uTorrent and Peerfactor

[apcmiller]

pg2 blocks Utorrent.com

Biggest news in the past few days in the p2p world is the Retspan story. Lots of inaccuracies and condemnations of Ludvig Strigeus (aka ludde) over his deal with peerfactor, subsidiary of Retspan, an anti-p2p association. Some claim its the end of the world, that the client will serve Retspan directly, and through the licensing of a single DLL file, ludde is permanently tainted as a traitor to p2p.

To this end, the current version of PG2+blocklist will block attempts to even visit the µtorrent website. The block gives the message "utorrent.com works for anti-p2p RetSpan". Mr. Strigeus described the block as 'ridiculous' and called for it to be removed. One of the admins at PG2, gong by the name "phrosty" blamed it on BlueTack, provider of their blocklist.

Over at BlueTack, admin "fa" appeared unaware of what the connection was between Mr. Strigeus and PeerFactor. When asked why the block was added, with the natural suggestion of "ignorance of what was actually going on" 'fa' replied "fuck you". Then, to Mr. Strigeus, present with me in their IRC channel, " you better pick the peeps you work for a littel better if you wanna make utorrent apps. its staying int"

Clearly BlueTack is not concerned about accuracy in any shape or form. A log of the discussion follows

[16:18.24] <+ludde> can you remove the silly PG2 "utorrent works for RetSpan" thing? I don't work for Retspan and I never will.

[16:30.45] <@fa> well, what is it that you are doing for them then?

[16:32.23] <@fa> or with them

[16:32.28] <+ludde> I'm providing a DLL file to PeerFactor, that they can use to download content through the BitTorrent protocol. It does not have any features for getting IPs or anything from users, it can only be used to download stuff.

[16:32.33] <+Benjones> I think thats been widely published everywhere

[16:32.50] <+ludde> exactly.

[16:33.56] <+Benjones> so, why was the block added?

[16:34.06] <+ludde> ignorance?

[16:34.32] <@fa> fuck you

[16:35.09] <@fa> you better pick the peeps you work for a littel better if you wanna make utorrent apps

[16:35.15] <@fa> its staying int

[16:36.24] <@fa> lol

[16:36.40] <+ludde> fa: utorrent is not related to anti-p2p. I don't see what the reason for the block is.

[16:37.10] <@fa> helping anti-p2p in any way is relating it to it

[16:37.43] <+ludde> I'm not helping anti-p2p. I'm helping a company (separate from retspan) that wants to provide a download service.

[16:37.45] <@fa> and yes, if you did the same for microsoft, you would have made the list as well

[16:38.00] <+ludde> so, microsoft is on the list?

[16:38.01] <@fa> staying in till the source is public

[16:38.27] <+ludde> that is not going to happen.

[16:39.23] <@fa> we have a list jsut for M$ yes

[16:39.46] <+ludde> fa: utorrent is not in any way related to anti-p2p. I'm just selling an "off the shelf" DLL product to PeerFactor, more or less.

[16:39.48] <@fa> they are the biggest anti-p2p organization

[16:40.23] <+ludde> this agreement is not about µTorrent.

[16:40.30] <+ludde> so I don't see why you punish utorrent.

[16:41.57] <+ludde> fa: can you remove the block please? If I was anti-p2p, I would never have created utorrent.

[16:42.32] <@fa> everyone should get to make the Decision for themselves, first they need to see that you have worked with them, then they can choose to use the app or not

[16:42.43] <@fa> the block is the best way atm to show peeps

[16:43.33] <+ludde> why put the decision on the people? They don't have enough information to tell what the deal is about. they just have the information provided by media, which is written in a way to generate attraction.

[16:44.25] <+ludde> this deal is really nothing, they contract doesn't even MENTION µTorrent.

[16:44.27] <@fa> the whole thing is dodgy as hell, they prolly needed that dll to build an anti-p2p torrent app, and you just handed it to them

Phrosty at Phoenix Labs was also present, and said "i don't think it utorrent.com should be blocked, but it's out of control of phoenix labs until we launch our own lists (soon)". As Ludde suggested, its clear that this is a decision made from ignorance. The value of these sorts of programs has never been proven either. Whilst protecting from overt lists might well keep you from the corporate networks, no-one rely on well known sources to search for copyright infringement. If you are relying on these lists to protect you from being found and prosecuted, you're investing in a false sense of security. Whilst they act on empty rumours and show little attention for the facts in compiling their lists, it leaves the question of just what value their lists are.

Can I recommend peerguardian? not until their blocklists are compiled by people who know what they're doing.

