TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

SeedFucker Is Not Going to Make BitTorrent Anonymous

With stricter anti-piracy laws being introduced worldwide, BitTorrent users are increasingly seeking ways to hide their identities online. Apparently the demand for anonymous BitTorrent transfers has reached a point where people are starting to believe in miracles, which then become news.

Today, The Register reported on a piece of code that apparently has the ability to make BitTorrent downloads untraceable. Before anyone gets too excited about this holy grail, we sadly have to shatter the hopes and dreams of all anonymity seekers out there.

The code the article refers to is SeedFucker, which is intended to poison BitTorrent swarms with fake peers. For years, these type of ‘exploits’ have been mainly used to to promote malware and other dubious torrents by making it look like there are thousands of people sharing the torrents in question.

This code can insert thousands of random IP-addresses into a swarm which is great for spammers, but useless for people who want to hide their own IP-address. No matter how this code is rewritten, one’s actual IP-address will always be reported to the tracker.

In theory, SeedFucker could cause problems for the anti-piracy outfits that track BitTorrent downloads because they would run into many fake peers. However, most reputable tracking companies confirm whether the material in question is actually being shared from a particular IP-address.

“It might seem to some that this is a major change, but in reality it’s nothing new, nothing that isn’t already done by some trackers themselves,” an experienced BitTorrent developer told TorrentFreak when commenting on the code, adding, “It doesn’t substantively change anything, and will not change things in the conceivable future.”

Indeed, all trackers based on the Opentracker software already insert fake peers, a setup that stems from the times when anti-piracy tracking outfits didn’t confirm that actual transfers were going on. With these fake peers, BitTorrent users would have plausible deniability if they were taken to court.

Aside from the fact that it’s utterly useless in terms on anonymity, the SeedFucker exploit will not work at all on most major BitTorrent trackers as they don’t honor the “ip=” parameter used in the code. If anything, the use of this code will trick BitTorrent users into believing that files are more popular than they are in reality, which can only lead to problems and a lot of frustration.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • CFultz

    Love the name of the service! Haha! When I saw the title of the article I was like LOL What?!

  • Matthew

    Lol guttered. Well that’s a let down

  • welll

    this method could be fixed though.. we just need to make the IPs look like they are sharing the file.

    sure it sounds impossible.. but im sure it could be done.

  • Anonymous

    ITT idiots.

    The solution is VPN.

  • oneswarm

    oneswarm is the solution

  • antiantipiracy.blogspot.com

    You guys are funny with your VPNs! Mostly all VPNs will tell your IP to the authorities for legal actions. Don’t think you’re god behind your VPN!

  • JonnieHayward

    i knew my torrents were inflated when i only connect to 3 and theres 300 peers showing …obvious

  • Anonymous

    Any good solution must be backed with lawyers and guns.

    Otherwise, it’s not really a solution.

  • duane

    If files are cut into small enough chunks, then you’ll find that unrelated files share some common chunks.

    For instance, the latest Ubuntu iso could have chunks that are the same as a DVD rip of Avatar — one is legal and one isn’t. If the bittorrent protocol was enhanced to download chunks from unrelated files, it would be impossible to say with any certainty what users are sharing or downloading.

    There has been some research on this topic, and I believe they said this has the additional advantage that transfers are faster because there are more seeds…

    This is the obvious next stage in the evolution of P2P, however could this lead to the Bittorrent protocol becoming illegal?

  • George Agdgdwngo

    What we need is a system where several IP addresses from the VPNs are spammed to a tracker allowing for people using Usenet and FreeNET to encrypt the data to the monies.

    Using this method, the children will not be hurt.

  • duane

    @duane – awesome idea!

  • HUH

    Why the fuck does he put those threads in a list? That ain’t no thread-pool! Amateur!

  • .jack

    Or we could use methods like oneswarm and shared file chunks. It would take more space (because of more hash files references, but maybe not) but it would increase file availability. It would just have to be that part of the bittorrent protocol is updated, b/c chunk sizes are nonstandard.

