 2012 (euphemistacally called an "election")).

  69. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fix? The software isn't broken. It just responds very well to completely fucking stupid users who run malware executables.

  70. ..yeah, good luck with that, Disney. by kheldan · · Score: 1

    When will people learn?
    It starts with blocking "thepiratebay.com". Then people start using "thepir@teb@y.com". Then when they block that, maybe it morphs into "tehpyr@teb@e". After not very long, and way too much in labor costs by network admins, they're totally missing blocking references to "7|-|3P1R473B4'/.(0/\/\".
    MEMO TO DISNEY (and everyone else trying to censor shit on the internets: Give the fuck up, it doesn't work no matter how hard you try, and it just makes everything more annoying and confusing for everyone!

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  71. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by rrohbeck · · Score: 2

    More importantly where does it end?

    When every switch and router does DPI and knows what's good for you. Hey, there could be a new standard for network cables that only allows approved devices to communicate. Hmm, where have I seen this before?

  72. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Java...banner ads? I thought GIF ads were bad enough. What's next, Flash and Silverlight ads?

  73. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    Why do you think the RIAA labels sued Napster? Same thing. During Napster's heyday, CD sales soared. But not just RIAA CDs, indie CDs as well. But the indies were dependant on P2P and the RIAA has radio and TV.

    Note that after Napster was sued was when CD sales plummeted, and the lying bastards at the RIAA claimed it was Napster's fault that their sales were dropping. You don't have to be a physicist to know that cause never follows effect. Also note that none of the corporate media at all said one single word about the very large boycott against the RIAA labels after they sued Napster.

    You are correct, the entire anti-piracy crusade by the MAFIAA is a fight against their independant competetion.

  74. User complaints you say? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    So if BIGNUM users complain that http://www.microsoft.com/ is harmful what then?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  75. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    I say this time and time again.

    If you must have java for things like Eclipse or intranets like Kronos at work just disable it in your browser.

    FF lets you disable the plugins.

    IE goes a step farther. it lets you disable it in the internet zone under security settings and will enable Java in the intranet zone for your crappy web apps. If your users need java for one site just build a custom zone for that domain with java. Admins at work always forget to do this.

    Chrome does not even support java so your safe. Thays good because much software is incompatible with java7 which is more secure.

    Sadly I have not usedjava on the web in 10 years. No one uses it anymore for applets. HTML 5 will replace all its promises

  76. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or making non-PC criticisms of religions?

    Vote Santorum, he'll make everything but Christianity illegal, so this will be made much easier :)

  77. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Making a comment about his comment is making a big deal out of it?

  78. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Drinking+Bleach · · Score: 1

    As far as what it sounds like, the restriction is only enforced client-side, so maybe using Pidgin or other clients will bypass this block. Anyone that uses MSN that can verify this?

    Of course, I wouldn't put much trust in a Microsoft-run IM service in the first place...

  79. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, if his original comment was a big deal, then comment about his comment is a big deal too.

    They're both the same, a random comment at an internet forum, not an open letter to the Parliament.

  80. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

    I agree... I want e-mail software that removes e-mail from spammers, but if a friend sends me an e-mail with a link to a spam site, I can decide for myself if I want to click the link.

    Of course, if the software warns me and asks me to confirm when I click the link, that's ok too.

    Too bad you're basically the 1%. Warning users doesn't work. In fact, what you propose is incredibly dangerous. Ignoring the dancing pigs problem, a LOT of spam rely on the whole "friend" thing. The old Facebook "I'm stuck in <foreign city> and need money, please send!" is the most common one with hijacked accounts, but it also has an email counterpart from harvested contact lists. And spammers have been doing this far longer than Facebook has been around - it's how many of the early virusese worked - they sent an email with the payload that scans the contact lists and propagates themselves onwards. Short of exchanging public keys with your friends...

    Anyhow, the malware from tpb doesn't come from the software itself, it's from the cracks and keygens, and always has. The software you download from tpb will be the same as what you get if you bought it - the reason being that these days, it's all signed by the company making it. However, the keygens and cracks that patch after install aren't checked and people do blindly run them. They're usually wrapped trojans - the keygen/crack as distributed by the crackers is completely clean, but someone basically took that and wrapped their dropper trojans around it.

    Of course, if you have the legit key and need a copy of the bits, you can ignore the keygens and crap and download the files via tpb with no issue.

    And it seems movies are in the same boat - fake movies with links to "download required codec here!" in the video.

  81. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 3, Funny

    You forgot to block access to the back seat. Historically, it's a major concern.

    Also, I'm thinking of the fun implications of the system. You'll drive you daughter to college and the car won't start. I imagine a long, awkward, suspicious pause before you decide either to check the battery or start the sobbing and the beating...

  82. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I highly suspect the filters could be circumvented by anyone with a brain...

  83. Just stop using the damn thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problem solved. Move on.

  84. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by RussellSHarris · · Score: 2

    A "banner ad" is a block of HTML which is supposed to stay within its allotted "banner" area.

