MediaDefender's BitTorrent-Based DOS Takes Down Revision3 426
Sandman1971 writes "Over the long Memorial Day weekend, Revision3 was the target of a malicious Denial Of Service Attack which brought R3 to its knees. After investigating the matter, it was discovered that the source of the attacks came from MediaDefender, the famed company hired by the MPAA and RIAA to try and stop the spread of illegal file sharing. The kicker? Revision3 was taken down for running a bittorent tracker to distribute its own legal content."
TO paraphrase world of warcraft (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? Lucky We Have Laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Failure to achieve these things will not reflect well on the fitness of the rulers to rule.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Shouldn't have publicized it on their blog (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:smells like... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Really? Lucky We Have Laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Failure to achieve these things will not reflect well on the fitness of the rulers to rule.
ROFL... You must be new here. Allow me to welcome you to planet Earth. Expect no useful action against Media Defender. And again, welcome to our humble planet...
Re:Really? Lucky We Have Laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Shouldn't have publicized it on their blog (Score:5, Insightful)
Except then RIAA could have just paid up and fixed their scripts and moved on.
The FBI investigation is going to turn up more dirt and likely will lead to lots of discovery. Imagine the connections between organizations proper discovery could come up with. Also imagine the work needed to comply. "Ok, RIAA turn over all correspondence you have had concerning enforcement for the last 3 years".
This does not mean Revision 3 can't sue for damages. But letting the FBI get the ball rolling is the first step. And if the FBI do lay charges then the money part gets a lot easier.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Really? Lucky We Have Laws (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:smells like... (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be the best thing that could happen. Judges have absolutely no sense of humor about people who pull shit like that.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:smells like... (Score:5, Insightful)
DOS attacks are a felony. People go to jail for committing felonies.
R3 can sue, in addition to the criminal charges brought forward by the state, in order to recoup any damages sustained by the attack, but even if they don't, MD still has to face the federal government for breaking the law.
-Rick
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Committing a crime to retaliate in response to another crime is still wrong, and committing a crime in retaliation for a mere civil infraction doubly so.
Media Defender is going to get shitcanned. (Score:5, Insightful)
"Move it's own media files" means they were probably using it for jamming operations against other trackers. Meaning they hacked the server, went to other bittorent sites, said "hey, we've got tasty files here, but only 91% of complete garbage", used revision3 as their server so everyone thought it was kosher instead of, say, Media defenders IP range, and when revision3 kicked them off their servers decided to reconnect and DDOS'd them. Because the input bandwidth was intense for the fubar'd uploads and they had just been cut off of their primary source, they used all available bandwidth to reconnect and DDOS'd.
What's going to happen here is a combination between defamation of character suites and hacking lawsuits. Those are the kinds of suites that put people out of business and in jail.
The RIAA and MPAA just shot themselves in the head on this one and their shell company is going to go tits up due to it. That's going to have a concussive effect on the other shell companies which will have a bad effect on their anti-piracy campaign.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why does the legality of Revision3's hosted content matter?
Is MediaDefender an agent of the federal government, granted extra-legal powers by Congress to commit these otherwise-illegal acts? Are they chartered by a state government? Has their operation been nationalized by the military, or perhaps they possess a letter of marque and reprisal?
No?
Re:TO paraphrase world of warcraft (Score:4, Insightful)
I am looking forward to hearing that MD is off-line and without a significant portion of their computing infrustructure.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Late Breaking News.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Brilliant! Dunno if this is original, but it certainly qualifies for meme status.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Shouldn't have publicized it on their blog (Score:3, Insightful)
What's sauce for the goose... (Score:4, Insightful)
If they take down *my legal tracker, I'll sue (Score:5, Insightful)
I operate a tracker to distribute my music [geometricvisions.com]. It's more efficient than direct HTTP downloads, so it saves on my hosting bill.
The point really needs to be rammed home to law enforcement and elected officials that there are many perfectly legitimate, and in fact socially beneficial uses for peer-to-peer file sharing.