    Not to mention that keeping our trackers in places were they can’t be forced to do things (like hand over our IP logs).

  • antiantipiracy.blogspot.com

    @ 14 – ???????????

    I totally agree with you bro.

  • AAIP.Fucker

    fuck the RIAA all day everyday by seeding and being grateful to your scene sharing community.

    Support your local & global Pirates :D

  • Ninja

    It’s either hide your IP or have a good argumentation for a possible lawsuit.

    We might see new technologies that will make tracking people harder than it is today but don’t expect miracles.

    Sad part is they are forcing ppl more and more into anonymity and the solutions that are available or will be made available can also be used to hide much worse stuff than an innocent music share. A pity MAFIAA blockheads won’t wake up u.u

  • jon

    to (6) vpns will report your ip but only if asked its encrypted there not going to be asked in the first place hence the private in the vpn you troll lol

  • hmm

    @6

    Some will. There are quite a few hosted in places where copyright law is not really an issue though… those are the ones you want to use.

  • Bert

    @9

    Lookup The OFF System.

  • PirateBay

    http://cultureghost.org/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2020&sid=c69fc5b8bdfe45359fd605eb22757495

    This VPN is geared toward helping the customer not the right holders. No logs and a fast VPN, for a few pounds a monh you can download safe in the knowledge some lawyer somewhere is pulling his hair out trying to find your name from a random IP.

  • Pingback: Pirate Home Page » SeedFucker Is Not Going to Make BitTorrent Anonymous

  • DeltaPan

    Should be substantially.

    No such word as the adverb “substantively” and is only an adjective, while it could be derivitive to an adverb, i mean i convert tenses to bona fide words which aren’t in the dictionary as adjective to adverb tense, but substancive isn’t really needed when the adverb “substantially” is definitively the same.

    Looks correct but isn’t. : )

    - – -

    Miracles indeed.

    I can’t even be bothered to hide, not going to be made deceitful by this, all i’m doing is switching off trackers and using mDHT/PEX to access swarms.

    I am not a criminal, i am not duplicit nor deceitful and no amount of corporate victimisation of the filesharing/downloader community is going to change that.

    Corporate want to persecute a celt pagan such as myself, directly, that’s their problem and it’ll serve them right.

    Make it personal towards me and metaphysical consequences will be incurred, as so many people realise after fracking with me personally.

    In fact, such as things are, i am disgusted at the corporates so please pick on me personally so you do suffer metaphysical consequences.

    I am more than aware how mad that sounds but true enough nonetheless, i’ve had it all my life, people throwing crap at me, they always suffer for it when it’s too late and people never seem to learn.

    So i don’t hide and welcome their persecution and prosecutions.#

    When they realise what they’ve done after they attempt to victimise me, it’ll help the many, when the few suffer the consequences.

    People have tried to make me suffer all my adult life one way or another, it only rebounds on them to the power of three and i don’t even have to invoke the Rede myself as mechanisms kick in themselves from spells self cast decades ago, i can harm none unless they harm me or attempt to, if i desrve something i do what i can to neutralise those consequences of acting against me but in this case i will laugh and think it couldn’t happen to nicer people, usually i think people are fools for acting against me, i pity them because they don’t understand what pagans like me are like, not these corporates though, i will not pity them.

    When they make people victims, they want to understand just how wierds some people are in society, as has been the case throughout human history, they don’t know who the strangest people are and there’s hundreds of thousands of Celt pagans, witches and worlocks, wiccans, out there, i am out in the open, most are not and they won’t know who they are either, it’s called occult for a reason, just suffer similar consequences as same as doing such to me, we are all the same.

    Not the wisest thing to do, try to make us pagans victims!

    I dare them to victimise me!

    Peace. : )

  • Whatever

    @9 duane
    Very good idea.

    I can see the possibilities. There are millions, maybe billions of files out there. Files which are not popular or shared anymore might still be assembled with other files. Bittorrent would need to evolve for it though.

