New Auto-Seeding Torrent Server Released

ludwigvan968 writes "The University of Texas New Media Initiative in association with Google's Summer of Code program have been working on a project to make sharing files over the internet easier than ever before. Summer of Code intern Evan Wilson just released Project Snakebite, the first fully automatic BitTorrent server. Just as with a normal webserver, you drop files in a folder to share them. Snakebite takes care of generating torrent files and running a tracker and a seeder for each file. Additionally, it builds a user-customizable link page with all of your files. It will even register your Snakebite server with an easy to remember URL for people that can't remember their IP. Snakebite is free and open software and is currently released for Debian. It's fully portable to both Windows and OS X and the developers just need some help packaging it."

OK, but is it anonymous?

[mlwmohawk]

Sharing files is almost a capitcal crime in the U.S.A.

Re:

[James McGuigan]

When sharing is outlawed only outlaws will share

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[bcattwoo]

You can have my warez when you pry them from my cold, dead fingers.

Re:

[IAR80]

If you are suspected of filesharing you should be sent to Guantanamo.
----
http://world4.monstersgame.co.uk/?ac=vid&vid=47010 693 [monstersgame.co.uk]

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[elrous0]

Actually, Guantanamo is soooo passé these days in the intelligence world. It's the detention facility for TOURISTS. There are dozens of much better, more secretive facilities to send them to now where the New York Times and Supreme Court will never find them. Only poseur intelligence agencies still disappear their detainees to Guantanamo.

-Eric

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[legoburner]

BitTorrent as a basic client will never be truely anonymous by virtue of the technology involved. Only by using private VPNs (like The pirate party one [relakks.com] or by using additional software higher up the network stack like Tor [eff.org] can basic anonymity be enabled.

Re:

[legoburner]

higher up the network stack

Or lower down the network stack if you are not standing on your head

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[JesseMcDonald]

Only by using private VPNs . . . or by using additional software higher up the network stack like Tor can basic anonymity be enabled.

Or lower down the network stack if you are not standing on your head

Actually, since VPNs are in the Network layer (packet-level) and Tor falls somewhere between the Session and Presentation layers (stream-level), Tor is higher in the stack than VPNs:

• Application Layer (top) [HTTP, FTP, Telnet]
• Presentation Layer [SSL, TLS]
• Session Layer [TCP]
• Transport Layer [TCP, UDP]
• Network Layer [IP, ICMP, IPsec]
• Data Link Layer [Ethernet, 802.11, PPP]
• Physical Layer (bottom) [10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 802.11b/g, DSL]

Re:

[legoburner]

oops you are of course correct. Seems I was actually standing on my head when I wrote the grandparent post.

Re:

[Kjella]

BitTorrent as a basic client will never be truely anonymous by virtue of the technology involved.

It never was... instead it's a very simple, effective way to share files. Everything from suprnova to the pirate bay hasn't been about anonymity or secrecy - it's about being doing it in so great numbers the risk is neglible. The users hav been distributed, the link sites and tracker sites not so much. This makes it a lot easier to set up a tracker site, meaning less centralization so they'll have to take down m

Re:

[hacker]

Only by using private VPNs (like The pirate party one) or by using additional software higher up the network stack like Tor can basic anonymity be enabled.

If by "basic anonymity", you mean lack of trusted anonymity or NO anonymity, then we all agree [noreply.org]. It is a pretty simple (and common) matter to become a maliscious Tor node. Google it.

"So I'm totally anonymous if I use Tor?"
"No."

Re:

[Jugalator]

The Relakks service (which is not a service by the Pirate Party, just endorsed by them) is only "anonymous" until the police comes knocking on their door with a crime that would give a high enough penalty. 2+ year jailtime and they can do any form of traffic analysis on site as they want. The Relakks site also states this in their FAQ, btw. Any form of jailtime penalty and they can request personal information, and it's possible IP addresses are considered that. Perhaps they don't keep logs to spite them, b

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[Zigg]

Actually, enabling people to easily share their own torrents could help promote legitimate use of BT.

I've been personally involved in several situations where large, legal files needed to be distributed among a small group of people--unfortunately several didn't have the know-how to set up a tracker, and others simply didn't have the time to figure it out. A tool like this could enable every one of us to start it up on our own.