N2N News

Check the update:

uTorrent Sign Six Month PeerFactor Agreement

According to a statement by PeerFactor, the lead developer of µTorrent, Ludvig Strigeus, has agreed to help develop “new content distribution applications on the Web”.

The developer has signed a contract with PeerFactor for an initial six month evaluation period.

Since the public release of uTorrent in September, the client has risen to the number one spot on Slyck’s list of BitTorrent clients for Windows, as voted by users. This is mostly due to the tiny memory usage, which is around 6MB, compared to second most popular, Azureus, which is typically over 70MB. Yet uTorrent remains feature-rich.

By developing the PeerFactor software, which uses the BitTorrent protocol, Strigeus will be entitled to a share of any advertising revenue generated by the final product.

This move into the authorised distribution market is a step away from anti-P2P technology for PeerFactor, which was a subsidiary of French anti-piracy group RetSpan. The two companies became independent companies six months ago.

PeerFactor shot to notoriety in April 2004 by giving financial rewards to file sharers for spreading fake files and directing downloaders to authorised download sites.

News that µTorrent are selling their software will fuel speculation as to why uTorrent has remained close source, which is extremely uncommon for BitTorrent clients.

This is not of concern to Strigeus, who told Slyck News, “This doesn't affect µTorrent, it's just a side project. If people like to be paranoid, I won't stop them.”

Strigeus denies that he is helping PeerFactor fight the P2P community by providing the coding.

“The agreement says that the software will be used to distribute legal content over the internet. In my understanding, everything in our agreement says that it will be used for downloading legal content,” Strigeus told Slyck News.

Although Strigeus rejects that he knew PeerFactor’s history of attacking and disrupting P2P networks, he defends working with the company now he does know.

“Just because I sell cleaning services to Microsoft doesn't mean I like Windows.”

Update: Please note there is a correction to this article. It was originally reported that PeerFactor is a subsidiary of RetSpan. The two companies parted ways six months ago.

PeerFactor deny ever being involved in anti-P2P operations, despite the reports to the contrary.

“We do not distribute any fake file over P2P, but only useful content,” Frenchman Richard Rodrigues, head of PeerFactor told Slyck. “We have never distributed fakes file (unreadable) because no user would […] want to distribute [them]."

Slyck News

The µTorrent fiasco

You may have noticed that PG2 started blocking utorrent.com. This is because µTorrent’s developer recently licensed his backend technology to a company known for monitoring P2P networks.

Today we confirmed that it is for a new content distribution system - something explicitly stated in the contract, meaning they are not allowed to use it for monitoring P2P users or anything else.

So is helping out a company known for P2P monitoring morally wrong? Maybe. But everyone needs to eat. The licensing had no malicious intent toward P2P users, and it does not affect µTorrent in any way.

Yet it is still blocked. This is because we are still silently redirecting all of your list downloads to our friends at Bluetack while we get our own lists ready. Adding or removing things from their lists is something we have no control over.

Fortunately, we have been preparing to launch our own lists for about a week now! Within the next few days PG2 should automatically start pulling the lists from Blocklist.org - no work on your end required.

Phoenix Labs News

More when I can find it!

Come on everyone. What's the big deal?

It's not like this will affect µTorrent. We did not sign a deal about µTorrent, we signed a deal that I will provide them with code that implements the Bittorrent protocol. This code will be used in an ad supported file distribution system webmasters can use to publish big content.

This is totally separate from the freeware program named µTorrent. µTorrent will not be affected in any way, and I would never implement any kind of retspan technology into this fine program, or whatever you conspiracy analysists are thinking.

I need a way to get an income. My primary motivation for working on µTorrent is that I think it's fun, and my primary goal is to make the best client free of any bloat or intrustive things such as adware or spyware. My second goal is to try and make some money off of it. Hopefully signing a few deals with various file distribution companies will allow me to do exactly that.

However, Goal 1) still has priority over Goal 2), so I would never accept anything that would break the rules in Goal 1).

Nuff said.

/Ludvig

Slyck Forums

Hi,

I'm not a hard core P2P-fan that's constantly at war with media companies. But I do like unrestricted file sharing, otherwise I wouldn't have made µTorrent.

I'm also not at all a fan of RIAA or companies trying to limit the user's right to do stuff on his/her computer, and I hate the practises of limiting file sharing. (Encryption was implemented for a reason).

File sharing is here to stay, both for file sharers that like to download illegal content, and by file sharing companies to promote legal content. Why am I not allowed to use my expertise to help companies distribute content over BitTorrent?

