Archive for the ‘Reviews/Opinions & Research’ Category

Researchers Counter Massive Onslaught of Fake Torrents

One third of all torrents uploaded to The Pirate Bay point to malware or scams, researchers report. While Pirate Bay moderators are usually quick to remove suspect torrents they can’t prevent millions of people from downloading these fake files. To counter this threat the researchers have published TorrentGuard, a tool that allows users to identify fake torrents. The Pirate Bay and several large public trackers are eager to collaborate with the researchers to optimize and implement the new technology.

With an estimated quarter billion active users per month, BitTorrent is a lucrative target for Image is Loading.....scammers and malware peddlers.

Every day thousands of “fake” torrents are uploaded from malicious sources, often labeled with the names of popular movies or TV-shows. Needless to say, those who download these torrents don’t get what they were looking for. Instead they are redirected to scam websites or lured into installing malware.

One of the prime platforms where these fake torrents are published is without doubt The Pirate Bay. To measure the scope of this problem and what can be done about it, a group of researchers decided to monitor all Pirate Bay uploads. The just-published results (pdf) are rather surprising.

During a two week period the researchers collected a total of 29,330 torrent files and found that 12,209 were “fake” and eventually removed from The Pirate Bay. Put differently, one in three torrent files uploaded to The Pirate Bay links to malware or scams of some kind.

This result may be surprising to many Pirate Bay users as these fake files rarely stay on the site for long. Moderators tend to delete the torrents in question within minutes or hours, but according to the researchers this is too late for the many people who’ve already started downloading the files.

The researchers estimate that in a year’s time millions of people will be downloading these fake files. Interestingly, people from the US, China and Brazil fall for these scams more than the average downloader. BitTorrent users from Spain, India and Great Britain on the other hand are best at avoiding them.

Fake Downloaders

Image is Loading.....

The researchers believe the mass distribution of these fake files poses a serious threat to the security of Internet users, but luckily they’ve also come up with a solution.

In addition to describing and analyzing the fake torrent phenomenon, the researchers have also developed a tool that allows BitTorrent users to check torrents before they’re downloaded. Their TorrentGuard application is available as a Vuze plugin and users can also test torrents via the website.

The researchers are able to accurately identify fake torrents because the vast majority of the files are uploaded by a small group of uploaders. They found that 90% of all fake files were initially seeded by just 20 different IP-addresses. By using the TorrentGuard tool, the researchers estimate that 10 million fake downloads per year can be prevented.

Talking to us, researcher Rubén Cuevas of Universidad Carlos III de Madrid explains that the research is important because it reveals the threat posed by these fake torrents. He hopes that more researchers will take this aspect of cyber-security seriously and that the research presents an opportunity to educate the public.

“Of course skilled users are aware of these risks and are able to identify fake torrents in most cases. However, a large percentage of BitTorrent users are unskilled and not capable of distinguishing between legitimate and fake torrents.”

“We hope that our research is able to make at least a fraction of the unskilled users aware of this threat, so that they become more careful when selecting the torrents to download,” Cuevas says.

Ideally, the research team would like BitTorrent portals and trackers to cooperate.

“In order to make TorrentGuard even more efficient, we would need the collaboration of both BitTorrent portals and BitTorrent trackers,” Cuevas told us.

This would not only make the TorrentGuard tool more effective, it would also prevent even more fake torrents from spreading as BitTorrent sites would be able to detect them earlier.

The Pirate Bay team informed us that they are interested in collaborating, especially if doing so can prevent millions of people from falling for these scams. OpenBitTorrent and PublicBitTorrent, the two largest public BitTorrent trackers, have also indicated that they want to work with the researchers to improve the tool.

If the collaboration leads to a practical solution which is adopted across all popular BitTorrent portals, the researchers predict that 35 million fake downloads can be prevented, making the Internet a safer place for all.

More information on TorrentGuard is available at the official website.

Source

Surprised By File-Sharing Snitches? You Shouldn’t Be

It was revealed Friday that the Oron cyberlocker service agreed last month to hand over the full details of users alleged to have breached an adult studio’s copyright. Many observers pledged never to use the service again, branding Oron ‘snitches’ and the lowest of the low. But snitching in the anti-piracy world is nothing new, it’s just that we tend not to hear about it. Just how the snitches like it.

We’ve all the seen the scenes in movies. The gallant hero tied to a chair, overlooked by a Image is Loading.....cruel interrogator flanked by two armed and burly minders. The blinding spotlight tears into his eyes, the cold steel of his binding chains weighs him down as much as the responsibility ahead.

But when his captor lays it on the line, explaining in graphic detail what will follow should his non-compliance continue, his response is valiant. He spits in his tormentor’s face and laughs out loud, accepting his fate and resigning himself to history.