The one thing that I think it needs to also have is at least minimal security against discoverability--a password on the torrent listing page, for example. Would also be cool if you could control who was using the server, but I gather BT isn't too well-adapted to that requirement? Not sure.

Re:

[SpecTheIntro]

Sharing files is almost a capitcal crime in the U.S.A.

That's really the $1 million question. And it's pretty obviously not, as far as I can tell--a publicly accessible website is not the best way to hide your personal information. All the RIAA or MPAA needs is an IP address to file suit against you; this is like handing it to them on a silver platter. You'll be hard-pressed to claim you "didn't know you were uploading files" when you have a webpage that indexes the copyrighted material you chose to share.

Correction.

[SpecTheIntro]

Ok, because I'm a moron, the quoted text should read: "But is it anonymous?" and not "Sharing files..." My mistake.

Re:

[Fordiman]

Ah, what about sharing ISOs?

The assumption that anything on P2P is copyrighted is an issue. Deal with it.

Re:

[computational super]

It's not anonymous, and apparently it never will be. Although it seems like anonymous file sharing would be a straightforward problem to solve, the FreeNet [slashdot.org] project has been working on this for, what, five years now? They have yet to produce anything usable, or even anything approximating usable. Others [sourceforge.net] have [eff.org] tried [gnunet.org] as well, and none has produced anything that can actually be used for actual file sharing. I'd like to help, but at this point, I wouldn't even know where to begin...

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[truedfx]

Illegally doing anything is illegal. If it's not illegal, and you do it, you're not illegally doing it. Duh.

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[LordLucless]

Actually, obtaining files that are copyrighted isn't a crime anywhere (that I know of) even the US. It's reproducing (ie: uploading) that's illegal, not the downloading.

Re:

[QMO]

So...uploading makes copies of stuff, but downloading doesn't.

"Truly you have a dizzying intellect." -Dread Pirate Roberts

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[LordLucless]

The person who owns the original media is the one whose generating the copy. The downloader is receiving it. An analagous situation: a guy is selling ripped-off copies of DVDs from a market store. Someone buys a copy. It's the seller (the distributor, the one who reproduced it) that gets busted, not the buyer.

Re:

[MerrickStar]

Hve you never heard of possesion of stolen property? I realize there are differences making the analogy difficult, but there are parrallels as well. Just because the law says the uploading is the crime, don't count yourself invincible because you only download.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Its not stolen, its copyright in... why do i even bother.

Re:

[Fordiman]

There's no paralell law, so it doesn't apply. Stop trolling, Mr. RIAA flunky.

Re:

[LordLucless]

But, as is the constant cry on this site, copyright infringement is not theft. I don't know how well they could stretch stolen goods to cover goods that infringe copyright.

Re:

[Amouth]

if some one walking down the street and hands you a cd that was copied.. can the cops walk by and get you for it????

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Who are you? Me?

Re:

[Amouth]

what.. every one needs a little competition every once in a while :)

don't worry I don't come up with them that often...

Re:

[Fordiman]

No.

It's the 'making available copies to others'

It's really just a way of figuring out who gets the finger pointed at them: he who provides the shares, or she who gets the shares.

Re:

[gatzke]

So the MPAA/RIAA are only going after file sharing people? Not leeches. I thought they were hitting up everyone, but maybe they were just getting distributors.

So you would be totally safe if you only download stuff and never upload?

Except for child porn, which is not ok to download.

I think you have to assume they could know everything you do online.

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[LordLucless]

So the MPAA/RIAA are only going after file sharing people? Not leeches.

Yep

So you would be totally safe if you only download stuff and never upload?
I think you have to assume they could know everything you do online.

It's easy to find the distributors - their IP has to be advertised in order for them to distribute stuff. It's harder to find just the leechers. Of course, in a swarming application like BitTorrent, everyone is an uploader as well as a downloader, so it's easy to get peer IPs once you connect to the swarm.

However, I believe it's currently only illegal to upload - after all, you can hardly be charged distributing X-Men 3 if you never actually had a copy of X-Men 3. Copyright is a prohibition against distributing, not copying - it was originally setup for the protection of publishing houses, so that if they bought the rights to a novel, a rival publishing house couldn't just run off it's own copies without the expense of buying the rights. In those days, publishing was a large and expensive business, and it wasn't really conceivable that the laws be used against individuals; individuals had no way practical ways to publish. In the mdoern era, however, individual publishing has become dead easy.

