I Know What You Downloaded on BitTorrent…

[GhostShip]

Stampy Stampy look at me I'm Josh 

It really is disapponting to see you unable to function beyond a single issue, dont you ever learn some folks are not going to do as you wish Josh ?

If anyone else asks I have no hesitation in delivering to them the facts of the matter as we have done so here

https://www.winmxworld.com/tutorials/fake_file_info.html

but when a young guy with a dubious record comes here to throw his mighty feet about I feel very reluctant to aid him in any way 

[Bieb]

Is it really that hard to simply confirm the fact I present without insulting me or bringing up my past in an attempt to reduced my credibility on this information in an attempt to cover it up? And simply throwing a generic web page out that does not go into technical detail of the actual protocol documentation which I am referring to is not you personally confirming this claim as I have asked you to do at least three times now. Who exactly is wasting time... hmmm??

So please if you would, either confirm or deny(which would be a lie) this is indeed true that every search result packet contains the sharer's ip address. As you already have proved my real point in the fact that you twist words, step around questions, and put blame onto others while lessening their character by bringing up very unrelated information that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. You really are not a nice guy... at least you aren't anymore.

[hollow87]

Yes with BT you can get IP's of people on the torrents, but as Josh stated it is also possible to get primary and secondary IP's on WinMX since WmW got the IP's of the "cartel" which used secondary connections to block in their blocklist.

Also thinking the "cartel" has "infiltrated" private torrent sites...well without proof will never know, I never heard of someone who STRICTLY used a private site getting a DMCA notice from ISP.  (By strictly, no public trackers, no DHT, no PEX or similar technologies)

Thinking the "cartel" has "infiltrated" a private community that you are not a member of to verify or not is similar to someone who doesnt know about WmW saying "the cartel is a part of every WinMX website and forum including WinMXWorld" (Just using an analogy here)

Just to clarify so my words don't get turned around
1.) Most p2p networks including WinMX have a way to get IP address.
2.) Private torrent sites are much much safer than public ones.
3.) I do NOT think the "cartel" is part of WinMXWorld at all (I can't stress this enough)
4.) Best way to hide your IP on any p2p is to find a GOOD VPN provider who does not keep logs verifying if they do or not would be a plus also getting a seedbox
5.) User IP address IS included in search results packet primary udp 0x4E and ALSO the secondary search result packet 0x177A (How else could you use the ping to see if your computer can reach theirs before doing the transfer or find the IP address of secondary clients to block for fake files in the blocklist)
6.) Yes BT users are often get DMCA notices but it is also has a much larger user base p2p if WinMX had the user base of BT you can bet you would find WinMX users getting DMCA notices

[GhostShip]

You make selected claims Josh I come here to rebutt those claims then you change direction and state something else and then say nasty things about me yet again when all you are really being treated to is the respect level you deserve given your actions over the whole time I have known you on WinMX.

It all could have been so much different and you have had the opportunity many times to go down the right path but you ignored that for the cheap thrills of harassing others, on the other side of the coin you have done some great things too and for those I have been proud of you.  You don't make me proud of you at this time however and  thus my respect for you is not at the point I feel willing to answer you one way or the other but anyone else out there who is interested in what information is available from search results need only look at the pictures that Josh is unable to resolve any data from, perhaps many of you will see and learn while Josh continues to refuse to.

[GhostShip]

@ Hollow we do indeed know openly of a mass breach of all the major torrent sites based on data contained in the media defender breach some years ago, its no secret hundreds of private site logins where found and we know they and other organisations of the same ilk continue to monitor such sites to track new releases to find the seeds of leaked material, all this is in the public domain.

Btw the way can you confirm you help operate a torrent site and thus have a vested interest in supporting such technology ?

[Bieb]

Hollow seems to know the protocol better than you do if he knows what I am talking about and yet you refuse to acknowledge that same fact.

Perhaps you should try digging up something from his past as well to try to make him irrelevant?

[GhostShip]

Only your claims are irrelevant, I dont need to make things up Josh the truth is out there, Hollow is Hollow and he is entitled to his opinions but I felt it only fair for readers to understand he may not be unbiased in his opinions, thats pretty reasonable from where I,m sitting, no need to hide facts when they are relevant to the discussion in hand.

[Bieb]

5.) User IP address IS included in search results packet primary udp 0x4E and ALSO the secondary search result packet 0x177A (How else could you use the ping to see if your computer can reach theirs before doing the transfer or find the IP address of secondary clients to block for fake files in the blocklist)

Sorry, but this fact is not an opinion whether you want it to be or not.

[GhostShip]

He was explaining that to those who like yourself seem unable to comprehend how the flooders have been tracked for the last 5 years, its all contained in the article I referenced bar the primary results code as I unlike those who have moved away from winmx, dont feel such data being public aids anyone but abusers and attackers. the fact that kM published the exact same data and attacks have been going on around the clock since then makes it clear some folks are irresponsible and some take responsibility seriously.

[Bieb]

Ahh the word twisting... right on time! I was beginning to think you actually had a soul.

I already explained how this fact (that every search result contains the ip address of the sharer of that file) has been used by WinMXWorld to track the fake file flooder's ip ranges for years which I talked about 5 or 6 posts ago. So claiming I cannot comprehend something I have already explained 5 or 6 posts ago is ludicrous.

And as you already have said, they already have this protocol information we are speaking of, so merely mentioning a small minute detail of information that is actually in these packets pose no actual harm to anything except your apparent ego that is forbidding you to admit the facts I have brought up is correct.

