I guess this is quit an old one for a lot people but as you might not now, in France a new law is making P2P Encryption popping in first page news.

The governement will force the ISPs to monitor P2P trafic an report it. After 2 mail telling you that you are Uploading illegal material, they will cut your Internet connection for a period of 3 months to a full year !!!

So, my question is simple, is this encryption protocol efficient enough in the ISPs are looking for this kind of trafis ?
If not, is there anoter and (or) better way to encrypt your P2P trafic?

Thx again and pardon my English… I’m French :p

So, I have to shape them completely. I’d love to just shape their BitTorrent so that they can still use Skype, HTTP and everything as they wish, but since BitTorrent attempts to snake its way around the shaping, there is no other way than to shape the entire port on the switch down to a limit where I feel everyone else will be fine even if that bandwidth is used 24/7.

The point is really that sometimes such restrictions are in place for a reason. At the end of the day you shouldn’t use a service for something that causes problems for others.

The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) is a trade association that represents the intellectual property interests of numerous companies that publish interactive games for video game consoles, personal computers, handheld devices and the Internet in the United States of America, in Canada, and in other countries (collectively referred to as ESA members). ESA is authorized to act on behalf of ESA members whose copyright and other intellectual property rights it believes to be infringed as described herein.

ESA is providing this letter of notification to make Rogers Cable Communications Inc. aware of material on its network or system that infringes the exclusive copyright rights of and is unlawful towards one or more ESA members.

ESA members are entitled to the full protection of Canadian intellectual property laws, including the Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, as amended, in such entertainment software products.

Based on the information at its disposal on 18 Apr 2008 03:50:38 GMT, ESA has a good faith belief that ******** infringes the rights of one or more ESA members by offering for sale or download unauthorized copies of game products protected by copyright, or offering for sale or download material that is the subject of infringing activities. The copyrighted works that have been infringed include but are not limited to:

Title: Assassin’s Creed
Infringement Source: BitTorrent
Infringement Timestamp: 18 Apr 2008 03:50:38 GMT
Infringement Last Documented: 18 Apr 2008 03:50:38 GMT
Infringer Username:
Infringing Filename: ***********
Infringing Filesize: 6899044196
Infringer IP Address: **********
Infringer DNS Name: **********
Infringing URL: http://218.145.160.136:8080/announce“

I have showed you the way to protect files and folders with Folder Protector 5.0. Have you take action to protect your confidential files and folders? Well, its all depends on your needs. But I highly recommend you to protect them or at least encrypt t…

Sympatico now uses whitelist-based throttling and whenever someone else in the house is using BitTorrent, Subversion, DCC file send, and anything encrypted that doesn’t seem to be HTTPS will time out.

I read above that someone had been receiving letters from their cable company about their bandwidth usage. I have been using bit torrent for many years now and have never had a complaint from my ISP. In late January, a letter was sent to our old house that we have been trying to sell, saying something to the affect of knowing that “we” had been downloading illegal content and that they would like us to stop. I did not receive this letter, because my dad was the one who picked it up and did not show it to me. He’s rather ignorant regarding all of this stuff, so he probably crapped his pants. Still, I’m pretty sure it was a complaint regarding the bandwidth usage because I bought a 500 gig HD and I used it to its full abilities.

My question is: After 4-5 years of using torrents and receiving no complaints from my ISP, was the letter probably due to the large amount of stuff I acquired due to my 500 gig HD? I hardly ever acquire large amounts of stuff in such a short span of time and I’d like to be able to download here and there without fear of being “clipped” for the act of downloading with BT.

I am not being throttled in any way by my ISP, but after receiving a letter, I am now paranoid to download anything.

I guess I’m looking for some reassurance from people that know more about this stuff than I do.

Thanks to anyone who can help me out.

I’ve just enabled encryption on Asureus and I’ve seen a noticeable improvement in speed. It kind of sucks that while I was cooperative with my ISP they were not so cooperative with me.

George.. I would spend more time thinking about your ideas before you express them with such confidence.
your a perfect example of ‘you can’t believe everything you read’

[quote comment="498"]Completely worthless. I’m extremely disappointed that people who know enough to develop BitTorrent clients don’t know enough about networking to realize that this is completely pointless. Sure, encrypting the stream may get around a few packet shapers, at the moment but, unless they reconfigure BitTorrent to run everything, incoming and outgoing, over port 80 or 443 then it will be trivial to block BitTorrent.