Copyright does include copying

[Kaseijin]

Copyright is a prohibition against distributing, not copying

In the US, copyright is a limited monopoly over reproduction, distribution, public performance, public display, and the preparation of derivative works (17 USC 106). Reproduction is controlled for the same reason you claim it isn't: when it was inefficient and expensive, personal copying was virtually unthinkable.

Re:

[gatzke]

But with bittorrent, you are distributing as you download (unless you use a hacked client) so you are illegal.

Other P2P applications would depend what you share with the world.

Just because publishing others copyright material is now dead easy does not make it legal or right.

What about allofmymp3? They are not in the US, so our copyright does not bind them. Assuming they are legal in their homeland, are you safe I wonder?

allofmp3 and 17 USC 602

[tepples]

What about allofmymp3? They are not in the US, so our copyright does not bind them. Assuming they are legal in their homeland, are you safe I wonder?

Assuming you meant "allofmp3.com" (no "my"), the most common allegations of the site's illegality depend on so-called parallel import laws (17 USC 602 [bitlaw.com] and foreign counterparts) and on an interpretation of saving the file on the user's hard drive as "reproduction".

Re:

[LordLucless]

We sort of talked about that here [slashdot.org].

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[denebian devil]

Yeah, it breaks down like this: okay, it's legal to buy it, it's legal to own it and, if you're the proprietor of a music or video store, it's legal to sell it. It's illegal to seed it, but, but - but that doesn't matter 'cause -- get a load of this, alright -- if you get stopped by a lawsuit, you can just claim it was someone else using your IP address.

Re:

[Fordiman]

Spoofing is difficult or impossible for any actual data transfer.

Meanwhile, have you ever seen the RIAA's method of litigation? The evidence is paltry. It's the potential legal fees that cause people to settle.

Re:

[Asphalt]

Spoofing is difficult or impossible for any actual data transfer.

Someone used my wireless router. What's "WEP"?

Seriously, I can hit 5 unsecured access points right from where I sit.

People who don't know how/don't bother to secure their wireless routers number probably somewhere in the hundreds of thousands.

IP spoofing is no longer necessary to use someone's IP address. All it takes is a $29 wireless card.

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[Fordiman]

http://phoenixlabs.org/pg2/

You didn't get it from me.

*whistles and walks away*

Re:

[advocate_one]

downloading doesn't reproduce??? scuse me... but it seems like there's now more than one copy, the one on the server, and the one you've "downloaded" onto your computer...

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[LordLucless]

Oh, and where did the new copy came from? It was copied from the original. Where is the original? In the uploader's possession. Who duplicated the item? The uploader. Who sent the duplicate? The uploader. Who received the duplicate? The downloader. Which is illegal, duplicating and distributing a copyrighted work, or receiving it? Duplicating and distributing.

Re:

[denebian devil]

Are you trying to argue that in receiving the information, you (via your computer) not complicit in the copying? Your computer is shouldering absolutely no part of the grunt work?

Not to mention the fact that when dealing with downloading music, I think it's harder for people to claim that they "didn't know" the music was ill-gotten. In the case of a burned DVD/CD being sold by a vendor, it can be more or less obvious that the DVD/CD is burned depending on how good their reproduction of the disc, label, pack

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[LordLucless]

No, I'm arguing that the person culpable (not necessarily the same as responsible) is the person who is offering the item for download. When you download something, your computer sends a request for data. The remote computer is the one that locates that data, and sends a duplicate down the wire to you. At the moment, asking someone for a illegal copy isn't illegal. Giving someone a copy is. That isn't to say it'll be that way forever; I expect the laws will be changed as soon as someone can be bothered prosecuting a downloader. For the most part, it's more efficient to sue and take down the uploaders - take the uploaders out of the picture and file-sharing dies. They're far fewer than the downloaders, it's easier to track them, and easier to prosecute them.

Re:OK, but is it anonymous?

[Kjella]

Actually, obtaining files that are copyrighted isn't a crime anywhere (that I know of) even the US. It's reproducing (ie: uploading) that's illegal, not the downloading.