    As such, it can contain anything that HTML can contain and which doesn't clearly (i.e. noticeably) break out of its rectangular frame when the site's admin tests it out.

    Scripts, Flash, Silverlight, Java, you name it; if it's installed and can be embedded in HTML (or included by the HTML referencing another file), it's possible. But the only reason the banner's HTML would really ever contain a Java embed would be if the banner's designer wanted to execute a Java exploit on visitor's computers. And a conscientious site's admin would delete the offending banner in short order if this was discovered to be the case.

    Does that clear up your question any?

  85. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by RussellSHarris · · Score: 0

    I'm much more concerned about Ron Paul than Santorum.

    The President can do jack shit about people's religion. Really. I'd like to see him try to outlaw porn. It'll be a cold day in hell before he does. But the President has quite a bit of control over the military and a fair amount of say in what the Federal Reserve decides to do (well, it's its own thing and can pretty much do its own thing, but the President can tell it what he wants it to do and it can get spanked if it doesn't).

    See, I'd rather have a President who has batshit crazy notions about religion than one that has batshit crazy notions about foreign and fiscal policies. You can't win them all, but if you can pick the ones you want to win, those are the ones I want to win.

  86. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by hobarrera · · Score: 2

    WTF!? Who on earth downloads software from TPB? Movies: sure, music: yup, pr0n: definitely, but software!?

  87. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Nyder · · Score: 1

    You may think that it is some grand anti-piracy conspiracy, but Microsoft is right. TPB is infested with torrents that contain malware. There are people who use it to spread viruses and malware. It makes sense too - it's quite easy method to infect peoples computers.

    Actually when people report files have malware, they usually get deleted.

    Of course, cracks tend to bring up false postives all the time, which is the industries way of saying they have malware/trojans/kitchen sinks.

    While yes, there are some malware to be had off tpb, I find it smaller compared to that amount on usenet and from websites with cracks/keygens and the such.

    Not to mention tpb has trusted uploaders, so if your not stupid (which most people are) you can easily get the proper stuff downloaded, malware free.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  88. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 0

    I agree, who uses TPB now? It's sucked hard for ages and has been nothing more than a virus distribution system.

  89. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by mea_culpa · · Score: 1

    Out of the many many years I've been using TPB only once did I ever download a torrent that was an infection.

    Perhaps this is true of only the infections that manifest themselves?
    To really qualify this statement you would have had to carefully analyze your system state prior to the download and after deploying it. Not very many people have the expertise, time, resources to do this. What if the trojan's payload was time delayed? Would you know where and when the infection took place?
    I only bring this up because I've encountered a few stealth malware that were completely undetectable using conventional tools. Even connecting the HDD to a clean system for a battery of scans revealed nothing. The computer operated perfectly normal to the user but firewall logs continued to report massive amounts of outbound port 25 connections to every country on the planet to spread the word of Viagra. It would do it in random 10 minute spurts every few hours in an effort to not raise alarm or it was trying to be funny.
    You are downloading untrusted software from an untrusted source and base your trust in the reputation of someone on a pirate website and comments posted by other downloaders. How many of these commenters would have actually noticed the above malware or even cared? If only a few did actually post a warning would anyone take it seriously? If it activated months later would they have even known what download it came from to report it?
    The bottom line is, unless every piece of code running on your PC came from trusted media/sources you cannot be certain that you did not infect your system. The moment a single piece of code is executed from an untrusted source you can have no certainty.

  90. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Shagg · · Score: 1

    I guess they don't mind free advertising, but they HATE competition.

    This is likely the real reason they are attacking P2P/filesharing. It threatens their distribution monopoly.

    --
    Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
  91. block not working here by alonsoac · · Score: 1

    What are the steps to reproduce? I am able to send thepiratebay.se links to my msn contacts using Pidgin.

  92. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

    You forgot to block access to the back seat. Historically, it's a major concern.

    Also, I'm thinking of the fun implications of the system. You'll drive you daughter to college and the car won't start. I imagine a long, awkward, suspicious pause before you decide either to check the battery or start the sobbing and the beating...

    ... or taxing.

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
  93. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Golddess · · Score: 1

    It's very clear that this "Pirate Bay is unsafe" is just a pretense.

    To you perhaps. But to someone who did get infected with something just from visiting the site, and not from any of the torrents, it isn't so clear. Not saying it's right, just saying it isn't clear what Microsoft's motives are.

    --
    "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
  94. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry, you seem to have mistaken hysteria and word games for rational debate.

    Call us back when you grow up.

  95. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by metacell · · Score: 1

    You can check the cracks/keygens against the checksums from the release group's site, but yeah, most users have no idea how to do this.

  96. who uses TPB by issicus · · Score: 1

    there are other torrent sites...

  97. Re:algorithms, third-party sources, or complaints. by scarboni888 · · Score: 1

    You have no certainty, period.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal

    But you still gotta live, right?