Slashdot Mirror
Dropbox's New Policy of Scanning Files For DMCA Issues
Advocatus Diaboli (1627651) writes "This weekend a small corner of the Internet exploded with concern that Dropbox was going too far, actually scanning users' private and directly peer-shared files for potential copyright issues. What's actually going on is a little more complicated than that, but shows that sharing a file on Dropbox isn't always the same as sharing that file directly from your hard drive over something like e-mail or instant messenger. The whole kerfuffle started yesterday evening, when one Darrell Whitelaw tweeted a picture of an error he received when trying to share a link to a Dropbox file with a friend via IM. The Dropbox web page warned him and his friend that 'certain files in this folder can't be shared due to a takedown request in accordance with the DMCA.'"
Its been nice while it lasted, now on to other services!
If Dropbox is doing that,then their service will get dropped like an overheated potato.I won't use them,that's for sure.
The Geek Hillbilly
If you are determined to use drop box, use an open source software as 7zip that will encrypt and zip. Otherwise, stop using drop box and move on to something else. One of the consequences of using the magical cloud is that your are bound to somebody else's rules for how they manage your data. Also note that those rules are subject to change at any time, and you don't have any say in those changes (I guess the only option is to speak with your wallet and move to greener pastures).
So, if I get this correctly, Dropbox will prevent you from sharing a file that was blocked due to somebody else uploading it and getting busted?
What does somebody else's data have to do with your data?
And what if there is a hash collision?
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
This is news, in the sense that Dropbox now actively crawls your files (DMCA still went about for publicly listed files anyway).
But my question is why are there people in the tech industry still surprised by the fact that Dropbox does not encrypt it's users's files and can read them outright...
That's how they do sharing between users, as well as file deduplication (Which probably works best for larger copyrighted files, funnily enough!)
I still use Dropbox, and promote it slightly: with the stern advise to use it simply as a convenient way of sharing crap, but treat it as a "public USB drive"!
Just never, ever, store sensitive data, like your business or evil masterplans, or your personal/bank/etc account details on it. But if you're sharing that MP3 you recorded on yesterday's block party, go right ahead!
All that's required of users is to use a encryption mechanism, even weak, to encrypt said files prior to uploading.
You could potentially even use an encryption key as weak as "password" because DropBox aren't going to be in the business of guessing encryption keys (won't have the CPU grunt) so anything is going to deceive them - potentially even just XOR. Or even use the file's name.
The only downside will be that DropBox will be just that little bit harder to use without some sort of application to make encryption and decryption of files easy.
This whole issue can be summarized as:
1) User wants to ignore copyright law and share something they have no legal right to via a public service
2) Public service being used has no idea how many people will want to access the shared resource but they do know it is copyrighted as they auto match everything uploaded so they can avoid keeping to separate copies of identical files and save storage space and had a DMCA take down request for that same file previously.
3) Public service errs on the side of not getting their arse sued off by the various content owner conglomerates legal attack dogs and refuses to allow the file to be shared even though the person who uploaded it can still see it.
All in all seems pretty reasonable. Until copyright law is changed (like that is ever going to happen) dropbox have to follow it to the letter. I suppose they could have avoided the whole thing by storing more data and then not doing the duplicate file scan thing but even that is no guarantee it would prevent them from being sued to oblivion.
The only safe option for them that would also keep things private would be to use encryption keys that were only kept in the client. That way if you needed to share a particular folder you selected to store that under a different encryption key, and gave that key to other person / people who needed to access it.
The big problem with this is that it then becomes more awkward to provide web access to the files. People are comfortable remembering a username and password, they are not so comfortable remembering a bunch of encryption keys. If you store the encryption keys on a server at your end anywhere then you can access the files so you therefore get the legal responsibility to make sure your system is not being used to flout copyright law. The only legal way to run this sort of service and not be liable for it's misuse is to design it in such a way that you cannot see what is being stored at all.
I dont read
Anyone who finds this unexpected really hasn't been paying attention. I and many others have assumed this was only a matter of time since the first day we heard about Dropbox and their ilk.
Publicly shared files that match known hashes are restricted, but not deleted, and any file can be shared to anyone privately without restriction, just not publicly to the world. Not much of a story. Read TFA.
The only thing I store in my dropbox folder is a truecrypt container file. Have at it.
Drop Box is nothing more than a gussied up repackaging of a SFTP or FTPS and a nice fancy ol' GUI.
