0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
While BlueTack may still perpetuate the idea that their filters are 99% effective, these latest findings will only fuel criticisms towards BlueTack's actual effectiveness. A complete test might not be possible short of creating a simple program to test every single number or spending weeks hand-testing every single Media Defender IP address. In the mean ime, it seems very apparent that BlueTack's filters have a few holes.
Use a blocklist? Think it makes you safe, allows you to share with impunity? Think again. I will say this now, up front, and clearly.The amount of overall protecton given by a blocklist is minimal at best.
The last paragraph sums things up better than I can, however: “We have further demonstrated that IP blacklists, a standard method for avoiding systematic monitoring, are wholly ineffective given current identification techniques and provide only limited coverage of likely monitoring agents.”
Pri,its a shame you dont keep the PG2 blovklist updated,the new script for metis i found was using a lot of bandwidth on the 2 metis' as i run 2 rooms, this seemed to make me feel like i was restricted and found sometimes i couldn't google/surf the net, so removing the scripts allowed me to carry on as normal,so i have no other way than to use PG2.
The community patch is the best option for any winmx user that is without doubt fact as that can at least protect the network by default where as the host file method and asking users to install winmx specific blocklists in peerguardian simply failed as many users did not bother to take the advice given and left themselves wide open and at the same time allowed their primary connections to be used by data harvesters and attackers
i would prefer, if anything, to have an ability to insert my own custom set of IP's to block, directly into the patch, rather than using an extra tool, such as PG2 or PB, but the designer/maker of CP 1.0 didnt provide that ability...