Better read up again, the Napster case is a good example. Uploading violates the "distribution" right - like sending your own pirate radio broadcast (ignoring FCC and other issues). Downloading, i.e. taking that transient stream and making a permanent copy is a violation of the "reproduction" right. It is not fair use like your VCR because it's a copy of an illegal stream, and the taint follows the copy. You could argue you had good faith reason to believe that it was a legal stream you were copying, but I doubt it'll fly and in any case "good faith" copyright infringement also makes you liable.

Re:

[danpsmith]

Actually, obtaining files that are copyrighted isn't a crime anywhere (that I know of) even the US. It's reproducing (ie: uploading) that's illegal, not the downloading.

That's all fine and dandy, but the definition of "downloading" is blurred using Bittorrent. You are both downloading and uploading the file at the same time, in this respect it could be seen legally as both receiving and reproduction at the same time if you stretched the definition far enough, and therefore illegal.

Re:

[LordLucless]

Yep, I mention that here [slashdot.org]. There are currently swarming applications in production which guarantee that each person has only an incoherent part of the complete file. For example, you might have every 10th byte of a file. When somebody requests a copy, various arbitrary parts are copied from a list of seeds which combine into the actual file on the downloaders computer. The idea is that every 10th byte of a media file is fairly indistinguishable from noise, and is not copyrightable. Likewise, a list of seeds

Re:

[Eivind]

You're sorta wrong, sorta rigth.

Having every 10th byte of a file would be just as copyrigthable as having the first 10% of the file. Atleast there's no logical reason to treat the two differently, especially not when the *purpose* in both cases is to collect pieces until you've got a complete file.

The swarm-technology you talk of *may* still be able to reduce legal liability (though it's hard to say without court-cases), but that's because they work differently;

They split a file in such a way that it

Re:

[LordLucless]

Having every 10th byte of a file would be just as copyrigthable as having the first 10% of the file. Atleast there's no logical reason to treat the two differently, especially not when the *purpose* in both cases is to collect pieces until you've got a complete file.

The difference is you can play the first 10% of a file (under most encoding schemes) and get a complete segment of a copyrighted work. With every 10th byte, there is not way you could play that get anything resembling any part of a copyrighte

Re:

[LordLucless]

I assume you'd have a complete file somewhere else on your computer. The thing is that you only have an incoherent part of the file on offer for download.

Re:

[cortana]

The downloaded illegally copies the data from his network hardware to his computer's RAM and hard disk.

Re:

[Mister Whirly]

Sweet, now all we need is for someone to design a system where everyone downloads but nobody uploads!

Re:

[ehrichweiss]

No, it's the downloading that's illegal too. I've had to deal with DMCA Takedown notices(from the side of the ISP receiving them as complaints) from people downloading. Don't fool yourself into thinking you're safe because you're not sharing.

Re:

[LordLucless]

Technically, it's copyright infringement. Argue about the morality of the two being equivelant all you like, but anyone whose been prosecuted under the law for these things has been prosecuted under the offense of copyright infringement, not theft.

Re:

[mlwmohawk]

Illegally obtaining files that are copyrighted is a crime NOT just in the USA. It's a crime everywhere.Everyone knows that. Do you?

I know the law quite well, and I have had to advise many engineers on the subject. My comment was not about performing an illegal act with intent, I am speaking about mere accusation and the damage that causes in this country. RIAA identifies you as a "file sharer," via bit torrent.

Make no mistake, jail is the least of your worries. Just being accused by RIAA or MPIAA is en

Re:

[Columcille]

Somehow I don't feel at all threatened by the MPAA, the RIAA and the like. I have nothing whatsoever to worry about from them. And I don't need bittorrent software in order to remain anonymous. And yes, things like this can potentially be used for honest purposes - but let's be honest, torrent and the like is primarily used for the illegal distribution of music, movies, and software.

Re:

[tepples]

new, unspoiled land

Unfortunately, you missed the boat by about a century.

Re:

[Fred Porry]

Yeah, so theres no problem, because who would want copyright-protected files? My Grandfather singing and dancing, thats the stuff they want! Paris Hilton's new song or even pornography that is copyright-protected by law? Come on, seriously! ...

So how do I avoid "special circumstances"

[tepples]

There is nothing wrong or illegal with sharing some files. (Unless there are special circumstances that makes it illegal, such as copyrights or some kind of legal agreement.)