    A few thoughts brings me to this:
    1 Pieces should be standardized at a certain size (like 8KB).

    2 One swarm is needed.

    3 A search would probably need to work like older P2P programs did.

    4 No search requests for files but only for pieces so nobody knows who is sharing which files.

    Some possible weak points:
    1. Distribution of torrents (as sites get taken down) because only a hash for a whole torrent won’t find a torrent/file or if it does it will identify someone with a complete file (because that computer can create the hash).

    2. It MAY be much easier to poison the swarm with fake pieces which have the same hash.

    3. As nobody confirms/denies the existence of a file, it will be impossible to guess if a download will ever complete.

    (i guess, with some more effort someone might create torrent 2.0)

  • earthling

    @duane

    awesome idea – lets cut up torrents to individual bits so that they are all 1s and 0s!!!! then we will be able to download any torent from any other torrent ;D

  • George Agdgdwngo

    @23

    Like par files!

  • Antony Hopkins

    That script sucks. But I’m sure this part could be greatly improved ;)

    [code]
    // generate an IP in the range [50-220].[10-100].[1-255].[1-255]
    return RNG.Next(50, 220).ToString() + "." + RNG.Next(10, 100).ToString() + "." + RNG.Next(1, 255).ToString() + "." + RNG.Next(1, 255).ToString();
    [/code]

    Just put a check if the 1st digit is 10 or 127 or 192, change it to a valid one. Also, the 1st range should start from 4, and the 2nd range could be much wider.

  • Antony Hopkins

    Really that script is just raw. I’ll explain myself.

    If an IP starts with 10, or 127, or 192, it belongs to a private network. An “anti-script” could just check if these IPs are injected, and deduct that the tracker is polluted.

    IPs starting from 4 or 12 belongs to the US (4.x.x.x and 12.x.x.x).

    The generated IP could be verified if appears to be authentic before to be injected just by doing a reverse IP lookup.

    Finally, the script could also be GEO-targeted. An admin area could be created, with the geolite (maxmind) database, and just IPs from specific countries could be injected.

    Lots more could be done but you got the point.

  • an0nym0us

    “this method could be fixed though.. we just need to make the IPs look like they are sharing the file.

    sure it sounds impossible.. but im sure it could be done.”

    No, it can’t. The only way to make the IP address look like it’s sharing the file is to actualy make parts of the file available from that IP address. Unless the IP address is actually running BT and sharing the file then any connection to it will fail.

    “If files are cut into small enough chunks, then you’ll find that unrelated files share some common chunks”

    Although this sounds possible, perhaps even plausible, it’s extremely unlikely to happen using current the BT protocol. Firstly, the hash of both torrents would have to match for the clients to think they were talking about the same torrent (this isn’t actually impossible, but it’s so unlikely it’s almost certainly never going to happen).

    Secondly, even if the protocol was changed to use parts from different files and/or by some unimaginable coincidence the torrent hashes did match, the odds on a 256 byte piece being identical to any another 256 byte piece are 1 in 256^256 or 3.231700607131100730071487668867e+616, which is a number with over 600 digits.

    With the 8kB pieces suggested elsewhere the odds length to an incredible 1 in 3.0932728613894819760869582492747e+32058 – A 32,000 digit number.

  • DeltaPan

    Perhaps some brainstorming between bit Torrent developers and those minded to get another protocol into existence, BT V.2 as it were, at Neowin forums http://www.neowin.net/forum/

    Or similar.

    Where ‘puter science geniuses are commonly found, would lead to something profoundly innovatiove and viable.

    Good venue for such brainstorming.

    Centralise the efforts.

    Peace.

  • phishybongwaters

    @#27an0nym0us

    thankyou for explaining that, I was scratching my head trying to dumb down the answer enough to make it palatable for these peeps.

    Cut it into small enough pieces until unrelated pieces match? Do you even understand the very basics of how torrents work?

    Fake transfers from ips is more of a reality than chunking every file on earth and mixing them together.

