Comments on: MPAA hacked Torrentspy

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 15:54:09 +0000

“(Thanks, Daniel)”

No problem Jon.

When I read this story on C|Net, I wasn’t really suprized by their tactics. And since a somewhat mainstream media outlet carried it, I thought that you would enjoy this one. With the cryptographic break of the SHA1-160 hash algorithm (which is what bittorrent uses to validate the individual peices of a download to make sure that they are not corrupted), BitTorrent and it’s clones are no longer secure from deliberatly corrupted files. I beleive (that is, in my opinion) that the MPAA is paying various firms to do just that.

With this in mind, maybe a migration to SHA2-512 is in order. I also beleive that the same thing is happening with the RIAA flooding the p2p networks with false music files…which probably contain viruses/worms/trojans that will attempt to take over someone’s computer which is a clear violation of computer security laws. Look what happened with the Sony/BMG CD-DRM scandel.

I read somewhere (I think it was the current issue of MIT’s Technology Review that did a full spread on the Sony/BMG rootkit issue) that there is a fine line with DRM as to what customers (not consumers) will and will not accept. Sony crossed that line. They may not have had a clue before the scandel broke with statements like “Most people, I think, don’t even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?”, but they certianly do now, right along with the rest of the recording industry.

I found the MIT Technology Review article on their website. This is the exact same one that I read in their printed issue:

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16812&ch=biztech

You may have to copy/paste the link in your bowser to read it.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 14:11:31 +0000

please don’t feed the trolls and shills.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 05:00:48 +0000

They have. More here:

http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=1200

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 04:56:47 +0000

That’s what the papers say. You don’t say “the papers alledgedly say” because they DO say that.

You’re fishing for holes.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 03:28:03 +0000

How do we know they haven’t?? They must have some pretty good proof to be so specific in their accusations.

Rick

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 02:33:43 +0000

http://p2pnet.net/story/8867

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 02:32:32 +0000

No the sorry assed troll doesn’t know how to read.

It should LEARN and then READ this: http://p2pnet.net/story/8867

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 02:28:46 +0000

Hey IDIOT!!!, you didn’t see WHERE Jon GOT the information FROM in the FIRST place????? Don’t you know that the blue print is a LINK???? CNET is but ONE contained in Jon’s post. If Jon is sued for this post then CNET should be sued ALSO!!!!

YOU make NO SENSE IDIOT TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 02:25:23 +0000

Why HASN’T Torrentspy filed a suit against the MPAA with the DoJ???

yep, verrrrrrrrrry gooooooooood question, indeed!!!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 May 2006 02:13:12 +0000

The MPAA and RIAA both use a moral justification for acivity that requires a legal justification. Firstly they are peak industry bodies not law enforcement agencies, so when they go into or onto someone else’s on-line service without warrant or court order with no op out option and no permision tey raise the likelihood that they are in breach of the U.S computer abuse legislation. Why Torrentspy has not lodged a complaint with the DOJ is beyond all of us

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 25 May 2006 23:06:24 +0000

I am not suprise by this. MPAA is run by a bunch of scumb bags and other disgusting parasites and they were caught doing just that on a server in Sweden. They even sent a guy to plant evidences into a torent server!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 25 May 2006 22:18:12 +0000

-= Disclaimer:This is just my opinion. =-
– As such I’m NOT suggesting any comment following -
– this preface is true. In fact I live in a fairy-tale -
– and nothing I say should be taken seriously. -

“Mr. Newton about to get sued again for Libel…. Seems like he just doesn’t get it. ”

Why are you STILL lying ?

He is being sued as a publisher for an anonymous comment.
This is from and article that originated at CNet News.
And Yes, it says “An Accusation”.

Do you read ?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 25 May 2006 22:03:38 +0000

Look at the main page. It says:

MPAA hacked Torrentspy
- Accusation

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 25 May 2006 21:40:33 +0000

Mr. Newton about to get sued again for Libel…. Seems like he just doesn\’t get it. You can\’t take accusations and turn them into fact and call yourself a journalist! At least it shoudl say \”accused\”

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 25 May 2006 21:09:58 +0000

considering your current legal problems, i would have thought that your headline might need an ‘allegedly’ adding in there somewhere…….