Ben Jones: The amount of overall protecton given by a blocklist is minimal at best.

[manpe]

"Indeed, in some cases using lists can work against you. After all, who uses such lists, is it the kid downloading the very occasional song, or the hardcore downloaders? Why, the latter of course, the slight/casual user doesn't know, or worry about it that much. So, the ones that download heavily are the ones to target. Alas, theres no way to tell from a torrents userlist which group, light or heavy, they are in, since every torrent is seperate from each other.

[...]

Thankfully, blocklists to the rescue!. The easiest method is use the blocklists themselves to identify the heavy users. Its very simple and uses two groups of systems (doesn't have to be a group, can be just one system in each). One group uses IPs on the blocklist, the other doesn't. Collect peer data from both, and after a while, compare lists. the major differences will be the blocklist computers will be on only one list. Voila, IP addresses obtained. Your 'protection' has been turned into identification."

What do you think about it? Made me think. Overall, is using an IP blocklist for better or for worse?

Link to the article

[bob1234]

did yet read the article, only your snippets.

from that alone, i would say that it is an interesting idea and something we could consider. however, i wouldn't say it's any reason to stop using blocklists. Overall, i feel that the majority of people who are targeted for lawsuits or legal action are people who do not use blocklists. since it's generally a scare tactic anyway, it's better to go after the "easy" victims instead of the "heavy users" who will probably just try new methods of circumventing detection.

[manpe]

If that snippet alone was interesting, you should read the whole article. I believe it could fuel an interesting discussion about the cons and pros of blocklists. I am interested in your views, because I just started using PeerGuardian and a bunch of blocklists with it in hope that I can mind my business without too many unwelcome noses sniffing around. But before reading this article it didn't come to my mind that it might actually backfire. So all in all I would like to come to a conclusion, is it for better or for worse.

[HX1]

Okay truthfully the man makes a big assumption in understanding a globe full of internet users. First he says that the only people who use filtering, are in fact HUGE offenders or file sharers. This is wrong. Filtering can be used as things as simple as Parental Controls. Therefore creating a profile of all people filtering traffic on todays internet is erroneous. It is also stereo-typing which typically is frowned upon as it also opens a whole to let people that are doing the wrong thing to get away, can endanger others, and basically 'throws you'. Becomes a problem and possibly your EPIC FAIL.

The second thing I see/hear is perspective. Objectivity, when it comes to various methods - it must be free from perspective. You must first have factual. He is trying to second guess. One thing.. 'left - right to fake---eey'. Now when they have you guessing, they can lead you, to or from.. in this action they can manipulate the situation. Example: Man in forest hunting can't get close enough with his weapon to kill something to eat...Woman lures it closer with smooth talk, and maybe even a treat...snaps its neck and goes home fortune-full. All he has done here is possibly stated how he would approach the situation, what he would do about it. This could be in an effort to 'throw others', or it may be a man too confident. It comes down to the way that one would go about doing things. I see this as basically an ignorant boisterous rambling of someone who is left without any direct involvement.