Slashdot Mirror


"Piracy Filter" Blocks TorrentFreak for 4 Million Sky Customers

An anonymous reader writes "Website blocking has become a hot topic in the UK in recent weeks. Opponents of both voluntary and court-ordered blockades have warned about the potential collateral damage these blocking systems may cause, and they have now been proven right. As it turns out blocked sites can easily exploit the system and add new IP-addresses to Sky's blocklist. As a result TorrentFreak has been rendered inaccessible to the ISP's four million customers."

37 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. There we have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is why censorship of the internet is a fucking stupid idea.

    1. Re:There we have it by paziek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That depends on your point of view. I'm pretty sure there people/corporations/governments that do like it.

    2. Re:There we have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It doesn't work because TorrentFreak is a news site. Unless the war on piracy declares even speaking about filesharing fair game as collateral?

    3. Re:There we have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Government officials usually have no real opinion on this due to a lack of understanding. They just act on lobby groups that are usually sponsored by Hollywood and other corporate interest groups.

    4. Re:There we have it by SGT+CAPSLOCK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is to be expected of what I've come to call the "Corporate Internet".

      Governments and corporations have inherited our tubes, and I think that by now they're pretty confident that it's going to be acceptable for them to control and limit the content that ordinary people have access to.

      It's been like this for a while now; once you learn the ropes and (more importantly) learn to obey all the rules, you'll fit right in!

    5. Re:There we have it by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It explains why the Linux distros in my upload queue have had a lot less activity lately.

    6. Re:There we have it by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Um, hello? It's called "Let's not only block the thing we're against, let's block any mention of that thing as well". Sort of like what the Russian government seems to be trying to do the LGBT community there.

      So, far from being "collateral damage", this means the (censorship) system is working just as intended.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    7. Re:There we have it by davydagger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      there were people/corporations/governments that though the holocaust was a good idea. /godwin, but to prove a point that every bad anti-social oppressive idea does actually work for some people, the people in charge at the expence of everyone else.

    8. Re:There we have it by blackest_k · · Score: 5, Informative

      you didn't read the article did you?
      It was actually a bit of clever manipulation by a torrent site who discovered sky was automatically blocking other ip addresses the torrent site was listing as alternate site addresses. So they performed a little experiment listed the torrent freak site as a mirror and sky automatically put a block on that ip address. Thus demonstrating how Sky's automatic blocking is flawed and fairly useless.

      Its a bit more complicated than that but summing up Sky thought they could automate whack a mole and instead managed to give control over blocking to the sites they want to block.

      Torrent freak were informed and agreed to be a target before hand. I think facebook was also targeted but with little to no effect due to the number of addresses assigned to facebook its believed.

    9. Re:There we have it by reve_etrange · · Score: 2

      No, Sky has done nothing. Access is restored because EZTV stopped pointing their domain at TorrentFreak's IP, and the Sky filter is updated at some interval.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    10. Re:There we have it by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Well, the USArmy and Universities put together the original internet, and Cern designed the web on top of it. Corporations, except for universities and a few other non-profits, were late-comers to the party.

      OTOH, the original internet was specifically designed to avoid centralized routing. Basically, when power grabbers took over ICANN and were blessed by the US govt. the writing was on the wall. You shouldn't be surprised by anything that has happened since then...well, actually the existence of torrents is a *bit* of a surprise, and there were a few others. All having to do with temporarily maintaining a bit of open communication.

      P.S.: Don't trust encryption. The NSA is currently putting together a "big" quantum computer, and one of the kinds of calculation that is particularly good at is prime factorization. They may not be able to crack that message THIS year.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  2. Re:So, What You're Saying is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    TorrentFreak isn't a site that allows you to conduct piracy. It's a news site that posts content relevant to file sharing.

    This would be like shutting down newspapers because they speak about other crimes.

  3. This makes me think of Wrath of Khan by fey000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    "To the last, I will grapple with thee... from Hell's heart, I stab at thee! For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee!"

    1. Re:This makes me think of Wrath of Khan by firex726 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Think you mean Moby Dick:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moby-Dick

      > Ahab ultimately dooms the crew of the Pequod (save for Ishmael) to death by his obsession with Moby Dick. During the final chase, Ahab hurls his last harpoon while yelling his now-famous revenge line:

      "to the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee."