BitTorrent is far too reliant on specific ports and far too reliant on those ports being open inbound. Because of this, it is ridiculously simple to block BitTorrent traffic. Encrypting the stream will not hide the fact that it is BitTorrent traffic. It will only prevent someone from identifying what the BitTorrent traffic is transferring. This may be a good thing for pirates but, it won’t stop the network administrator from blocking BitTorrent ports completely.

The truly successful P2P app will allow multiplexed up/downloads over SSL port 443. This will be encrypted and will appear like most other https applications. It will also traverse most any firewall and be stupidly simple for the user to operate. The down side is that it would require a centralized server to make it work so, it isn’t desireable for piracy but, I think this is also a good thing. I’m sure you’ll disagree with me on this one though because you no doubt feel that “sharing” music is your God given right and is not stealing or piracy.

Bram Cohen’s BitTorrent is doomed because it doesn’t work as well as it should (multiplexed downloads should perform far better than BitTorrent), it relies too heavily on opening obscure inbound ports, it is too hard for the average AOLer to get working, it is too easy to block.[/quote]

Watch Satellite TV on PC from over 3000 stations with simple software. No messy hardware installation or monthly fee….

1. First of all I think that the argument given by the ISPs that the BitTorrent and other P2Ps generate a lots of traffic does not sound logical enough. I mean what do they mean by lots? BitTorrent is basically an application level protocol which means that its using the underlying (underlay) TCP/IP model of the Internet. If an ISP is charging me for the “unlimited” Internet access at fixed monthly charges then I have all rights to use that to its maximum possible extent.The fact is that if the capacity of my connection pipeline is some amount “X” GB per month at maximum possible rate offered to me then I can not cross that limit and download more than that under any circumstances irrespective of I use BitTorrent or not. So this concept of “unlimited connection ” is really a misnomer because a fixed rate connection for a fixed period of time can only allow you to download a certain fixed maximum amount of data no matter what you do or how you use the connection and ISPs know this thing. So their blaming the BitTorrent users or the protocol is totally wrong. They are just trying to hide the failure on their part to provide the claimed/advertised service.

2. Now coming back to the encryption issue. I think its a good idea to perform traffic encryption so that BitTorrent traffic cant be detected by shapers or sniffers. But again it depends on the extent of the success of this scheme because as Bram mentioned on his blog, a protocol generating huge volumes of bi-directional traffic is bound to get caught and shaped sooner or later but as long as this scheme works, its fine.

3. I’m completely in agreement with the BitTorrent community but what I feel that we need is a middle solution which would result in a win-win situation for both sides. Lets admit friends that we the BT users need an ISP as much as the ISP needs costumer. I mean what if all the ISPs in the world start using Traffic Shaping or worse: what if they are able to crack the BitTorrent encryption method being used. So I guess that retaliation(from both sides) is not a solution.I personally want to use BitTorrent to its full capacity as I mentioned above.

4. Also I think that in place of traffic shaping or bandwidth throttling, the ISPs should pay more attention towards traffic localization.As we all know that as long as the traffic remains within an ISP’s network, the ISP does not have to pay anything but if lots of cross-ISP traffic is generated then the ISPs have to pay to the higher-up(Tier I and II etc.) ISP. In fact one of the prime reasons why BitTorrent traffic shaping takes place is because of the fact that it generates lots of cross-ISP traffic without taking into account the underlay connection of the peers and this comes costly for the ISPs.But traffic shaping is not a solution for this either as it’ll not reduce the amount of cross-ISP traffic but only degrade the performance at the customer’s end.

http://www.binitbhatia.blogspot.com

I’m Not impressed i pay 45$ a month for internet speed the highest u can get with rogers and they are limiting me…

And personally Torrents Are so popular. Accept im starting to feel that utorrent and the big downloading program programmers dont seem to care about the people who have crap speed. Quit being little girls big deal u secure a line so they cant see what ur downloading and problem fixed if i could build it i would ..u guys are acting like girls… Build it and just put a warning up if u use this u may get in shit… simple

BitTorrent is far too reliant on specific ports and far too reliant on those ports being open inbound.”

- George W

Clearly you have never used BitTorrent before.

BitTorrent is far too reliant on specific ports and far too reliant on those ports being open inbound. Because of this, it is ridiculously simple to block BitTorrent traffic. Encrypting the stream will not hide the fact that it is BitTorrent traffic. It will only prevent someone from identifying what the BitTorrent traffic is transferring. This may be a good thing for pirates but, it won’t stop the network administrator from blocking BitTorrent ports completely.

The truly successful P2P app will allow multiplexed up/downloads over SSL port 443. This will be encrypted and will appear like most other https applications. It will also traverse most any firewall and be stupidly simple for the user to operate. The down side is that it would require a centralized server to make it work so, it isn’t desireable for piracy but, I think this is also a good thing. I’m sure you’ll disagree with me on this one though because you no doubt feel that “sharing” music is your God given right and is not stealing or piracy.