So if I write and record a song, and I want to distribute it over BitTorrent to promote my album, how should I verify that the song I wrote doesn't violate the copyright in something I heard 10 years ago on the radio?

Re:

[tepples]

[You avoid subconscious infringement of copyright] Exactly the same way as any other kind of distribution.

And what way might that be?

Automatic + Open = Garbage in?

[thehunger]

With an unattended, fully automatic, open torrent server, how are you going to stop it from being filled with trash (ie. pr0n, infected files, illegal material) etc?

Re:

[Jussi K. Kojootti]

Why would remote uploading be enabled by default or even possible?

Re:Automatic + Open = Garbage in?

[szembek]

Who said other users are going to be able to upload files to share? I think allowing all users to add files would be something that you would have to specifically set up in your own configuration if you wanted it. This is just an easier way for a user to share files on their own website using a torrent.

Re:Automatic + Open = Garbage in?

[SpacePirate20X6]

Exactly right. As opposed to maintaining a tracker on a server, and then separately seeding the files, this solves the problem for you, assuming you have sufficient bandwidth and disk space. This essentially combines the best of direct downloading and distributed downloading; ensuring content is always available, while minimizing the bandwidth used to distribute the content.

Re:

[inKubus]

apached module anyone? I could just see it now:

<?php
 
torrent_link("/files/file1.mpg", "This is File 1.");
 
?>

You just stick the files you want in some dir, maybe have a little admin script to upload new files and manage your seeding, mysql table that has a list of the torrent info, torrent_link generates the .torrent file and an a href and you're good to go.

Re:

[legoburner]

A moderation system? Using the 'file' magic to determine and block file types? Virus detection software? Dedicated team of administrators?
I dont think there is a silver bullet answer, but a combination of the above would be fairly effective.

Source

[baadger]

For those wondering where the source code is (the website isnt really your typical open source project breed), this app is written in Python. Something quite interesting the article failed to mention.

Re:

[painQuin]

It seems that Python is the language of BitTorrent...

Re:

[nkh]

But they fail to mention where to download those files/app/source code for those who don't use Debian and here is the url: http://sourceforge.net/projects/tristero/ [sourceforge.net]

Re:

[XMyth]

The app IS the source code......or did I just blow your fucking mind?

(Sorry, just got done reading my America the book calendar)

Re:

[XMyth]

Did I say or imply "duh"? The "blow your fucking mind" part was a joke. If you thought I actually meant that as an insult then I can't believe you bothered replying to such a moron (me).

Re:Source

[TeknoHog]

Python is interpreted, not compiled. When you distribute a python app, you are distributing its source.

Actually, it's possible to compile Python into Java-style bytecode or native binary. See Psyco [sourceforge.net] for example.

While it's true that Python is mostly used as an interpreted language, it's not a part of the language definition. Conversely, there are interpreters for languages like C++, I've used one as a part of the ROOT [root.cern.ch] system. ROOT users often compile into native binaries when their code is getting into production level. The same goes for Matlab, for example.

On the other hand, I believe that distributing software as source is much better than the binary, even if you don't have a GPL-like permission to modify/distribute it further. I believe one reason why the www got mainstream is that pages were distributed as source, so people could learn HTML from each other.

Re:

[GooberToo]

Not true. There are many ways to distribute a python application without providing the source code. Simply providing the .pyc or .pyo file does it. Granted, that is still the byte code, but that's not source. On top of that, there are many installers which can turn a python application into a single binary application; where, the python runtime, standard library and code (possibly byte code), are all bundled.

Long story short, distributing a python application does not always translate into providing so

I guess

[szembek]

I guess this might be good for people who want to distribute legal products through a torrent. I've used bit torrent, but only for leeching. It just doesn't seem like enough people are setting up their own torrent servers to make this software that worth while.

Re:

[griffjon]

That's kinda a chicken-and-egg argument; people aren't setting up BT servers on their own, therefore we don't need software to make it easy? If something's overly complicated, people will do it less. This lowers the barriers to setting up your own tracker. Now, hosting your own tracker on your website or personal system is not something you want to do in the current situation with RIAA and MPAA - if you're sharing music/movies/etc. - but if you're sharing things, like, say, your remastered Knoppix projec

Great automatic folder sharing

[LiquidCoooled]

How long until people start seeding "Inbox.dbx" or "Outlook.pst" and other fun files we all remember from p2p days?

