Comments on: RIAA victim Jammie Thomas gets expert defence

By: A_F

A_F — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 18:46:40 +0000

Well, he has written a paper how to attack the KADemlia DHT network more effectively.

So depending on what “side” you are, you can argue that he is with Evil4 or he is with pirates.
I guess if RIAA-RICH would be still in charge he would try to smear this korean guy’s reputation by accusing him that he provides a “road map for would-be infringers” in showing how to increase the cost for anti p2p measures on the emule net.

__
Abstract:

The Kad network, an implementation of the Kademlia DHT protocol, supports the popular eDonkey peer-to-peer file sharing network and has over 1 million concurrent nodes. We describe several attacks that exploit critical design weaknesses in Kad to allow an attacker with modest resources to cause a significant fraction of all searches to fail. We measure the cost and effectiveness of these attacks against a set of 16,000 nodes connected to the operational Kad network. We also measure the cost of previously proposed, generic DHT attacks against the Kad network and find that our attacks are much more cost effective. Finally, we introduce and evaluate simple mechanisms to significantly increase the cost of these attacks.

http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~kyd/node/150

By: Dreddsnik

Dreddsnik — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 18:07:04 +0000

” am surprised that experts are not volunteering. Seriously, do you really need a PhD to be an âexpertâ? ”

As am I.
If I could pass the Daubert standards I would volunteer in a heartbeat.
In a way it makes our side look just as mercenary as the RIAA goons, which is
pretty sad.

” Sure Ã’ll help you, if you got the cash ”

Yup, even our ’side’wants cash to do the right thing.
I don’t know what to think of that.
Well, I do, but it’s too sad to contemplate.

By: surfer

surfer — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:49:20 +0000

hahahah, ‘only we are allowed to distort reality to our needs’ – RIAA Lawyer

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:54:37 +0000

I think you now get a clearer picture why the RIAA didn’t want this on the internet. The objection stated that it could be changed to say anything was nothing but a bald attempt to snow the judge. Even their own material for a good part of it, that they will depend on to show their side is subject to the same flexible changing. Of course that’s something they would rather not have out in the open, just like the expert witness that we all will expect to give a truthful but a far different light on the idea of how and what the net and computers are capable of.

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:11:45 +0000

More to the point, why arenât the politicians elected by the same people upon whom the labels depend for their survival, âcoming to the rescue of those being bullied by the RIAA/MPAA lawyersâ?

âDonât they care about corporation abusing citizens?â

You know the answer to that. But things are changing. Scumbags canât hide under their rocks, any more.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:36:44 +0000

I am surprised that experts are not volunteering. Seriously, do you really need a PhD to be an ‘expert’? All you need is to prove you know the protocols inside and out and are well versed and experienced with networks and security.

I still wonder why so many professors or researchers or other extensively knowledgeable people are not coming to the rescue of those being bullied by the RIAA/MPAA lawyers. Don’t they care about corporation abusing citizens?

By: surfer

surfer — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:02:31 +0000

‘…junk science, technobabble, snow job….’

it is exactly that.

I hope she motions for internet televised as well. AND a precedent gets set that will crush the extortion campaign.