    2. Re:This makes me think of Wrath of Khan by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Kahn was quoting Melville; Kirk was his whale. And Star Trek is more known to most slashdotters than Melville.

  4. Re:So, What You're Saying is... by ClaraBow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So very true! The masses in the UK will suddenly acquire the necessary means to get around the filters. The word proxy will become a household word, just like it has become in school that filter the internet.

  5. Add DNS for "legitimate" sites by grahammm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the blocks are applied to any IP address pointed to by a blocked site, maybe as a demonstration a blocked site should add the IP addresses of all of the major UK political parties, BBC iPlayer, Youtube, Netflix, lovefilm etc. If mainstream media sites get (automatically) blocked then perhaps the backlash might force TPTB into either removing the requirement to block or require the ISPs to use a blocking mechanism with less potential for collateral damage.

    1. Re:Add DNS for "legitimate" sites by skovnymfe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They should block Slashdot, and all the sysadmins in the UK will rebel and take down the filter in their anger.

    2. Re:Add DNS for "legitimate" sites by rb12345 · · Score: 2

      If they were aiming for truly evil exploitation of automated blocking, they wouldn't block any of those. They'd get the DVLA tax disc renewal site blocked instead and, given the automatic fines now, you'd easily upset a twelfth of Sky's userbase who'd need to switch back to manual methods. Alternatively, you'd aim to block HMRC in late January and block the rare people doing tax-returns at the last minute...

    3. Re:Add DNS for "legitimate" sites by rb12345 · · Score: 2

      My post certainly wasn't meant to recommend that it should be attempted! It was intended to reply to the OP's comment that:

      If mainstream media sites get (automatically) blocked then perhaps the backlash might force TPTB into either removing the requirement to block or require the ISPs to use a blocking mechanism with less potential for collateral damage.

      Blocking "mainstream media sites" would upset journalists more and get far more publicity. TPTB probably care more about their own sites being available and not having to pay more staff to do the work by hand. Either way, this will probably be fixed within the week.

      Answering your actual question: perhaps, but I seriously doubt the torrent site will care much either way since they can no doubt get away with blaming Sky or the content industry for the blocks anyway. The cynical view is that they'd get far more self-promotion that way too...

    4. Re:Add DNS for "legitimate" sites by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

      Might this be what you're looking for?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  6. The whole article in a post by ConaxConax · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm a Sky user in the UK, and I am here to post the text of the article:

    "Website blocking has become a hot topic in the UK in recent weeks. Opponents of both voluntary and court-ordered blockades have warned about the potential collateral damage these blocking systems may cause, and they have now been proven right. As it turns out blocked sites can easily exploit the system and add new IP-addresses to Sky’s blocklist. As a result TorrentFreak has been rendered inaccessible to the ISP’s four million customers.

    stop-blockedFollowing a High Court ruling last month, six UK ISPs are required to block subscriber access to the popular TV-torrent site EZTV.it.

    The actions EZTV faces are not the first taken against a torrent site in the UK. The Pirate Bay, KickassTorrents and several other “pirate” sites have been blocked by previous court orders and remain inaccessible by conventional means.

    However, over the past couple of days Sky subscribers noticed that the blocklist had been quietly expanded with a new site that’s certainly not covered by any court order – TorrentFreak.com.

    Our site first became inaccessible on Wednesday night, only to be unblocked 14 hours later. However, about an hour ago it was again added to the blocklist.

    The recent blocking spree is causing confusion among Sky subscribers who have no idea why TorrentFreak is longer accessible. However, we can confirm that the problem lies with Sky’s filtering software that is supposed to enforce the court-ordered torrent site blockades.

    The owner of EZTV informed TorrentFreak that he used Geo DNS to point UK visitors to TorrentFreak’s IP-address. Soon after there were reports that our website had become inaccessible to Sky users."

  7. The fun that can be had by TheP4st · · Score: 5, Informative

    EZTV should have their DNS servers point to SKY's IP addresses and sit back and watch as hilarity ensues.

    --
    "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
  8. Question: by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    How many Sky customers are reading the article?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  9. Re:oooh, big scary corporations! by firex726 · · Score: 4, Informative

    FYI this site is not a tracker or place to download torrent files; it's a new sites that posts articles, and only articles relating to filesharing.

