|
|
Posted by Technomage Hawke on 09/20/05 11:09
anthonyberet wrote:
>
> This is something I have been thinking about.
> Supposing on a browse of a user, you didn't get just their collection
> but those of everyone on that primary? (this is similar to the
> 'ghost-files' bug).
seen that many a time. its one of the reasons I just don't use WinMX. as for
KazaA, I wouldn't trust the sharman networks to do anything right without
backdooring my machines (hence, they aren't trusted either)..
> Then the **IA couldn't get a definitive list of a user's shares without
> downloading them.
you'd be surprised at what can be done. getting a definitive list is one
thing, getting the actual files, thats another. an accusation of sharing
without actual evidence of sharing is nothing more than an accusation.
unfortunately, the MMIA (Multi Media Association of America <yeah, its
corny, but accurate>) is of the "legal opinion" that if you list it, you
must be guilty by intent to share (even if no real files are present)
> In order to combat that threat, what if a small number (say 10%) of
> transfers would be proxied via another peer on the primary?
> - In that case, there would always be doubt about whether the IP address
> recorded was actually the source of the files.
unfortunately, the winmx network isn't decentralized enough to do this.
you're better of getting a TOR server running and routing stuff via an
encrypted domain.
TMH
--
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or
numbered!
My life is my own - No. 6
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|