Competition ... illegal or otherwise (Score:5, Insightful)
First WTF (Score:5, Insightful)
Try this instead: Determine if the tracker belongs to you. No? Then you don't have the right to abuse it in this way.
Re:PUT THEM IN JAIL. (Score:3, Insightful)
Or you want to abandon the whole concept of justice and just punish whoever gets pointed at first?
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Shutting down illegal content with an illegal attack is still illegal. Also, the only evidence of illegal content is the content MediaDefender was trying to put there. They are apparently going to all open BT servers they can find, serving up illegal content generated by them, then shutting them down. That's not looking for problems to address, that's planting evidence and then attacking them claiming vigilante justice. The only ones slinking away will be MediaOffender
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:0, Insightful)
Honestly this is what these corporation heads need, they need angry mobs breaking their knees and ribs.
Honestly it's what's needed, the fuckers have bough the government and courts, so they need to be shown their asses bleed just like everyone elses.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
MediaDefender uses back doors in web server software to plant fake torrents. Then if those fake torrents are removed, and the back door closed, they DDoS the server?
Wow. Entrapment, AND attacking the network.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here's the blog post (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:First WTF (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:4, Insightful)
If your morals say that smoking pot is fine, then you should lobby to have the law changed, because I can assure you there's a cop out there somewhere whose morals say it's fine to turn a blind eye while his buddy has his way with you, before planting a few grams of heroin in your car because you didn't pay him for the privilege.
Will you accept a collect call from reality, Hatta?
intentionality already established (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Really? Lucky We Have Laws (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I don't get one thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember that blocking the packets doesn't make them not come to the router. It just means they don't get past the router.
Publicity a better business strategy? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll say it again (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:3, Insightful)
Surely by using them, they advocate that it's a kosher thing to do. Afterall, the **AA are populated by the model citizens that we should all aspire to be like, right?
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I knew you bought illegal drugs, despite being a crime, that doesn't mean I should hope you were really buying illegal drugs when i murder you by shooting you in the head. No matter if you were buying illegal or legal drugs, I would still be in even more trouble for murdering you.
MediaDefender committed a felony here, while arguing the only reason they are allowed to commit this felony was because they thought R3 was breaking a civil copyright contract.
No matter if they were breaking copyright or not, that has nothing to do with, nor justifies, nor makes it ok/allowed/legal to launch a denial of service attack.
Re:Shouldn't have publicized it on their blog (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:1, Insightful)
If everyone had a well trained conscience it would be a wonderful thing.
But since we don't we have to have laws to at least maintain some kind of civility in life. Otherwise you would be locked in a box for the next 5 years till I got tired of you and fed you to the pigs.
Note that the law doesn't prevent me from doing these things that my conscience allows me to, but The fear of PMITA prison or a death sentence keeps me from it.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:3, Insightful)
As long as they either enforce a particular law uniformly or don't enforce it at all on the grounds that it's immoral, then yes. I DO want that. That would be a much needed additional check on the law.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:3, Insightful)
So, conscience are good. So are laws sometimes. And sometimes they are both very messed up. But neither should exist alone.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to feed trolls, but this needs to be pointed out: R3's still in the clear because they took action to both remove the illicit torrents and close the backdoor as soon as they found out about it. The DMCA, of all things, would protect them. Mistakes happen and the DMCA even recognizes that. Companies are given shelter as long as they remove offending content as soon as made aware of it. In this case they found it themselves and quickly removed it. They're completely clear under the law.
MediaDefender however blatantly violated several federal laws about computer crime, and R3 has plenty of evidence. The FBI is already investigating and R3 suffered a measurable loss due to MediaDefender's actions. I'd say they're in deep shit.
Re:First WTF (Score:2, Insightful)
You're simply not wearing your Hitlerian headgear. Put it on, and you'll realize that rights belong to institutions and not to individuals.
Re:Criminal investigation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Such a person isn't going to care what the law says, they will victimize people regardless. Think harder about it. You are making a fundamental mistake when you place the law above a persons conscience, where do you think the law comes from? It is (ideally) an expression of our collective conscience. If our consciences are so unreliable, then the law is even more so.