    That would have to take place on the server/tracker itself, running basically AI clients

  • DeltaPan

    It’d lead to untold hashfails and discarded pieces, indeed.

    Peers would end up downloading many, many more times the actual filesize by time any download had completed, if a download were to ever complete.

    Phishybongwaters and @27 are correct, not possible, in point of fact.

    Peace. : )

  • an0n

    “Fake transfers from ips is more of a reality than chunking every file on earth and mixing them together.

    That would have to take place on the server/tracker itself, running basically AI clients”

    The ‘fake’ parts would have to actually be real parts though or the receiving client would reject them. It would then cease to be a ‘fake’ transfer, with the consequence of that server/tracker being issued with a takedown notice.

  • DeltaPan

    In other words, a pointless and futile exercise.

    Peace. : )

  • MultiCast

    iv said this For Years Now, simply write the generic Multicast protocol into a generic multicast tunneled torrent app.

    make the generic multicast tunnel a semi random DHT enabled virtual LAN IP multicast address and have your torrent app inject this random ip into the small manageable swarm.

    no one but your app knows your virtual IP and can match this to your rel ip address and so take any data on the wire it required….

    lets break this down.

    the simple fact is using multitask instead of the antiquated wasteful Unicast as per today means you send one single copy of your torrent to Many client as are in the small swarm lets say 10 then sending 10 copy of the same data to each of them separately, a massive saving in upload bandwidth for a given torrent multiplied per client connected to the swarm…

    a massive bandwidth saving for all including even the worlds ISP’s even though all they would see is a Multicast overlay anon data of some kind running inside an Ipv4 tunnel.

    and all this but for a sake of the torrent app writers cant be bothered to actually take whats already a proven Multicast DHT ‘Bamboo DHT’ with their prototype of many years and add it and a generic multicast IPv4 tunnel into all the current apps today, add a little thought into the virtual semi random multitask IP and sequential read/write into a virtual file so as to finally allow several WAN connections on your wireless community LAN to write many inputs to a single file at once and you have fixed MANY problems that exist today, and saved MASSES of the worlds real torrent data throughput in one intelligent innovative move of finally bringing the old ‘MBONE’ multicast network overlay in the torrent utility’s into the 21 century at last….

    but its all down to the torrent devs on this one, code up/re-factor that Multitask overlay tunnel and virtual file/IP etc services into an existing torrent java app, it could exist today but for Your lack of real innovation, the codes out there ,put it all together and finally start thinking Many smaller ‘multicast swarms’ multitasking a single data stream together, Not massive wasteful traceable IP Unicast swarms as per todays traffic…

  • MultiCast

    sorry for the bad spell checking.

    multitask=multicast

  • bash

    Funny how this supposed news on this pathetic code snippet is making the rounds. Just check out the lucubrations on all IT related sites: it has nothing to do with IP spoofing yet they all talk about anonymity on the net! Some even go as far as claiming the inevitability of pirates becoming truly untraceable. Behold, how myths become legends!

    @33 MultiCast
    really … why don’t you just write it then and stop repeating yourself “For Years Now” (wow, capital letters). Yeah, show those bad, lazy, stupid “torrent app writers” how it should be done!

    @21 DeltaPan … are you on drugs or something?

    @9 please refer to #27
    @25 please refer to #27 … actually just stop making a fool of yourself
    @27, thanks! I was losing hope

    @myself … just stop wasting time and not adding anything useful.

  • DeltaPan

    @ 35 Apr 15, 2010 at 14:39 by bash

    No.

    Chance’d be a fine thing, can’t afford drugs.

    Couple of lines of Charly would go down well actually.

    By the way you’ve just posted, looks like you’ve an alcohol problem though.

    Peace. : )

  • an0nym0us

    @33 ‘multicast’

    I think I understand what you’re saying, but wouldn’t this require either a central, and therefore easily compromised or disabled, server, or for every client to receive every piece of multicast data? If the former, then any robustness and possibly anonymity is lost. If the latter, then the amount of bandwidth consumed by each client would be huge. they would effectively receive every part of every torrent in the anonymous swarm.