Look out Google

[Goodgerster]

Next case: RIAA versus Google; Google is accused of funding piracy
Next case: Google versus the United Kingdom; Google is accused of funding the manufacture of items useful to terrorism (as the Federation Against Copyright Theft tells us, piracy funds terrorism)
Next case: RIAA versus Canonical; Canonical is accused of supplying Azureus, a piracy tool, to people
Next case: RIAA versus GNOME Foundation; the GNOME Foundation is accused of supplying a GUI library to piracy tools

WHEN DOES IT END?

Re:

[hcob$]

Next case: RIAA versus Google; Google is accused of funding piracy
Next case: Google versus the United Kingdom; Google is accused of funding the manufacture of items useful to terrorism (as the Federation Against Copyright Theft tells us, piracy funds terrorism)
Next case: RIAA versus Canonical; Canonical is accused of supplying Azureus, a piracy tool, to people
Next case: RIAA versus GNOME Foundation; the GNOME Foundation is accused of supplying a GUI library to piracy tools

WHEN DOES IT END?

Right abo

Re:

[Columcille]

It probably ends when we stop inventing lawsuits that haven't happened/won't happen.

Anti-Slashdot Effect for large content?

[BrynM]

Despite the posts trying to paint this into the next Napster/Limewire/P2P, I think it would be great for distributing large files that might get slashdotted/dug/whatever. I think it's a good way to have a sudden rush of trafic pay for it's own bandwidth. Sure, not everyone is at risk of a slashdotting, but it makes a good precaution. Since it's just some Python, I bet there wouldn't be too much trouble getting it up in a hury as the server starts to get hit (if you're lucky enough to notice). A bonus of planning ahead is that there's always at least one seed (the server) transferring at about the same rate a normal download would have for a single user in the first place. Scalable content rather than scalable servers. Interesting...

Re:

[ichigo 2.0]

This would however require some changes to browsers and the HTTP protocol. Because first having to download a site with bittorrent to your computer and then opening it with a browser sounds like a good way to get rid of 99% of your visitors.

Re:

[ichigo 2.0]

Plugins are modifications to the browser. :)

Re:

[inKubus]

Yeah, I see what you're getting at. Objectify content (like is already is, as a .html file or whatever) but instead of using HTTP to transfer it, you use the torrent protocol (or whatever's faster). The problem is that .torrent takes a few minutes to get a list of everyone, then you have to wait for slots to open up. Once it gets going it rocks though (hence the "torrent"). Maybe the protocol could reoptomize itself on the fly, just like the old ZModem days, where it chooses a block (frame, whatever) si

Re:The greater the demand, the faster the download

[Fordiman]

It's the whole idea bittorrent is centered around.

Of course, that, and relative anonymitiy have caused its use for piracy, but really, it's just a means of distributing large and/or popular files efficiently.

More and more like Gnutella

[ajs]

The more Bittorrent adds features, the more it becomes like gnutella. Fortunately, I have been able to just use Gnutella for the last couple of years ;-)

Bittorrent is great for very large, very popular files, but when you start dealing with small or unpopular files, I've never found an example where BT got me what I needed faster. Searching Gnutella takes longer than searching for a torrent on the Web, of course, but in the end, download times on very large files that aren't well seeded is radically different, mostly because of the larger chunk size and contingous second-block fetch in Gnutella.

Great idea for legal torrents!

[MMC Monster]

I will definitely use this myself. I have some large video files that I want to occasionally want to backup from one computer to another. Home movies and stuff like that. Between the problems in filesystems (what filesystem has full read/write support on Linux, Win2K, and OS X?) and size, this is the best way for me to transfer files.

Though a nice tutorial on setting up a vpn among computers with dynamic IP addresses (I don't have a static IP) would be appreciated.

Re:

[gozar]

Though a nice tutorial on setting up a vpn among computers with dynamic IP addresses (I don't have a static IP) would be appreciated.

Check out Hamachi [hamachi.cc]. Once you setup a network in hamachi, every machine gets a nice static ip address.

