Comments on: ‘How to bypass MiniNova filters’

By: catflap

catflap — Wed, 13 May 2009 02:12:23 +0000

eztv has a simpler solution.

this is the message that eztv includes when they post on mininova.
they post a torrent for a text file which has the url for the direct torrent link:

“Due to mininovas current filtering system we are not uploading the direct torrent file of our releases.
Instead we will provide a text file which has a url of where you can download the correct torrent from.

Sorry for this inconvenience.

- EZTV Staff

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 10 May 2009 22:59:19 +0000

Quote – The only problem I see with this is that in order to seed the file it must be left intact. The rar and image file must be left in the folder the same as when it was obtained. You can extract the contents to another area, but you still have to keep the original archive folder as well. So, with large files, space could become an issue -

how is that different from a any rared file. most stuff is rared anyway, much better for ftp tansfers. how do you think all that stuff makes its way from the scene groups.

By: scpatl4now

scpatl4now — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:26:30 +0000

The only problem I see with this is that in order to seed the file it must be left intact. The rar and image file must be left in the folder the same as when it was obtained. You can extract the contents to another area, but you still have to keep the original archive folder as well. So, with large files, space could become an issue

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 10 May 2009 11:35:59 +0000

“The issue with this is that it will make it even easier to pass viruses and trojans via bittorrent something that will drive the average user away.”

How so? A Rar file is just an archive. Unless it’s created as a self-extracting archive (which no torrent should be) there’s no code to execute, it has to be unpacked using an archive program like WinRar. Putting files into an archive doesn’t automatically make it any easier to fool users into running an EXE file than distributing the EXE alone.

By: Jakykong

Jakykong — Sun, 10 May 2009 02:18:17 +0000

There is also the problem of seeding. See, if 10 people get the same file from 10 different channels, they can’t just all make an identical rar out of it and start seeding the torrent. E.g., every copy of every file becomes unique. This takes torrents and makes them very similar to FTP — even downloading the same file doesn’t guarantee that you’ll get the benefits of using bittorrent.

There is another potential issue: what if they start disallowing archives or encrypted files as attempts to circumvent copyright protections? It’s a reasonable possibility given the media companies’ usual tactics. Forcing clear-text would make this technique useless.

Finally, there is the issue of laziness. Users want both security and simplicity. But simplicity wins out. When users are shown what a secure filesharing application actually looks like, they dump it in an instant and go back to bittorrent. So what we really need to do is change the laws. The technology isn’t going to get much better unless users are willing to change habits.

OneSwarm and Freenet are good examples of relatively and highly (respectively) secure filesharing apps. OneSwarm isn’t privacy protecting unless you know some other people that use it and connect to them. Freenet is more secure and anonymous, but you not only need to have someone to connect to, but you also need to have disk space available (even if you don’t share/download much), processor time and memory, and be willing to put up with slowness.

Basically, the more secure it is, the less convenient.

By: bl

bl — Sat, 09 May 2009 23:17:05 +0000

The issue with this is that it will make it even easier to pass viruses and trojans via bittorrent something that will drive the average user away.