The post office is nothing but a gussied up repackaging of walking to your friend's house and giving him the letter yourself.
The fax machine is nothing but a waffle iron with a phone attached!
No, it's slightly more than that.
You set up a server for SFTP or FTPS and download a nice, friendly little program called FileZilla.
...and then? Will Filezilla run on startup, settle itself inconspicuously in the systray without a running window you could accidentally close, connect to the SFTP server, download files automatically to local directories so they're instantly accessible, then monitor, sync and notify you of any changes? Will it allow you to dish out invitations to share directories and files direct from your desktop, and manage those permissions for an unlimited number of users and directories?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
This is what OwnCloud is made for.
I know not everyone is able to set up their OwnCloud server. There are places that will host it and set it up for you.
I am truely sorry that DMCA is slowly but surely choking the web, In the end it will go away. Kids that are 15 today, when they are 45 will not convict someone of piracy, they just wont see anything wrong, same thing for the judges and prosecutors. In the shot term it could get alot worse. If you don't have the skills to circumvent it all I can do is quote John Wayne. "Life is hard, it is even harder when you are stupid"
vi +
Due to provisions in the DMCA, the law is 110% illegal, and here's why.
There's no escrow mechanism for the encryption keys of the media protected under the DMCA.
Why does this matter?
Because of the wording of the DMCA, any encrypted file cannot be decrypted without permission from the copyright holder - EVER.
Without escrow storage of the encryption keys, it extends copyright to infinity, or for as long as the copyright holder wishes to hold onto those keys.
That makes the DMCA provisions illegal, as it circumvents copyright law to whatever the holders want.
Write to your congress-critter, write to your lawyer, it's time to get this illegal law wiped from the face of the planet.
> Viola!
I fail to understand what a stringed instrument, slightly larger than a violin, has to do with it...
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
...and then? Will Filezilla run on startup, settle itself inconspicuously in the systray without a running window you could accidentally close, connect to the SFTP server, download files automatically to local directories so they're instantly accessible, then monitor, sync and notify you of any changes? Will it allow you to dish out invitations to share directories and files direct from your desktop, and manage those permissions for an unlimited number of users and directories?
You can do that with rsync and I have seen plenty of SFTP and FTP clients which can manage to do the same less efficiently as well.
Permission schemes... You would think you could do that with UNIX and separate login accounts no?
It's called AppOps. Was in Android hidden, then removed, but still ships in standard Cyanogenmod.
copyrighted material. Share a link to the original material.
You can do that with rsync and I have seen plenty of SFTP and FTP clients which can manage to do the same less efficiently as well.
Permission schemes... You would think you could do that with UNIX and separate login accounts no?
Is it easy for a 'non-techie' to set up and use such a system? No; now you see the niche that companies like Dropbox seek to fill.
Come up with a secure, self-hosted system with one-click setup and simple configuration, and you might actually give them a run for their money.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
The image of the error message did not say who, or which corporation, had made the DMCA complaint. I thought that in order for something to be taken down under the DMCA the user had to be told who was complaining.
In this case: the user admits that the file was something that he should not be sharing, but there have been cases where the DMCA is being used to prevent legal files - in a case like that the user must be told who is complaining so that they can challenge the DMCA complaint.
And DropBox is probably the most benign of mainstream cloud hosts. Google, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft all sell content and sign voluminous contracts for the sale of said content. It's not hard to imagine that they would or could be obliged to scan for infringing content and notify the content providers when they find any.
Change a character in the metadata fields, hash changes. If they're scanning the actual video portion of files, add a byte at the end. I don't think that would affect playback.
>> Drop Box is nothing more than a gussied up repackaging of a SFTP or FTPS and a nice fancy ol' GUI.
>
> The post office is nothing but a gussied up repackaging of walking to your friend's house and giving him the letter yourself.
Your analogy is retarded. Installing your own application on some PC is nothing like being your own mail man.
That's all this is really about. It's the rough equivalent of installing the latest high res shooter on your overpowered Windows gaming machine.
If Windows makes it a problem then that's Windows being crapulent as usual.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Drop Box is nothing more than a gussied up repackaging of a SFTP or FTPS and a nice fancy ol' GUI.
The same thing could be said for early Ubuntu. That doesn't mean it's not worthwhile.
