Slashdot Mirror
Copyright Alert System To Launch Monday
An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from the Daily Dot:
"Starting next week, most U.S. Internet users will be subject to a new copyright enforcement system that could force them to complete educational programs, and even slow their Internet speeds to a crawl. A source with direct knowledge of the Copyright Alert System [said] the five participating Internet service providers will start the controversial program Monday. The ISPs — industry giants AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner, and Verizon — will launch their versions of the CAS on different days throughout the week. Comcast is expected to be the first, on Monday."
Of course, there are many ways around the Copyright Alert System, so it probably won't be terribly effective.
This is actually a pretty moderate approach compared to just suing single mothers for millions of dollars for downloading an MP3 once.
To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
For VPN providers.
I'm partial to AirVPN since they accept Bitcoins for payment and let you connect via Tor if that's what you want.
Can we PLEASE keep referring to it as "Six Strikes system"? Not the Industry-concocted, innocent-sounding "alert system" crap? Thank you.
This will only speed up the race to fully encrypted comms.
Good-bye
Because I'd have to say I have a problem with that.
I don't use Bittorrent very often, but when I do, it's to download content that is entirely legitimate. I have to say that if they accuse you of infringing on copyright, you should be permitted to at the very least be able to say "No I didn't", and have that actually mean something.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
"... or slow their Internet speeds to a crawl."
So, pretty much business as usual then?
like phone lines, water, and electricity. Would you accept an unelected corporate group like Hollywood policing your phone conversations and throttling the line if they didn't like what they overheard you saying? Or throttling your water supply if they objected to the flowers growing in your yard?
Inform your elected officials. Make it clear that we will not tolerate these for-profit commercial groups invading our privacy and abusing public resources. Apply citizen utility rights to internet access.
(By the way, expect small captured governments like New Zealand to bend to corporate influence, but how is this stuff not struck down in modern social leaning nations such as France?)
State of the art copyright 'protection' methods use signature databases. Companies acting as 'agents' on behalf of copyright 'owners' scan various forms of their clients 'property' to create signatures that can be tested against video/sound streams, or against packet streams intercepted at the ISP using 'deep packet inspection'.
Now, here we are talking about the later- the ISP inspecting the 'signature' of data traffic to the users. Firstly, false positives will swamp the system. We have already seen have legal live video streams have been closed down by automated signature testing systems. But let us instead consider the 'valid' matches.
To fight back, users will need packet streams that are unique to the user. While this is frequently described as 'end to end' encryption, simpler solutions also work. The 'deep packet' signature test fails if the data stream suffers ANY per user modification, and that can include a simple XORing of most of the packet via an XOR key at the head of the packet. This really isn't 'encryption' but data 'morphing' where the same data can have a massive number of different forms, confusing or defeating a 'signature' based approach.
Data morphing can be done with near zero computational processing, unlike proper encryption. The goal is simply to ensure the same data has a vast number of different forms. And included 4-byte XOR key, for instance, has 4000 million variants, if memory serves, requiring this number of signatures in the database to dumbly recognise ONE packet.
Now, today, governments benefit greatly from the mostly open nature of data transmitted across the net. Intelligence agencies must be doing their nut over useless proposals that simply have the effect of moving us ALL to obscured forms of net traffic. The new US system will ensure EVERYONE will come to the conclusion "I do not want my ISP sniffing my traffic".
PS Automated (or Human) takedowns of non-live material can never work. If the worst comes to the worst, people will simply post encrypted 'zips' with no description, and tell people to "watch this space". Seven days later (or whatever), the password will be posted alongside a description of contents. Sure, this still allows the uploaders to be targeted, but their has NEVER been a time when uploaders were unable to be targeted.
Since survey after survey shows that 'pirates' are also the biggest purchasers of 'legal' content, we already know that the solution is in providing the legal services people want (which means EVERYTHING available EVERYWHERE for use on ALL devices). The tech war should not be wasted on 'downloaders' but on finding better ways to get paid content available universally.
I got a nasty letter from my ISP telling me "No peer-to-peer". I called them, and said "WTF guys? I download Linux distros and OpenOffice ISOs via torrent, all kinds of 100% legal and legitimate content." "We don't care. No peer-to-peer."
So I signed up for a VPN, of course.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
What were those, the famous last words of a few Anonymous script kiddies right before they got arrested?
Finding someone who is "anonymous" on the Internet is hard, in the same way that cracking a new hardware-based DRM scheme is hard. It can take a lot of work, at least if you're the first person trying to do it, but ultimately trying to establish two-way communications over the Internet and yet remain completely anonymous is just as futile as trying to lock up content that you're also showing to someone. There may be many levels of indirection that are difficult to follow, but it's impossible to do what you actually need to do and yet still remain 100% safe from hostile activity.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
DUDE! That thing sticking outta the side of his head... is his tongue in his cheek... next you're supposed to laugh... and now we know why there are no savant comedians...
Fortunately or unfortunately, only agents of the *AA can report infringement. The system cannot be turned against itself. Arguably this is unfair to all copyright holders who are not part of the *AA, but the flip side is that you can pirate non-AA content with impunity.
"We don't care. No peer-to-peer."
This is unacceptable and unprofessional, can I please speak with your supervisor?
Drone: "Certainly Sir, just a minute", hits mute button, says to coworkers, "Who wants to be superviser today?".
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...