Well, that’s for the movies and in the cold light of day, on lesser matters than saving an entire nation or the life of a loved one, human responses are rarely so honorable.

On Friday it was revealed that file-hosting service Oron had agreed in principle to settle a lawsuit with adult studio Liberty Media. Part of that deal was to not only hand over alleged copyright infringers, but also help with their prosecution.

There was almost universal shock and outrage at this news, but why anyone should be surprised at Oron’s actions is well, a bit of a surprise really. Snitching on pirates has been going on for as long as someone has been interested in punishing them. So what motivates people to turn informant?

In Oron’s case the motivation appears to be straightforward self-preservation. With a potentially ruinous lawsuit hanging over their head, this file-locker has chosen to feed a small number of customers to the hungry copyright lions at Liberty Media. But if you think Oron are alone, think again.

In March we reported that the UFC had taken down Greenfeedz, a site offering illicit streams of UFC events. But as part of the arrangement it now transpires that Greenfeedz handed over the personal details over people who merely viewed UFC events via the site. Fifteen of those are now being hunted down in Zuffa, LLC v. DOES 1-15

Image is Loading.....Skin-saving is a common theme with file-sharing informants. Although he was only hired as a coder for streaming links site SurfTheChannel, in 2011 Boston resident Brendan DeBeasi soon found himself facing a charge of conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and with it a five year prison sentence and $250,000 fine.
In the end he never served a day, instead preferring to work out a deal with the authorities to testify against the operators of SurfTheChannel.

But for every case like this we hear about, there a potentially dozens more. Remember EliteTorrents, the first BitTorrent site to be raided in the United States and its admins and uploaders jailed? FBI documents handed to us by a reader researching the case appear to show that someone very close to the site was working with the MPAA as early as February 15th, weeks before the FBI received the official complaint on March 1st and months before the actual raid.

Image is Loading.....
Who the person was and why they did what they did remains a mystery, but it’s quite possible they were under pressure to save their own skin. But there are other motivations for turning informant too.

The UK’s Federation Against Software Theft runs a so-called “grass hotline” where people can inform on their companies for using under licensed software. FAST rely on two human traits to gather information on targets – greed (informants can get paid) and the lust for revenge. Reportedly, FAST snitches are often ex-employees with a grudge.

And grudges are dangerous things, particularly in the world of private BitTorrent trackers. On two occasions last month we were approached by clearly angry individuals who asked us to report on alleged wrong doing at a pair of trackers, one very small, one very large. The motivation obviously wasn’t money or to save the person’s skin, it was born out of conflict and desire to do damage.

But whether it’s to make money, save money, avoid lawsuits, avoid prison or execute revenge, people are prepared to inform on file-sharers. So don’t be too surprised when you hear about it again – and again.

Piracy Politics Fuel Internet Censorship

Internet censorship is a hot topic in 2011, but also one that reveals the disturbing double-standards of politicians and governments around the world. This week U.S. Senator Dick Durbin sent China’s largest search engine a letter asking them to stop censoring their search results. A noble attempt, but at the same time U.S. politicians are encouraging Google to censor piracy related terms from their search results.

Image is Loading....

Internet Censorship can be a confusing topic for politicians. In the U.S. most politicians have openly spoken out against rampant political censorship in countries like China, but at the same time on their home soil they are supporting censorship initiatives for economic motives.

As part of their ongoing effort to tackle online piracy, the House of Representatives organized a hearing last month titled “Promoting Investment and Protecting Commerce Online: Legitimate Sites v. Parasites, Part II.” The main topic on the agenda was Google and why the company doesn’t do more to ensure that infringing materials aren’t indexed.

Earlier this year we discovered that following pressure from the entertainment industry, Google had already taken steps towards censoring their search results for this very reason. The result was that legitimate products of legitimate U.S. based companies (e.g. uTorrent from BitTorrent Inc.) are now actively censored from some of Google’s services. Let’s call it economic censorship.

Google’s move was applauded by many politicians who subsequently cheered the search giant on to take it up a notch. During the House hearing last month the big question appeared to be why Google hasn’t ended piracy yet. Some clever search keyword filters could help there, some argued. Indeed, just look at the torrent site isoHunt which was ordered by a U.S. court to censor its search engine based on a list of keywords provided by the MPAA.

Yes, isoHunt’s filter also makes some legitimate content inaccessible, but that’s just considered collateral damage. The overall agreement was that censorship is needed to solve online piracy.

This idea is also nested in some of the more recent legislative proposals in the U.S. The COICA bill for example, that would grant US authorities the power to seize (thus censor) domains that are deemed by the authorities to facilitate copyright infringement. COICA was introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and supported by 18 other Senators including Sen. Dick Durbin.