[GhostShip]

You cant have it both ways Josh you just publicly said Hollow knows more than myself regarding the protocol so with all these "experts" about I also end up asking why is it the non winmx programming experts are doing all the work to keep the network operating while self proclaimed programmers who could have helped ( Yourself, Hollow, Pri etc ) are not interested in doing so, many folks would like an honest answer to that question, I sure would.

Btw is it a coincidence that you started the same noise about the same topic last year in the middle of another thread.

https://forum.winmxworld.com/index.php?topic=10530.0.html


Seems you don't have enough to do in December Josh.

[hollow87]

@Ghostship
Mediadefender did setup a trap website miivi.com but that and the leaked emails said to use PUBLIC trackers for pre-leak releases
http://torrentfreak.com/mediadefender-emails-leaked-070915/

I'm sure there is a ddl for the over 700mb mbox file out there somewhere still.

Stating that I'm biased for bit torrent technology, yes I prefer to use bit torrent but in the same sense your biased with WPN technology that fact can not be hidden,  but the protocol for WinMX has been hidden from users where the bit torrent protocol is open for all to see. 
You can clearly see in bit torrent protocol that users IP addresses are easily obtained another fact not hidden
You can see it in the protocol docs for WinMX too that users IP addresses are easily obtained from a search

As for my opinions

Fact: Private is safer than Public
Example: It is safer to live in your own house than in a public park.

Fact: An encrypted VPN provider that does not keep logs is better to hide your IP address than not using one
How a VPN works: Your computer connects to a VPN through an encrypted tunnel using software for example Windows XP has built in software to connect to a VPN or OpenSSH client provides a SSL based VPN.  Now after your computer is connected all outbound traffic is routed through this encrypted tunnel providing only the VPN IP address for anyone to see while your on the VPN

Fact: User IP address are provided during a search result packet
Example: Check the WinMX secondary and Primary UDP search results


My only opinions were point 2 and point 6
Point 2  is pure opinion while point 6 is based on statistics

Part of point 6 is a fact, there are much more Bit torrent users than WinMX users
 

Josh was looking for a simple yes no confirmation on the fact of that, for the users to be aware, how hard is a yes or a no?

[hollow87]

I am not interested in helping since a bandaid on top of a bandaid is not a real fix.  Real fix would be brand new protocol and to do that you would need a new client, new network etc.  All old clients would not work on new network.  So in a sense it would not be WinMX anymore.

[GhostShip]

I refused to answer Josh on principle Hollow as was clear from my posts had you read then properly, I stated as such.

I do enjoy having so many experts about all rushing out to "correct" me on reference points that I was sharing documents on over 5 years ago now, I find the whole thing one big joke as you would if you where me.

KM also had the same outlook you have on the thought of a new client but I put it to you thats more a limitation of thinking than with how the community perceives it, not all the protocol is doomed and if your not able to see how at this time to work past those limitations that do exist that's hardly a reason not to at least support those trying, but its your time and your life I always make it clear I have no powers other than persuasion to get folks following the mad mission path to the future 

[hollow87]

Well, I couldn't find where you flat out refused to answer all I saw was circles going around.

And on the point that the protocol can survive, I am interested in how you plan to implement IPv6 in the wpn protocol.

[GhostShip]

A protocol is simply a set of rules specifying the form and format of a communications system, I find it incomprehensible you ask such questions when other p2p clients such as limewire and most bit torrent implementations are able to deal with IPv6 and for some magic reason winmx wont be able to ?

Knowing you as I do I suspect the question your posing is actually how to keep the current client compatible when the time comes to change over, that pre supposes a patch only effort and a limited one at that as anything is possible in a patch if you have the time to write it all in, however I prefer to place my bets on a new client rather than stand guard over a static target that has become easy picking for some cowards, that's what I see as the real path to the future and one that's not so far off if all capable folks took the opportunity to add their time to it.

[Lagerlout666]

I think for a long time, and KM used to drum this about a fair bit too was that a winmx clone was far too much hardwork for one person to make. And it would take too much time. But being fortunate enough to be sat on the fence and having the opportunity to chuck my two cents worth in periodically i have the fortune of both having seen a patch that filters the fakes out of searches; one mountain out the way. And a secondary client, that prob would of been released months ago if these attacks hadn't started; as whats the point in a client that dont fix these problems.
I also see frequent updates on the primary client which im overjoyed at the prospect that folks can see a completion time not so far into the future.

Now I like you guys too have been round this place a fair old time now, we all think we have seen it all. And this brings with us our own views of what we see and think as possible. Before ive seen projects start and stop, developers come and go. And if i was sat where the normal folks are id be pretty skeptical too. I actually asked a few weeks back if we could start making public announcements of where the current development stands. But then quite rightly the development team is so small, its not fair to over load them with millions of questions and take them away from the prized goal with why is this part taking ages and the no doubt continues steams of go team between the actual important discussions.

Standing from where im stood i think hollows skeptical sounding question of how to fix ipv6 and other flaws comes from a lack of knowledge as to what quicks has been busy orchestrating behind the scenes, and quicks frustration seems to be showing in that he has every piece of information in his hands and although a very fast working team, if their was more it would be done quicker. And then you just get pain in the arse's like josh; and for you to read http://www.slyck.com/story1585.html thiers a leak involving Oink, well we all know what happened to them http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7057812.stm just incase you dont.