Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

File-Sharing Site Was Actually an Anti-Piracy Honeypot

Posted by Soulskill on from the oh-bother dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The administrator of file-sharing site UploaderTalk shocked and enraged his userbase a few days ago when he revealed that the site was nothing more than a honeypot set up by a company called Nuke Piracy. The main purpose of the site had been to gather data on its users. The administrator said, 'I collected info on file hosts, web hosts, websites. I suckered $#!&loads of you. I built a history, got the trust of some very important people in the warez scene collecting information and data all the time.' Nobody knows what Nuke Piracy is going to do with the data, but it seems reasonable to expect lawsuits and the further investigation of any services the users discussed. His very public betrayal is likely meant to sow discord and distrust among the groups responsible for distributing pirated files."

12 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Good thing no one used it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, UploaderTalk is a no-name site.

    1. Re:Good thing no one used it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Gotta agree there. I've more or less gotten out of that life-style and only occasionally keep track of file-sharing news when it was something big. I'd never heard of this guy or his sites.

      That said, now that this story is Slashdotted... what will the Internet vigilantes do to this guy?

    2. Re:Good thing no one used it by TemperedAlchemist · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, it's likely he won't stay anonymous for long.

      The whole thing makes me scratch my head though. Seems like a bad and unprofessional idea to just announce it's a honeypot. If I were setting it up I'd just say the site is closing down then dish out lawsuits or what have you or whatever else, I don't know. An anti-piracy stance (in the typical MPAA fashion) is a very unpopular one on the internet. There's nothing to gain.

      But he even announced he's doing it again, and it's likely he'll be tracked down and effortlessly exposed.

      Sounds more like some script kiddie who is pulling some prank or what have you. But apparently tracking down who was behind was just handed to us on a silver platter, right here. Names and address included.

      So it's a legitimate business. Well good luck against the internet, if they even take your vBulletin forum and website that was coded by fifth grader seriously. I wonder if they even know how to extract the data in any meaningful way.

    3. Re: Good thing no one used it by Yaur · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Tbqh this doesn't pass the sniff test. More likely scenarios: 1) its a hoax/false flag and piracy nuke is the target. 2) He got a c&d and thinks that pretending that it was an anti piracy thing all along will help him with the lawsuit.

    4. Re: Good thing no one used it by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except it won't because

      1.-The clueless will never hear of this guy, and

      2.-The ones that know WTF they are doing and put up the most files don't hang around sites that look like they were coded by a 14 year old girl.

      Most likely all the "data" he collected is a bunch of clueless wannabes trying to play big fish in a teeny tiny pond and won't be worth shit.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    5. Re: Good thing no one used it by jodido · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As opposed to a 14-year-old boy? Girls can't code?

    6. Re:Good thing no one used it by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

      it's classic ad hominid.

      Does he say "you're an Australopithecus, and they're all liars"?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. Implicit permission? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So for the months that the site was active these files (and links) were being shared with the implicit permission of the copyright umbrella groups? Neat. Bless 'em.

  3. Whaaa? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are no important people in the warez scene. That's why they can't stop it.

    1. Re: Whaaa? by loufoque · · Score: 5, Informative

      Internet piracy: choose what you want to watch and watch it. Available on the day it is aired on or released, in any country or region around the world, best quality, all versions available, subtitles for all languages, no ads, transferable to any device.

      DVDs: find a shop that has what you want and is willing to sell it in your region, or order them online. Go to the shop or wait. Put the DVD in your current DVD reader in its box. Put the DVD you just bought inside the DVD reader. Watch the mandatory ads. Go through some horrible and unpractical menu. Bad subtitles. Not transferable. Bad resolution and often interlaced video. No easy way to keep track of which version of the video it is and whether there are better ones that got released later or in other regions. Must use the DRM-locked interface of your DVD reader to do anything.

      Blurays: pretty much like DVDs, except the quality is better and the non-transferability and ads are even worse.

      TV channels: you must be present at the time of broadcast to see the show, or set up the appropriate recording with an inept interface (assuming you have paid the premium to be allowed to do this). If your connectivity fails or stutters during the broadcast, you've missed the bit in question. Ridiculous amounts of advertisements (especially in the US). Very bad subtitles, if they're even available. Not transferable to another device. Must use the DRM-locked interface of your TV box to do anything.

      Video on Demand: Number of shows available fairly limited, even with the best services, since only the shows for which the provider has struck a deal are available. Shows only available quite after they've been aired or released. Not transferable to another device. Services tied to particular geographic regions. Some problems similar to that of TV channels with some services. Must use the DRM-locked interface of your TV box to do anything.

  4. serious ? by Spaham · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they were anything serious they wouldn't have gloated that way.
    Sounds so much like a whining kid trying to annoy people...

  5. Re:Don't you believe it. by BradleyUffner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not when you have to go through the "justice" system.

    If you are a copyright holder, or acting on his/her/its behalf, and you seed a torrent for me to download, you have, in fact, given me the file. Since you are the copyright holder, that file was given lawfully. You cannot now turn around and sue me for taking from you what you have lawfully given. Your harm, such that there is, is entirely self inflicted.

    Honeypots are a useful tool to learn techniques that the other side uses, but they are, by and large, useless as a technique to sue over copyright infringement.

    IANAL

    Shachar

    They won't sue you for downloading the torrent, they will sue you for uploading to others without permission.