    Of course, the real solution to all this is to reverse-engineer, or brute force in an effective way, the SHA hashing algorithms. If this were ever actually achievable (not in my lifetime, I’d warrant!) then all that would be required is to distribute the filenames, piece-counts, and piece-hashes. Everyone could then simply construct the original files from those. No actual file-data would ever need to be exchanged.

    But this isn’t going to happen for many, many years to come, and even if that day ever comes (and this is a very big if) then I’m sure it will be illegal to distribute or reverse the hashes anyway.

  • TECH GUY

    Al tracing of file sharers relies on IP address broadcasting via torrent software or direct broadcast via strait download, this is a simple fix now being worked on in order to give out a false IP address ,using a very small peace of software designed to be an add-on, a program you can switch on and of , this software is under development in the UK and will be out for sale in a few months , how it works is by changing the real IP number with a fake number for each part of the IP address IE say your IP is – 89.138.137.263 it will scramble it to -98.381.173.623, same IP numbers but all mixed up basically making the IP address useless for tracing purposes, nice little program easy to use and very effective, they got the idea from that thing the Germans used in war two can’t remember what it was called but it works.

  • DeltaPan
  • an0n

    @38

    Sounds like you mean a proxy or VPN to me.

    If not:

    Somewhere along the line the TCP packets have to be sent to your real IP address or you’ll never receive them.

    Does the scrambled address get sent to the tracker? Does the tracker have to be aware of the scrambling? Does it rewrite them to the real address?

    Does the client rewrite them?

    Do all clients need the ‘scrambler’?

    How does it stop people tracing you by, for instance, sniffing the wire and getting the real address from outgoing (or incoming) packets?

    Do all the packets get re-routed through some central server, with all the problems involved with that sort of approach?

    How will you stop the people doing the tracing using the cery same software and reverse-engineering it? These people have lots of time, money and incentive, and some very bright minds working for them.

    Really people, you’re pissing into the wind here if you think that something like this will work without a major overhaul of the entire BT protocol.

  • Jack

    Useless article.

    The aim of the code never was anonymity, but making anti-piracy work harder.

    And this is useful when antipiracy laws don’t the need to download any datas to retrieve the IP’s on networks.

    Sure this code is not made for private trackers..

  • CapnS

    Now I’ve done a bit of code with tracker software myself. They often rely heavily upon a database for parsing. Personally I wouldn’t be too offended if someone found a way to implement hash-coding of IP addresses at the cost of a little speed.

  • Anonymous

    One easy way to deal with IP anonymity has been used by the TBP trackers consisting in randomly injecting some fake random IP addresses. This practice is still in use right now explaining all the false positive collected by the piece of shit at ACS law.

    Some time a random IP address correspond to a real users and not to a printer or a refrigerator.

  • Johnson

    I don’t see too much point in trying to obfuscate an IP other than to make it harder for the simply idiotic AP companies to gather addresses due to the pathetically crap software some of them use to obtain them. Any AP company worth anything shouldn’t have the slightest problem in modifying an existing open-source BitTorrent client software to spit out exactly what’s needed, including actual proof of transferral of copyrighted material based on piece hash matching.

    You’re not going to get anonymous BitTorrent short of running through a proxy. BitTorrent on its own is wide open to exploitation and is likely to remain that way. You have a lot of people in the BitTorrent scene running websites and tracking services, but few of them know anything about real protocol development, and many don’t care as they’re only in it for the money/status anyway. Don’t expect any of these types to provide you with an answer as most know little than a bit of PHP and basic scripting/database skills at best.

    Using BitTorrent for illicit files without proxy could be as good as dead in many countries soon as new laws are passed and the AP/law companies ramp up business accordingly. The possibility is right there for them to do this, and they are. People are probably going to need to look elsewhere to new protocols to keep on running free. This writing has been on the wall for a long time.

  • Anonymous

    Forcing the parasites to download entire file to demonstrate infringement by poisoning the cloud with fake Ip address will seriously impair their ability to hunt for down-loaders. So by itself this should be effective.