Again, with COICA it seems that censorship is not really seen as a major roadblock for prominent politicians. To some, economic censorship appears to be a must in order to protect corporate interests. The human rights and constitutional issues that may be violated in the process are reduced to collateral damage.

Considering the above it’s very interesting to see that Senator Durbin, who supported the COICA anti-piracy bill, has this week voiced his concerns about Internet censorship taking place in China. Yesterday Durbin published a letter he wrote to the Chinese search giant Baidu. In his letter the Senator voices his concerns over Baidu’s censorship efforts and asked the company to take “immediate steps” to stop them.

“I recently returned from a Congressional delegation to China. I decided to personally verify the reports about Baidu’s censorship. During my trip, I accessed Baidu’s homepage and attempted to search for a number of terms. I was disappointed, but not surprised, to see that Baidu heavily censors its search results,” Durbin writes.

“As a member of the U.S. Congress, I am especially concerned about Baidu’s internet censorship because of your company’s extensive business dealings in the United States. Baidu has been listed on NASDAQ since 2005. I understand that two of Baidu’s five directors are American and that American institutions are significant investors in Baidu,” the senator adds.

So there we have it, censorship is a problem, but only if it suits the interests of the people advocating against it. This is often the case in politics of course. Many U.S. politicians don’t see any problems with Google censoring (possible) copyright infringement related terms, but if they or another search engine do the same with political terms then they change their tune.

Censorship is censorship, but many western politicians seem to make a clear distinction between political and economic Internet censorship. Hypocrisy?

Read

Secret Australian Piracy Report Revealed and Debunked

Last week the Australian press referred to a study that claimed piracy was causing the local economy $900 million in losses, yet the report was carefully hidden from the public. After pressure from multiple sides the report has now finally been published, revealing significant flaws. The report appears to be nothing more that a direct translation of a bogus piracy study that aimed to mislead EU legislators last year.

Two days ago, we revealed how a report on the economic impact of Internet piracy in Australia was so secretive that the journalists reporting on it hadn’t seen it. Even established researchers wrote in to us complaining about the secrecy.

It now seems that the building pressure has had an effect. After multiple phone calls, emails and even filing a freedom of information request with the Attorney General who quoted the report, it was finally made public a few hours ago.

So now that the report has been published, what are we dealing with? Well, it turns out that the ‘study’ is nothing more than a direct translation of one of the most questioned piracy reports that has ever been published.

It is entirely based on the EU-focused “Building a Digital Economy” report that was released by TERA Consultants last year. On the one hand this explains why a ‘real-estate” company could have easily penned it, as no original analysis was needed. But it also means that previous flaws were copied.

For one, the report suggests that there’s a direct correlation between Internet traffic growth and lost jobs. That is, the more traffic that is generated on the Internet, the more money will be lost. This correlation is 1 according to the report, which assumes that all growth in Internet traffic will increase piracy at the same rate.

Just to illustrate how twisted this line of reasoning is, by following the same logic one should conclude that by getting a 5 times faster connection, people will automatically watch 5 times more videos on YouTube, and visit 5 times as many websites. It’s easy to see that this makes no sense whatsoever.

This absurd logic is accompanied by the age old fable that there’s a direct correlation between piracy volume and lost sales. The report states that more traffic will mean more piracy and thus more lost revenue. It does not account for the fact that people might consume higher quality media which is greater in file-size. All projections are based on bandwidth and not the number of pirated goods.

For a complete list of fallacies, errors and misleading assumptions we refer to our previous coverage on the original report.

To us, it is absolutely incomprehensible that Australia’s Attorney General considers this report as a basis for shaping future copyright law. Aside from the fact that it was commissioned by the entertainment industry and carried out by a company that is not even four months old, it should be disregarded based on the horrible methodology.

The Australian Pirate Party, who helped with our attempts to uncover the report and the people behind it, has to be applauded for obtaining the report through a Freedom of Information request. We suspect that without this pressure, the document may have never been released so quickly.

“As taxpayers, as electors, we are entitled to transparency from our lawmakers,” Pirate Party Australia’s Rodney Serkowski told us.

“Now we see the reasons for their opacity. It is a study riddled with issues, and the Attorney General must now explain how he could be so easily mislead and rely on such industry propaganda, which is used as justification to impose stricter enforcement, compromising fundamental rights like privacy.”

The report, with all its flaws and shortcomings, once again reveals to what lengths the entertainment industry is willing to go in order to mislead politicians. A sad state of affairs, and let’s hope that now that it’s out, the Australian press will again pick up on it to address its validity.

Read