A) Hosting an FTP server is "nice and friendly"? *cough cough cough*
B) Since when has SFTP/FTPS been considered more than minimally secure?
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
"Waaah, someone won't let us share another person's products I torrented for free! Now I have to find another free site to find stolen binaries! DropBox is the Man!"
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
It's more of a repackage of rsync, hooked into a daemon that watches the filesystem. I still wouldn't call it trivial, or I'd have my own version working between my fileserver and my laptop already.
Encrypt your data before putting it on Dropbox? You mean you weren't doing that already?
Come up with a secure, self-hosted system with one-click setup and simple configuration, and you might actually give them a run for their money.
Dropbox does not do that either. Plus you have been able to do everything else you said with Vuze for years.
s/Vuze/eMule.
password protected zip files in dropbox. they cant scan them.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The "secure" is just a personal preference. Although, theoretically, so long as I don't give anyone my Dropbox account info...
And, of course, Dropbox isn't self-hosted.
But I can set it up on almost any computer with a simple installer, and configuring my devices was a breeze.
I suppose I don't understand what, precisely, you mean by "that" in your first sentence.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
What it is to be human shows that we are creatures who literally NEED to kill everyone who bars our way. But this kind of indiscriminate killing doesn't play well with "society" and stability, so we make laws against it.
Arguing that you should be able to share your Miley Cyrus collection because it's human nature to share ignores all of the other human instincts to subjugate, kill, and procreate to pass on the most powerful genes of the pack - all of which we have made illegal, for much of the same reason copyright originally existed. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it null and void.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Dropbox is not useful because of what it does - it's useful because of how it does it (seamless for a non-technical end user) and its integration into other, especially mobile, applications. Until you can roll-your-own references into commercial mobile apps, or make sharing a cloud file with a colleague with a different OS and no access to your private net available with a single click, whatever you hack together won't be Dropbox.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Ahhh, but you've created a PUBLIC link, not a private one. Since you don't own the copyright, you don't get to make a public link. You can make as many private links as you like, and that's arguably fair use, and you're not limited. It's like claiming that publishing a torrent link doesn't mean anything because the person who might download it could own a license.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I refused to use Dropbox ever since its "end to end encryption" claim was shown to be false, and they were de-duping your files. (De-duping required access to the original files, which Dropbox tried to claim they didn't have.)
Then they said they were changing that practice. But how far could you trust them, considering that they had already lied to everybody? Fool me once, and all that.
NOW, apparently they're checking your files -- which back when they again claimed they weren't accessing -- for copyrighted content, which again requires access to your original files. (Even if you're just doing an MD5 hash or some such, you still need access to the original file to do it.)
So, yeah. For all those who didn't drop Dropbox when I did, maybe it's time.
Your analogy is retarded.
Why?
Dropbox is an application that can be installed by anyone with just a rudimentary level of computer skill. OP's suggestion was far more complicated and time-consuming and wouldn't provide as many features - in fact, it wouldn't even provide those features which practically define Dropbox as a service. Just like being your own mail man is more complicated, more time-consuming and doesn't provide as many features. I think my analogy holds up pretty well.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Seriously it's not that hard to setup your own cloud service. I spent under $400 for the whole setup that includes backups. For the lazy or people that don't want to mess with a headless Linux box, seagate sells a LAN / dyndns enabled device that is marketed exactly as a "personal cloud". Why would you trust a service when you can easily DIY?
"(I) have this unfortunate condition that causes me not to believe a single thing any politician says when a mic's on.
I would seriously think that you could build something user-friendly around rsync - the guts are all about efficient file replication. I use it extensively to sync backups of data on the home network and sync music to a few devices and USB stick. You have to take responsibility for keeping a server up 24/7 or whenever you want to sync data, deal with bandwidth etc, some things that the service provides for you.
The Dropbox web page warned him and his friend that 'certain files in this folder can't be shared due to a takedown request in accordance with the DMCA.
AFAIK, takedown requests happen after it is suspected that a file may violate the DMCA.
So, can you just browse/search publicly shared folders? Otherwise, how would any content company know what is shared (unless posted on some public page), so they could then file a takedown request?
...
The other 25% are for cat videos.
Amazing what people will go through because they are stuck behind NAT and can't send things directly or allow people to pick things up directly from them.
Wow - just in time for BitTorrent Sync 1.3.
They did that suddenly like that? Doesn't sound like them.
Use open source software and licenses, and these issues mean nothing.