Bram Cohen’s BitTorrent is doomed because it doesn’t work as well as it should (multiplexed downloads should perform far better than BitTorrent), it relies too heavily on opening obscure inbound ports, it is too hard for the average AOLer to get working, it is too easy to block.[/quote]

You can Have bit-torrent run on any port it is just like web servers running of your home pc if your isp doesnt allow it to run on 80 then run it on 8080. I am in favor of this encryption, I am using it now have noticed no speed decreases and very little cpu increase. I dont like how the RIAA and MPAA act like they can just sniff anyones network traffic and get away with it. I hope that Torrentspy and whatever other site is in a lawsuit wins and tells those stupid pricks that they are in fact breaking the law and all their practices are unconstitutional.

There’s also the piracy concern. With the recording industries cracking down on P2P networks and subpoenaing abusers ISP’s have to make a descion on how to treat that type of traffic. Since we all know you guys are downloading your favorite porn movies, music, and videos why not throttle this traffic to make room for legitimate requests.

You are NOT paying for a 6mbps/512kbps (down/up). All broadband ISP’s I’ve ever had any interaction with provide UP TO, those famous two words. You get UP TO 6mbps/512kbps, you may get slower depending numerous variables and by abusing the acceptable use / fair use policy. An unlimited connection @ 5mbps synchronous from an ILEC/CLEC will normally run you a couple grand, about half of that is for local loop fees.

ISP’s are a business and profit from reselling bandwidth. Most smaller ISP’s oversell their pipes, because very rarely will they have their entire user base trying to download the paris hilton sex tape all at once. It does happen, and this is when congestion occurs. If the ISP is smart they use a bandwidth manager that implements certain bandwidth policies for users and protocols on the network to bring the equilibrium back to the network. That way users connections don’t time out, they just simply slow down until the congestion passes.

In sort your 39.99/month is peanuts, you’re not guaranteed anything and the ISP has total control of what protocols they decide to run on the network. You should be greatful the connection you do have and quit your bitching. :)

Or just buy through an ILEC if you’re fortunate enough to be in their access areas. They have the most bandwidth and usually don’t throttle anything.

If you are looking for speed, Newsgroups are the best way to go.

This comment was a while back, but it pissed me off, so I wanted to reply.

Bob, I have the right to use the bandwidth because that is the service as it was advertised to me. I pay $38.95 per month for 60 GB throughput, at 5Mbps down, 512kbps up. Nowhere is it stated that some protocols will get severely reduced (near zero) speeds. If my ISP cannot provide this to me, they should change their package to a profitable one.

On a side not, before I downloaded Azureus, thanks to this article, I was actually using more bandwidth downloading painfully slow torrents, as my up speeds were faster than down, and while I normally stop the torrent when my ratio hits one, I was instead maintaining a ratio around 3.

1. Switch to another provider which will sell good internet (without shaping). Maybe it will cost more (naturally), but you will get better service.

2. Publicize information about your provider, so all prospective customers would know which providers do throttle and which doesn’t.

The REAL issue here is bandwidth consumption for p2p filesharing. ISPs should realize that they are building a busines model on a rapidly advancing technology – and that they should be prepared to make hard investments on their infrastructure when it is required – rather than going the short route and giving their customers the middle finger.

It doesn’t really matter whether its torrents or some more advanced protocol that emerges later on, its just simply unethical to throttle speeds in any way.

BitTorrent is far too reliant on specific ports and far too reliant on those ports being open inbound. Because of this, it is ridiculously simple to block BitTorrent traffic. Encrypting the stream will not hide the fact that it is BitTorrent traffic. It will only prevent someone from identifying what the BitTorrent traffic is transferring. This may be a good thing for pirates but, it won’t stop the network administrator from blocking BitTorrent ports completely.

The truly successful P2P app will allow multiplexed up/downloads over SSL port 443. This will be encrypted and will appear like most other https applications. It will also traverse most any firewall and be stupidly simple for the user to operate. The down side is that it would require a centralized server to make it work so, it isn’t desireable for piracy but, I think this is also a good thing. I’m sure you’ll disagree with me on this one though because you no doubt feel that “sharing” music is your God given right and is not stealing or piracy.

Bram Cohen’s BitTorrent is doomed because it doesn’t work as well as it should (multiplexed downloads should perform far better than BitTorrent), it relies too heavily on opening obscure inbound ports, it is too hard for the average AOLer to get working, it is too easy to block.[/quote]