Re:

[WebHikerOriginal]

Maybe you don't understand the Bittorrent principal - it's quite inefficient to use as a 1-1 transfer, and only pays off as the number of clients increase. There are much better solutions for backing up large files between 2 machines.

Re:

[inKubus]

Though a nice tutorial on setting up a vpn among computers with dynamic IP addresses (I don't have a static IP) would be appreciated.

Try Hamachi [hamachi.cc]. It works flawlessly and your IP on the VPN is determined by your login, not your actual IP. So as long as you're running it, you'll have the same IP on the VPN, regardless of the current state of your real connection. You install it, run it, choose a network name and password and that's about it. They have a central server that handles keeping a list of everyo

Great for Home Videos?

[friedmud]

I've been thinking about setting up my own tracker to allow my family to download home videos from me...

I know that sites like YouTube are popular right now... but I really don't like the quality restrictions... and would rather family members could just download a nice sized full copy themselves so they could burn it to DVD if they like or whatever.

Bittorrent would be ideal for doing this... and this software sounds like just the ticket. All I would have to do is point my family at the page it generates... and when I finish editing a home movie drop it in the "upload" folder and wham... it goes out to everyone.

All it needs now is an "auto client" that you just give it the URL of the automatically created website and it will automatically download anything new that arrives (that's a lot of "auto" going on ;-) That way I could go around to all of my families computers and set them up with the software and then just leave it alone. Every once in a while they can look in the "Home Videos" folder for new videos....

I think it's funny that people around here always cry "Bittorrent doesn't have to be for illegal purposes" and then any time a bittorrent story comes up all they can do is argue the finer points of what would/wouldn't be illegal/enforceable if you use the new tech... sigh.

Friedmud

Debian package doesn't work with Sarge/Stable

[intnsred]

While it's great that the authors created an apt-get repository for easy Debian installs, be warned that the packages don't work with Debian Sarge/Stable. (The packages conflict with Debian Sarge/Stable's Python packages.)

The .deb doesn't work on Debian

[hacker]

Oops! Another case of not testing your software before you release it.

# dpkg -i snakebite-rc3.deb
Selecting previously deselected package snakebite.
(Reading database ... 100410 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking snakebite (from snakebite-rc3.deb) ...
Setting up snakebite (1.1) ...
Adding system startup for /etc/init.d/snakebite ...
/etc/rc0.d/K20snakebite -> ../init.d/snakebite
...
aphrodite:/tmp# /etc/init.d/snakebite start
Starting Snakebite...Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/snakebite", line 16, in ?
from BitTorrent.defaultargs import get_defaults
ImportError: No module named defaultargs
.

Ah, this will return the internet to its glory...

[diamondsw]

The days of free-flowing porn, put up by bunches of amateurs with no web design experience, and not a pay site in sight!

Nice

[Daath]

How about that [slashdot.org] :)

Second?

[AnotherBlackHat]

The first fully automatic BitTorrent server.

I thought he.net had the first fully automatic [he.net] BitTorrent server [slashdot.org]
.

Re:

[baadger]

Actually i've noticed alot of OEM Compaq's here in the UK have Python runtimes preinstalled on arrival...I suspect some of their help and support software is written in it but I never bothered to invenstigate

Re:Google and Piracy

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Piracy is a tough enemy for companies who make money off there software,

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! Incorrect. Piracy is irrelevant for the majority of companies that make money from software. (Most software written is single use, business logic type custom apps).

and seeing how Google does not fall into this category,

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt! Incorrect again. Google makes a hell of a lot of money off their software - just not by selling it.

Re:

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

Your trolling isn't helping too much.

Let me spell it out for you. A post suggesting Google sponsored this project to indirectly make money from piracy is a troll. A reply rudely slapping that post down is not.

Re:

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

So any suggestion that goes against Google is a troll now?

Let me spell it out for you. A post suggesting any large company with bo history of encouraging piracy sponsored a project to indirectly make money from piracy is a troll.

Re:

[Atzanteol]

Yes, I know, BT is has legal uses, but they're sure not taking any steps to make the illegal sharing of information harder.

Neither is wu-ftp, or Apache, or IIS, or any other application that allows one to download stuff from the inernet.

Re:

[LordSnooty]

Er, this project is slightly different to Az's ability to auto-check a dir every few minutes... this sets up a whole tracker. Which is something that Az can do, but not many people will run that on a web server.