    For those though who still insist in using BT (while many many alternatives exists though)and not willing to use VPN or deal with the slower speed of onion routers you can still use Peerguardian that will effectively denied access to 99% anti-piracy spys.

  • outsider

    Start using I2P.. ie torrents and more.

  • Nobody

    “you can still use Peerguardian that will effectively denied access to 99% anti-piracy spys”

    >He thinks that PG2 hinders the MAFIAA

    laughing_girls.jpg

  • DeltaPan

    45 Apr 15, 2010 at 21:12 by Anonymous
    Forcing the parasites to download entire file to demonstrate infringement by poisoning the cloud with fake Ip address will seriously impair their ability to hunt for down-loaders. So by itself this should be effective.

    - – -

    Not using corporate ADSL2 pipes and modded clients which are aggressive anyway unless configured to be friendly, like Bit Vomit etc.

    All what they do now can be automated to collate IP’s and banks of mainframes permanantly scouring the swarms would lead to the same results and wouldn’t take longer, just means more machines to do the work and collate the data they want.

    If and when they get laws changed to what they want in order to be more invasive, they will spend money on the technical infrastructure and progam development to enable them to collate IP data in swarms and seperate spoof from actual etc in counter to what counters to their counters being employed now.

    It’ll hardly slow them down if they get a legal green light, which seems likely, especially in the UK if Tories gain power, bad enough Labour have allowed the DEB to pass in such circumstances as it has been in the wash up.

    IMMHO, unfortunately.

    Peace. : )

  • dig

    My opinion is that we give them too many informations, infos we should kept safe.

    Why is there a distinction between a seeder and a leecher in a torrent swarm?

    Is there any need to show our ratio to every member?

    Why should a leecher know if i have 100% of a torrent or if i am a leecher too?

    Since they are after seeders, initial and latters, lets let them know that we are all lechers like them.

    We cant be sure of what we are downloading until it is finished and when it will be finished we will not seed it, just keep leeching it till we are 500% sure it is finished. ;-)

  • Anonymous

    “Not using corporate ADSL2 pipes and modded clients which are aggressive anyway unless configured to be friendly, like Bit Vomit etc”

    I disagree.

    Doing this is ok to make few example as it has been done before but for a real enforcement of 10 of thousand of users even a Tx connections are not going to cut it. (Don’t make me laugh with ADSL2 please!)

  • Anonymous

    “He thinks that PG2 hinders the MAFIAA”

    Yes it does and with the 3 strikes non-sense there is a way to test that.

    If by incredible bad luck a letter come just switch to VPN for a year.

    That’s all.

  • Pingback: SeedFucker non protegge affatto gli utenti BitTorrent

  • an0nym0us

    “He thinks that PG2 hinders the MAFIAA

    “Yes it does”

    >He thinks that the MAFIAA don’t use residential ADSL/cable and other connections, nor that they have access to the PG2 blocklists just as easily and quickly as anyone else.

    These people have huge resources. It’s really not hard for them to work around PG2, is it?

    Also, everyone talks about IP-spoofing and other measures, you think the MAFIAA don’t do that too?

    Use PG2 if you like, but all it will bring you is a false sense of security.

    –

    “Why is there a distinction between a seeder and a leecher in a torrent swarm?”

    So that the clients know which parts other peers have so that they can ask them for the pieces they still need.

    “Is there any need to show our ratio to every member?”

    Not really, except that it speeds things up and lets clients know which peers are the best to ask for the pieces they want.

    “Why should a leecher know if i have 100% of a torrent or if i am a leecher too?”

    See above about knowing who to ask for pieces. There’s no point in asking an incomplete peer for parts it doesn’t have.

    –

    Read the BT protocol to understand how torrents work and why clients provide this information to trackers and other peers.

  • DeltaPan

    52 Apr 16, 2010 at 12:39 by an0nym0us
    Read the BT protocol to understand how torrents work and why clients provide this information to trackers and other peers.
    - – -

    Indeed matey.

    Here’s a good starting point for them…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_(protocol)

    Peace. : )

  • an0nym0us

    And another, which gives more details, and in fact provides enough information to implement a client or a tracker ;)

    http://wiki.theory.org/BitTorrentSpecification

  • Whatever

    @27
    …Impossible…
    Your right but data is not really random so the odds are a little better than 256^256. The biggest problem is that video and most audio are always compressed on the internet (But still not random because compression will exclude a range of possibilities).

    To see if it has any chance of working it would need to be calculated what happens if everyone is in one huge swarm and all those shared files are online (not knowing which torrent isn’t an issue, the only thing needed is to compare the hash to all hashes of pieces you own).

    An easier solution my be for all clients in a huge single swarm to cache some random pieces of torrents (request = just send me one) to spoil investigations. They can be uploaded to a request but never have the rest of the file.

  • an0nym0us

    @55
    “Impossible”

    I never said that in relation to the piece-sharing. What I said was “Although this sounds possible, perhaps even plausible, it’s extremely unlikely to happen”

    And it is extremely unlikely, so much so that the odds on it happening are so skewed that the chances are it never will.

    “data is not really random”

    To all intents and purposes it is, and remember that the 256^256 only applies to 256 byte pieces, which are almost never used as they are impractically small. Want a 700MB file? That’ll be 2,867,200 pieces please. Generally pieces are much bigger than 256 bytes for very good reasons.

    “An easier solution my be for all clients in a huge single swarm to cache some random pieces of torrents”

    Are you seriously suggesting that every client downloads pieces from every torrent currently running on every tracker out there?

    And how do you expect these clients to even know about each other?

    And do you also mean that those clients never actually make requests for specific pieces which they require for the files they actually want to download? If so, what are the odds of anything ever actually completing?

    “They can be uploaded to a request”

    Thereby increasing everyone’s exposure and therefore their risk of being associated with something they didn’t even want in the first place.

  • sheepy

    I’d like to see something like a onion routing network for BitTorrent, with a low hop count for efficiency versus security (configurable), and every peer a relay. No exits necessary; all internal. Maybe some data caching too.

    And not in Java, coz it’s poo. :P

  • Anonymous

    Atrack-based trackers kept zero personal information in permanent storage. For example: http://track.th0r1n.com

  • Whatever

    @56 an0nym0us
    Not random example: if all files are compressed 256 0′s or 255′s do not exist. However it is probably unlikely there would be many collisions which i agree with.

    As for the cache, its like limited freenet, think outside the box.

    Bittorrent may not be called bittorrent then. You do not request all the time random pieces from peers but just sometimes a random piece for your cache which can then be used to send it if someone requests a matching hash. One huge swarm, and maybe a hash (for pieces), instead of name, search mechanism based on Kazaa or Soulseek.

    It has increase overhead but might be faster than freenet. This will make you, like freenet, not responsible for the (cached) data on your computer because you don’t know what it is (never tried freenet yet, just from reading the infos about it). And for the things you actually did download there is now plausible deniability like with truecrypt.

    Its just an idea for evolution.

  • Clm

    Yes this code has nothing new.
    Yes it will not work on a lot of trackers.
    Yes it is useless to hide someone’s IP.

    But for french poeple (yes, I’m french, sorry for my english and for my president), it still means a lot :

    The HADOPI law aim to shut down the internet connection of poeple sharing copyrighted stuff.
    To find those poeple, they will use the IP as a single proff.

    Talking about SeedFucker or BTpoison.php is only a proof of concept, a way to say to our politics : “your argument is invalid”.

    And maybe at last will they accept a better solution than filtering, monitoring, spying and repression.

  • tt555

    [quote]ITT idiots.

    The solution is VPN.[/quote]
    the VPN will not help u, if officals want they can detect your ip adrass

  • Pingback: » Petit Journal du Web (spécial explication Facebook)MonBouquet | Le Blog des Fleurs et des Idées de Création d’Entprises

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.