  10. Re:so... what by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    It's not a site that gives you torrents. It's a site that gives you news. And once we block information, the slippery slope just gets lubed a bit more.

    Making information and getting it illegal is and was the hallmark of any and every dictatorship in history, from fascism to communism. Part of that right to speak is the right to listen, without, it's pointless. By that logic, even the Soviet Union had a freedom of speech, as long as you were alone and nobody would listen in. It just was not allowed to say anything when someone else could hear it.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Re: Who cares? by amiga3D · · Score: 2

    I listen to NBC and get all the leftie info then tune in FOX and get the right's viewpoint. It makes the news interesting when you see it from both sides.

  12. Re:So, What You're Saying is... by davydagger · · Score: 2

    unless the word "proxy" is....filtered.

    for now you can "opt-out"

    but not if your at a coffee shop, cafe, library or public network.

    the UK is now in the leauge of China, and Iran as far as internet access goes.

  13. Re: Who cares? by Rockoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It makes the news interesting when you see it from both sides.

    Notice how easily they convinced you that there were only two sides...

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  14. Re:So, What You're Saying is... by classiclantern · · Score: 2

    And now you know the real reason for this bullshit. Censorship was never to protect the children. Children don't give money to politicians, corporations do. It's always been about perceived copyright violation by "Big Media." All hail our bought and paid-for ruling class. Follow the money.

    --
    Now that I said that, I fell better.
  15. Re:So, What You're Saying is... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the UK is now in the leauge of China, and Iran as far as internet access goes.

    You might want to try that again.

    I'm in China right now, and I've no trouble accessing either TorrentFreak or TPB.

    (And no, I'm not using a proxy or VPN, just a bog-standard residential connection.)

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  16. Re: Who cares? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

    It makes the news interesting when you see it from both sides.

    Notice how easily they convinced you that there were only two sides...

    I'm not sure which represents the greater tragedy--that, or the fact anyone could mistake NBC for being "leftist".

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  17. Re: Who cares? by Rockoon · · Score: 2

    Well, its certainly leftist from the American perspective where the right is "religious conservative" and the left is "whatever is popular today"

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  18. SKY customers being blocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    SKY is operated (largely) by NEWS Corp aka Murdoch and Fox news

    So CAN WE PLEASE HAVE A BLOCK ON the SUN Newspapers Website and FOX news -

    That would at least be some positive achievement out of this shambles

    I live in the UK and I see a totally inept, totally technophobic government try to work the 21st century with 19th century tools and mentality.
    We have 2 little rich boys trying to run a country that is in a shambles because they don't understand anything - basically.
    Oh and to keep the balance - the other lot aren't much better
    Too many lawyers and PR executives and not enough techies - or anyone who has actually had to work for a living - in our government.

  19. Re:So, What You're Saying is... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    Don't, whatever you do, opt out. Your name will be added to the UK Pervert Database and the next time some poor soul is raped and murdered in your area the police will be rounding up anyone who opted out of the "pornography" and "weapons and violence" categories.

    If you opt out of the "suicide and self-harm" filter you can expect a visit from an NHS mental healthcare professional. Seriously, I asked my MP about the filtering and told her not to use the example of saving a single life because it was flawed, so she used the example of saving a single life. Apparently someone said they were going to kill themselves on Twitter and the police backtraced their IP address so they could rescue them, but that wasn't good enough and she thought that the government should be monitoring Google searches.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  20. possible solutions? by polyp2000 · · Score: 2

    There are a variety of solutions to these problems.using alternative DNS is one but this does not work in the case that IP addresses are blocked. Proxies may also work but in the end these are reliant on no blocks existing on the proxies network .Even then how long before proxies are blocked ?TOR seems like a good idea but in reality its a bit slow and thus you couldn't just route all your traffic through it. What is the long term solution to this?

    Does anyone have any long term predictions or ideas about how we might work around this in a way that performs well and is more future proof?

    FYI. EZTV is also blocked with BT infinity. And my VM at Bytemark cannot access either

    my fear is that what happens when Microsoft or apple start putting pressure on the government to block things like cyanogen or the Linux kernel?

    --
    Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp