Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pirate Bay Shuts Down Tracker, Switches To Distributed Hash Table

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the look-at-our-semi-clean-hands dept.

The Internet 327

think_nix writes "The Pirate Bay has shut down their BitTorrent tracker. Instead TPB is now using Distributed Hash Table to distribute the torrents. The Pirate Bay Blog states that DHT along with PEX (Peer Exchange) Technology is just as effective if not better for finding peers than a centralized service. The Local reports that shutting down the tracker and implementing DHT & PEX could be due to the latest court rulings in Sweden against 2 of TPB's owners, and may decide the outcome of the case."

cancel ×

327 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

In a related question (2, Interesting)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128210)

How do you get rtorrent to load a magnet link (preferably by pasting it into it's window) ???

The docs aren't too clear on this. I've tried and then pasting the magnet link at the "load>" prompt. But no luck.

Re:In a related question (4, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128510)

Magnet link is an URI, your browser is supposed to send it to it directly.

It's interesting that TPB takes this stance now when it has become too expensive and hard to keep their trackers working, and while having legal issues shot against them from everywhere. DHT and PEX have been around for years with no significant improvements. This isn't a change because "the technology is ready now", but because the ship is sinking.

Re:In a related question (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30129098)

rtorrent is a console client, so there are obviously problems with the idea of your browser sending it directly.

Anyway, it appears that rtorrent doesn't support magnet links. There's an open bug on trac for it: http://libtorrent.rakshasa.no/ticket/955

Re:In a related question (5, Informative)

Galactic Dominator (944134) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129102)

Of course this is in response to the legal situation, but DHT is a better method provided users get their clients configured correctly and ports forwarded. Your comment implies they are switching to an inferior technology which is certainly not the case. It's far more fault tolerant and less prone to bottlenecks, it simply requires more from the user. As more sites switch to this method, swarms will increase in size and throughput with less liability for all. I'm glad this finally happened.

Congrats, you've successively cut off a head from the hydra.

Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

Lissajous (989738) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128216)

F......

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

russlar (1122455) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128252)

i........

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

clambake (37702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128664)

R.......

Re:Distributed Post! (4, Funny)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128976)

C-C-C- COMBO BREA.......

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128994)

piece 443 failed hash check

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

Rigrig (922033) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128690)

...s.

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128808)

....t.....

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

catbertscousin (770186) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128816)

T.......

Re:Distributed Post! (4, Funny)

pHus10n (1443071) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128860)

C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!

Re:Distributed Post! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128818)

....t....

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

mrdogi (82975) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129046)

...s.....

Re:Distributed Post! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128272)

....E..

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

jaggeh (1485669) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128286)

....N..

Re:Distributed Post! (2, Funny)

gomiam (587421) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128346)

Part 1 of the torrent failed checksum. Redownloading...

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128410)

....??...

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128480)

....D..

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128634)

Z....

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

clambake (37702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128636)

Crap, stuck at 99%!

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129036)

We need more minerals!

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128372)

Seriously guys, can you PLEASE SEED!!!!

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

ionix5891 (1228718) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128448)

that sounds so wrong

Re:Distributed Post! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128514)

Seriously guys, can you PLEASE SEED!!!!

that sounds so wrong

Homophobe.

Re:Distributed Post! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128672)

    You have a problem with breeders? Your mom didn't seem to mind last night.

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

Talderas (1212466) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128874)

Dammit, I only make male disciple breeders. I want all my women pregnant at all times!

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

hosecoat (877680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128792)

FAKE!

Re:Distributed Post! (5, Funny)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129030)

I"VE BEEN STUCK ON 98% FOR 3 DAYS!!!!!!1111!!!1!! SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED.

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129056)

Bad video quality, audio out of sync, don't bother getting this one.

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129126)

Yeah, cams suck, I'm waiting for the DVD rip.

Re:Distributed Post! (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129170)

Bad text quality, idea out of sync with the output, no car analogy. Don't bother up-moderating this one.

Does this mean TPB will still be working? (5, Insightful)

Kirin Fenrir (1001780) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128228)

Proving that technology is always one step ahead of copyright law.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (0, Flamebait)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128446)

No, it is not. You cannot circumvent laws with technical bullshit, atleast not in nordic countries and probably elsewhere in Europe too, because intention counts in courts aswell. If it is as clear as The Pirate Bay is and how they handled to all the DMCA requests (even if theres no such law in sweden, but common sense works long way), judges are going to see whats going on and punish for it. You cannot get around that with technical reasonings like "but we dont host the files, we just provide .torrent files". And before anyone jumps on the "but then Google should be sued and shutdown too" bullshit, everyone can see the difference between TPB and Google.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1)

Zombywuf (1064778) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128524)

Yeah, it's easier to find albums of obscure artists on Google. Even then you miss the point, TPB will have to go to court again to find out if this is illegal, and that could take years. So we now have a few years to find another workaround.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (3, Insightful)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128562)

Sure you can.
The decentralized service doesn't have that central server weakness, so the best you can do is blast sacrificial individual users with law suits.

After that, it's a case of mass disobedience vs prohibition laws, because people are not going to stop sharing any time soon.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128590)

You cannot get around that with technical reasonings like "but we dont host the files, we just provide .torrent files".

My view on the whole Pirate bay thing is this: If I give you the address of a drug dealer, am I to be held responsible for your subsequent drug taking?

.torrents are the equivalent of directions to an illicit place, like the address of a dealer or whorehouse..

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (-1, Troll)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128698)

It's more like setting up a site called drugdealers.com where people post advertisements on where to buy drugs. You can defend your "but the site is only giving address where to buy drugs, I'm not selling any!" all you want, but it wont hold up in court.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128872)

Yes, I know this arguement is getting old but... How does that differ from Google in ANY aspect, again?

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1)

MikeURL (890801) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129250)

Simply this, intention matters.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (3, Insightful)

SethJohnson (112166) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128926)

Whereas the tobacco companies have lost several huge lawsuits, I don't recall any magazines getting sued for running ads for cancer-causing products.

Seth

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30129166)

Whereas the tobacco companies have lost several huge lawsuits, I don't recall any magazines getting sued for running ads for cancer-causing products.

Seth

Please quit signing your posts! If you must sign then then at least put your signature in the signature field so that we can turn off sigs and not have to see it.

Seriously, I never understood why people sign their posts on Slashdot anyways. Your username is already right there in the title of your post:
 

by SethJohnson (112166) on Tuesday November 17, @09:58AM (#30128926) Homepage Journal

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (2, Insightful)

AlamedaStone (114462) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129220)

It's more like setting up a site called drugdealers.com where people post advertisements on where to buy drugs. You can defend your "but the site is only giving address where to buy drugs, I'm not selling any!" all you want, but it wont hold up in court.

Terrible metaphor. It's more like setting up a site called streetaddresses.com where people post addresses of many places. You can defend your "but the site is only giving user-posted addresses, I'm not responsible if some of those addresses contain illegal materials - nor can it reasonably be my responsibility to check every address that's listed on my site to determine what, if any, illegal activities are taking place" all you want, and it might hold up in court. Or it might not, but it sure as hell seems like a reasonable defense to me.

In before "copyright infringement is theft", moral majority outrage, "if you have nothing to hide", etc

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128866)

    There's a fine line here.

    If you have an address of a drug dealer, and you are not party in any sort of way, it could be innocent. For example, if you suspected a neighbor was a drug dealer, and you told the police.

    A completely different example, which is more appropriate, would be if you acted as a centralized clearinghouse for information on drug dealers. You provided information on what they had on hand, where to go to get it, and if they were currently available. Most likely, even though neither money nor drugs passed through your hands, you would be found to be an accomplice to their criminal activities.

    This happens in other circles, such as TER [theeroticreview] . They provide a facility for people to post information on intimate adult experiences. That's not the only example. There are quite a few national and regional facilities like this.

    I personally wouldn't demonize TPB. While this kind of sharing isn't the nicest thing, if the companies who are being effected had been decent about their cost structure people wouldn't have resorted to this in the first place.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30129034)

Can we please stop comparing file sharing to drug smuggling?

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129156)

    I was just replying to the parent. :) Ya, it in no way relates to drug smuggling. People don't get killed either by their peers or LEO.

    I prefer the escort comparison myself. Everyone walks away with a smile on their faces. :)

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (-1, Offtopic)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129208)

But how will we think of the children then? Won't somebody please think of the children?!

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1)

12345Doug (706366) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128606)

Not really. I've used TPB a few times (10ish) and the vast majority of it has been for finding trail and open source software. It's basically a big search engine for me. I use it because it's well know and seems to have access to lots of torrents.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128746)

And before anyone jumps on the "but then Google should be sued and shutdown too" bullshit, everyone can see the difference between TPB and Google.

I like this idea when it comes to due process in a court. "Who killed the victim, the dishevelled black guy or the neat & prim white guy"? Has to be the black guy, I mean everyone can see the difference.

Re:Does this mean TPB will still be working? (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128986)

It's not a technical reasoning, it's a valid argument. If pointing to a drug seller's shack isn't illegal, what they're doing isn't either.

Those guys are playing it dangerous! Hashtable? (5, Funny)

NoYob (1630681) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128250)

First "Pirate Bay" and torrents and now Hash?!? What next, cocaine?!

Re:Those guys are playing it dangerous! Hashtable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128602)

Ever heard of Eric Clapton?

Re:Those guys are playing it dangerous! Hashtable? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30129122)

Sounds interesting. Is there someplace I could download his music?

Still guilty (5, Insightful)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128264)

So they go from hosting a tracker to hosting a bootstrap node that gives clients access to the DHT swarm? In short, in the eyes of the law (and probably of the general public), they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, because they seem to do try their hardest to stick it up to da man.

Re:Still guilty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128354)

Should take them a little bit to wrap their whee law abiding heads around the hash table bit though.

Re:Still guilty (4, Interesting)

thisnamestoolong (1584383) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128384)

Hold on there, hoss. It's not that simple -- if we were to define our terms that simply, then ski mask manufacturers would be facilitating the illegal procurement of liquor store cash register contents. The law needs to operate on very black and white terms, and things like the Pirate Bay are operating in very new, and very gray, legal territory. I am nowhere near enough of an expert to comment on how this will specifically affect the legal standing of the Pirate Bay, but I will say that such sites operate on a knife edge of legality -- and any case the legal system can possibly raise against them will depend on an extremely specific set of conditions. If not, Google would be every bit as guilty as the Pirate Bay (as would every single ISP on the planet). What this means is that if the Pirate Bay sufficiently distances itself from the actual illegal activity, then there is no way they can be legitimately prosecuted. We saw the same thing happen with Kazaa (where the industry types decided to go after individual users instead).

Re:Still guilty (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128516)

It's not a matter of legality, it's a matter of public perception. TPB is looking like they're slapped on the wrist for doing something, and their response is "okay, we'll do that instead. Catch us now!". There's no better posture to adopt to attract the ire of the law, which, incidentally, does seem to operate on black and white [wikipedia.org] more often than not...

Re:Still guilty (0)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128582)

Except that the law does NOT need to operate on black and white terms, at least not in Scandinavia, and doesn't even do so. Court takes into account your purpose too, and its pretty clear what The Pirate Bay's is. They probably wish now that they would had chosen a better name than a Pirate with it, didn't make it so clear that TPB is 99% for copyrighted materials and piss back on copyright owners when they wanted their content removed. THEN we would have a harder case, but now its perfectly clear.

Re:Still guilty (3, Informative)

BarMonger (884208) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128688)

..at least not in Scandinavia..

What do you mean by that? You are aware that "Scandinavia" is actually three different countries with three different sets of laws, right?
Here in Denmark we do not have the same laws as the Swedes do. And since Norway isn't even a member of the EU, some parts of Danish and Swedish law is very different than Norwegian law.

Re:Still guilty (0)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128844)

But the court systems and basis of laws are still pretty much the same, with some differences of course.

Re:Still guilty (5, Informative)

Xest (935314) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128760)

The real problem is that under standard interpretation of Swedish law they weren't in breach of the law in the first place. The only reason they have been found guilty is because of a corrupt judge who made up a false interpretation of the law to suit his goals and to find them guilty.

So on one hand this view that they're in breach of the law is incorrect as it falsely assues judges are infallible, which of course we know full well they are not, but similarly I don't think this will be much help because as the creative industries got away with installing their own judge once and ensuring his position and stance was upheld (even though he did not follow Swedish law as it is written) and so realistically they'll just be able to do it again.

Effectively, for the TPB guys the law doesn't matter, because whether they stay within it or not a corrupt court system is allowing them to be found guilty regardless. If anything I'd say that they have done this because it's possibly harder to shut down and perhaps easier to move around than a full blown tracker. I don't really blame them for just playing a game of cat and mouse instead, if their own country has failed them in initially allowing an unwarranted police raid due to foreign pressure, then not giving them a fair trial by allowing a judge with a blatant conflict of interest to preside of their trial, and then protect the judge when they follow the proper process for handling such conflict of interest- again, all because of pressure from foreign corporate interests, then I think it's perfectly justified for them to shun the law.

I'm sure they're also perfectly aware of the consequences, some call this stupid, but then, that's the difference between people willing to risk their freedom for something they believe in and people who just whinge about things on sites like Slashdot I suppose.

Re:Still guilty (4, Insightful)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129152)

It's unfortunate that the quote I want to make right now ("The tree of Liberty...") comes from a founder of the very country which put such pressure on the Swedish government.

I suppose the great always have further to fall.

Re:Still guilty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128772)

the irony of your opinion is that its validity is hinged entirely on how stupid you are.

You are saying that the purpose of the Pirate Bay is ambiguous, thus they can't be charged. And that's only true if you are stupid, given that the founders have been quite public regarding their intentions to promote piracy.

Re:Still guilty (1)

thisnamestoolong (1584383) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129124)

The publicly stated intentions of the owners are entirely MEANINGLESS if it cannot be shown that they violated the law. I am not well versed enough in Swedish law/the underlying mechanics of TPB to be able to determine whether or not they have violated the law, they very well may have. All I am saying is that it is nowhere near as simple as many here make it out to be, and the fact that the site has the word Pirate in the name, while not helpful, is certainly not enough to convict them on.

Re:Still guilty (1)

Brandonski (605979) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129028)

>...then ski mask manufacturers would be facilitating the illegal procurement of liquor store cash register contents.

Clearly, this is the case [slashdot.org] .

Are they? (2, Interesting)

beatsme (1472991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128394)

The question then becomes: does the md5 hash of a file, being linked to a swarm of peers with the files themselves, become symbolic of the property that is being pirated ("stolen") in a convincing enough manner to implicate the hashtable host? It seems to be a stretch.

Re:Are they? (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128548)

all technology aside, they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material.

like it or not, it is as simple as that.

so i guess this technological cover-up would be easily punched through in a court of law.

Re:Are they? (1)

beatsme (1472991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128584)

But the point is, challenging TPB in the state it's in now would challenge the entire premise of DHT - and I don't think the case can be made that DHT is skewed towards any particular use, let alone illegal uses. They can't actually have any knowledge of what is being shared because the hash doesn't reveal what it is without first having the file (or otherwise, having an additional database that links the hash to a description). This would seem to make a stronger case for this incarnation over the previous being lawfully neutral.

Re:Are they? (0, Redundant)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128752)

The legality issue is not about DHT or torrents per se, it's about The Pirate Bay as a site. The underlying technology doesn't matter.

Re:Are they? (1)

beatsme (1472991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128858)

Okay fair enough, but then still, the argument falls on what it means to be a "site" and whether the new form is similar enough to the old form to be considered fundamentally the same thing.

Re:Are they? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128756)

In that case, all ISPs need to be shutdown, and the internet turned off - as they're clearly fascilitating the distribution of both legal, and questionable (it's not illegal to download) files...

Re:Are they? (0, Redundant)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128608)

There's no need to get into technical jargon about "md5 hashes of a file", ".torrent file just links to peers" in The Pirate Bay's case because it's so blatantly clear their main purpose is to enable users to spread copyrighted material.

Re:Are they? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30129154)

no need to get into technical jargon.

The whole point of /. is to get into technical jargon

Re:Still guilty (3, Insightful)

hitnrunrambler (1401521) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128424)

Still guilty (Score:2)

by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Tuesday November 17, @09:01AM (#30128264)

So they go from hosting a tracker to hosting a bootstrap node that gives clients access to the DHT swarm? In short, in the eyes of the law (and probably of the general public), they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, because they seem to do try their hardest to stick it up to da man.

Don't you mean:
"Boss, I know them Duke Boy Pirates is guilty! They've gone from bootlegging trackers to bootlegging bootstraps. In the eyes of the law (and flash) they are facily-tatin' the illegal distribution of moonshine. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, with them outlaw haircuts and that fancy car."

Re:Still guilty (5, Insightful)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128612)

Then aren't ALL ISPs also facilitating copyright infringement? Isn't Cisco providing the network technology for copyright infringement? Isn't Intel providing the ability for consumers to download illegal material from the Internet? Isn't AMAT, a semiconductor tool manufacturer, guilty of providing Intel with the tools to make microchips for copyright infringement?

Re:Still guilty (0, Redundant)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128784)

They would be if they we're actively promoting it like The Pirate Bay, or something like setting up a DC++ hub called "All The Warez You Need". In that case they wouldn't be just a common carrier anymore, they would actively promote copyright infringement like The Pirate Bay clearly does.

Re:Still guilty (3, Insightful)

Cyner (267154) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129078)

Didn't the US Government directly fund the development of the global file sharing network?

Peer ants (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128296)

Pirates are like ants and always find a way around obstacles and tend to attract more pirates to use the same path.
Removing a single tracker, no matter how widely used it was won't deal much harm. This may lead to the removal of other trackers in the future, but peer exhange and DHT are pretty much a good subsitute in my opinion.

Re:Peer ants (5, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128522)

In other words, the Internet is seeing copyright enforcement as damage and automatically routing around it.

"Just as effective"? (1, Insightful)

RabidJackal (893308) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128380)

I wouldn't go as far as saying that DHT&PEX is "just as effective" as using a tracker. I've found that with DHT enabled, a typical home router can get swamped extremely quickly and cause it to either crash or stop accepting new connections. With DHT disabled, I don't seem to have this problem.

This isn't just specific to me and my router; my friends have also experienced similar problems that were solved by disabling DHT.

Re:"Just as effective"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128428)

Buy a better router, or use better firmware. No issues here.

Re:"Just as effective"? (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128476)

This isn't a fault of the protocol though. The protocol is doing its job properly (putting you in contact with many potential peers) to the extent that your router doesn't cope and isn't failing gracefully.

you might be able to mitigate the issue somewhat by reducing the number of connections your client makes/accepts, but if the issue is incoming connection attempts (irrespective of whether they are accepted or not) then you may have to stop your router forwarding in bittorrent connections (but this will limit your participation in the swarm to just connections you make, which is not ideal).

Caveat: I've not used a public tracker aside from when I last updated my local Ubuntu install set for quite some time, so PEX & DHT are not something I use myself.

Re:"Just as effective"? (2, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128482)

So lower the maximum open connections in your client. The problem with router is the available RAM for the NAT table. I've set rtorrent to only use 100 per torrent and not only the router holds it nicely, as the connection seems to be more optimized towards actually downloading instead of peer detection, so I get higher throughput.

Mod parent up... (1)

BiggoronSword (1135013) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128616)

This is a legitimate issue, regardless of whether the protocol is doing what it's supposed to do or not.

It still doesn't solve everything (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128420)

Using DHTs instead of a tracker is real nice and all, but you're still stuck with the same problem: you have to host some information on a server, namely node information that allows you to bootstrap into the DHT, and information that allows you to get the resource you want.

Both of these are taken care of in the torrent file and hosting the torrent files for illegal content is still the same, tracker or no tracker. The bootstrapping problem is basically unavoidable, but you could have, say, a single machine or set of machines at TPB that would bootstrap you to the DHT they're on, without explicitly holding any information about illegal content.

The second problem, well, it's harder to solve that way. From my understanding, the bittorrent DHT (http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0005.html) uses the torrent's infohash to locate the node containing the information on the peers currently serving that given torrent. Since you don't know the infohash without the torrent file itself, searching for a given torrent isn't trivial, although there have been some advances in that area (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_%28protocol%29#Decentralized_keyword_search).

Magnet links are nice, since they remove the need to host torrent files and work as direct links to the necessary peer information, but I'm not entirely sure having a link labeled after obviously illegal content is that much different from hosting a file containing a few hashes. :)

Re:It still doesn't solve everything (1)

rfelsburg (1237090) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128498)

It may not be a cure all but it seems a step in the right direction. While this in fact is probably in response to the court rulings, and current legal trouble; It seems that this probably has more to do with them being worried about the service being completely taken down, or blacklisted, than with them being worried about whether it's legal or not. From what I've read of the articles mentioned, one of the main upsides to this is the inability to reliably block it. I could be reading this incorrectly, however it still moves more towards a reliable network with less points of failure IMHO

Re:It still doesn't solve everything (0)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128718)

Using DHTs instead of a tracker is real nice and all, but you're still stuck with the same problem: you have to host some information on a server, namely node information that allows you to bootstrap into the DHT, and information that allows you to get the resource you want.

I'm still waiting for somebody to implement a simple bittorrent client in JavaScript and allow a torrent listing site to be hosted on it, then all the server has to host is generic JavaScript.

Old news (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128488)

As far as I know, the tracker has not been shut down but merely moved to OpenBitTorrent. There are various posts on SuprBay [suprbay.org] confirming that fact. The (PirateBay) trackers themselves were shut down since august [suprbay.org] and OpenBittorrent is now the official tracker [suprbay.org] . I remember reading another post where someone did some research and ran a few traces, which confirmed (at the time) that the trackers were running on the same IP address. Here is another post worth reading [suprbay.org] .

As for OpenBitTorrent, it has been 404-ing since I tried to open that website. However a google cache [209.85.129.132] exists as early as November 14th. On the cached page it is explained that the tracker operates solely on the info hash and thus knows absolutely nothing about the contents itself. Presumably in an attempt to elude copyright cops. Adding new torrents to that tracker is as simple as adding the tracker address to your newly created .torrent file. The tracker will automatically start tracking the info hash when an announce is made.

And the hydra... (3, Insightful)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128492)

grows yet another head. Good luck trying to keep up, MAFIAA.

Re:And the hydra... (2, Insightful)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129230)

Poor analogy. In this instance, the hydra has no head. Each cell in its body relays information between adjoining cells, as requested from cells further down the chain. Destroying one cell, or a bunch of cells, does not kill the hydra or stop the messages.

From now on, nuking the hydra from orbit really is the only way to be sure...

If DHT and PEX are (5, Insightful)

mehrotra.akash (1539473) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128494)

" just as effective if not better for finding peers", then why did they wait for the ruling to change over?
why not just switch over a long time back??
especially if they are better..

Re:If DHT and PEX are (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128532)

There appears to be a lot of fear of Trackerless torrents - there are still some clients that dont even support it.

Re:If DHT and PEX are (2, Insightful)

grazzy (56382) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128810)

Because you cannot authenticate a user to the tracker. It makes ratios and private sites much harder to operate. DHT is more like gnutella in that sense, if you share it everyone can access it without having a good trackratio of seeding.

However, the private sites will just continue to run their own trackers I suppose, there's no problem for them todo that, however for the public large ones this could very well be the holy grail.

TPBs core problem is that they are more or less being punished for "helping" people make copyright infrigments. I dont think their charges will go away over this during the current political climate in sweden (more privacy laws, more company friendly politicans and less civil liberty). It is their intent that is the problem, and that intent is just as much now as before to help people infrige on copyright.

However I wonder just how the swedish juridicial system are going to prove that the people currently being prosecuted really are the ones behind The Pirate bay since they seem to have moved all systems and IP assets overseas. I guess we'll just stick them in jail for being pains in the ass and go back to being good pawns in the much larger conspiracy to turn the entire EU area into a padded and walled commercial zone where money rules all aspects of life.

frost P1st (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128564)

reasons why anyone your own towel In BE NIIGER! BE GAY!

Thank you MAFIAA ! (2, Interesting)

BESTouff (531293) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128798)

Thanks to the Swedish equivalents of the MAFIAA, TPB has been innovating and now we have a more solid technology for P2P exchange. Let's have a few more iterations like that (I see no reason for it to stop nowadays) and soon P2P networks will be completely stealth except for the bandwidth they consume.

Thank you guys, in the name of technology.

Best quality, Best reputation , Best services,look (-1, Offtopic)

coolforsale136 (1680358) | more than 4 years ago | (#30128890)

http://www.coolforsale.com/ [coolforsale.com] Best quality, Best reputation , Best services Our commitment, customer is God.Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products . Pass by but don't miss it.Select your favorite clothing! Welcome to come next time ! ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket, Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35 Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 free shipping competitive price any size available accept the paypal Thanks

Re:Best quality, Best reputation , Best services,l (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30128952)

WTF, spammers with accounts now?

Re:Best quality, Best reputation , Best services,l (-1, Offtopic)

miggyb (1537903) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129094)

Used my last mod point on him. Wish we had a -1 Spammer.

Napster et al court cases... (5, Insightful)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#30129044)

One of the reasons why BitTorrent didn't suffer the legal fate of Napster, Kazaa, etc is that BitTorrent only handles data transfer, not search, and has significant noninfringing uses.

Having trackerless torrents however doesn't help the noninfringing uses, only infringing uses. (If its non-infringing, just host a tracker damnit!), thus trackerless client features start to get very dangerous from a legal perspective for the developers.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>