I'm netural, and not on anyone's side. I'm working with file sharers using it for illegal purposes, and I'm working with companies trying to give BitTorrent a better name.

I'm however not putting my hands on anything that would limit the effectiveness of BitTorrent, or reduce the ability for people to use it for whatever purpose they like.

If the recent deal with PeerFactor turns out to be about limiting file sharing, or making it harder for pirates in any possible or imaginable way, then I will terminate our agreement promtly and concisely.

/Ludvig

More from the Slyck Forums

For the record, Ludvig was not aware of PeerFactor's ties to RetSpan at the time he signed the contract with PeerFactor.

I was present during the interview Mike had with Ludvig.

Ludvig didn't know anything about the RetSpan connection, or that PeerFactor was distributing fake content to begin with. He found out about all of this from Mike.

What PeerFactor got from Ludvig in the contract, was a DLL file with the BT protocols so they could interact with other BT clients. No source was shared with PeerFactor, and the contract was for a 6mo evaluation period.

I was alarmed when hearing the new details.

Mike asked "can't they get that from bittorrent.com?"

Ludvig replied "they can just get a big & bulky python implementation from buttorrent.com"

I had a different reaction to that however.

I answered "why would they go through bittorrent.com when they've already been discredited in the sharing community by selling out to the MPAA?"

Mike commented why would they worry about someone working with the MPAA, but didn't initially get the point I was making.

Maybe I'm being a little paranoid, maybe not, but a little paranoia is a healthy thing.

Think about it. Since when do anti-P2P groups need to contract out to do things like post fake files on various P2P networks? All the tools they would need are already freely available.

I'm trying to see this from the anti-P2P groups' point of view, and what I'm seeing doesn't look pretty.

Anti-P2P groups don't care one bit about distribution. Sure, they want to get their fake and poisoned files out on the networks, but that isn't their goal. Their goal is to hurt file sharing. Any way they can.

Why didn't they go through bittorrent.com? They were already in the pocket of the MPAA, and if I were running an anti-P2P group looking to develop a distribution system, wouldn't I naturally choose to work with people who were already sympathetic to our goals?

Yes... if the distribution system was what I was after.

However, still looking at it in the eyes of an anti-P2P group, my goal isn't the distribution, but to hurt the file-sharing community itself.

There is nothing to be gained by going with bittorrent.com... they've already been bought and discredited. Going with them, would do nothing to further my cause as an anti-P2P group.

No... I need to go with someone popular in the community. Someone who has a good reputation, credibility, exposure.

So I would do what PeerFactor did. I would try to make a deal with one of the big players in the community, to help develop a content distribution system. After all, to many torrent utility authors, legitimacy for the protocol and community ranks quite high on the list of what they want.

We won't tell them that we'll be distributing fake or poisoned files. We'll try to appear legitimate. Whether or not anything is actually developed, is irrelevant. Eventually, someone is going to make the connection between PeerFactor and its parent company, and word will get out. It doesn't matter if it is true or not, the general public doesn't care about facts. Give the general public as many facts as you have, and none of that will make one bit of difference. All people will pay attention to are the links back to the anti-P2P group, and the damage is done.

Just look at the first two replies to Mike's story for an illustration of what I'm talking about.

Then there is the confidentiality clause. We'll make the author agree to a confidentiality clause for the next 6mo duration of the contract, while we can say anything we want to.

We'll post a web page somewhere announcing our "deal" with the author of µTorrent and draw some attention to it.

Why µTorrent? It is a big threat to anti-P2P's efforts to thwart file sharing now. Its growing popularity, combined with their new joint encryption protocol with Azureus makes it a very big threat to anti-P2P's goals.

Why not Azureus? It is open source. There is no single person they can discredit like there is with µTorrent. This isn't a matter of open source vs closed source, but of the number of people involved, and which is more vulnerable.

Is it possible that PeerFactor's claim that they really are working on a distribution system for authentic legal downloads? Yes, it is possible.

Does it matter?

Not one bit. By association alone, the damage will already be done.

I like Ludvig a lot. I have had plenty of time to get to know him, and what kind of man he is, over the past several months I have been involved in the µTorrent support team. Had he known about PeerFactor's parentage ahead of time, I don't believe he would have gone forward with the contract.

In the meantime, µTorrent is no more a security risk than it was before the contract. Nothing has changed in the program.

In my perspective, this wasn't about the program at all, but about damaging reputations and credibility, and in the process, keeping people away from a program that is such a threat to the anti-P2P group.

People, after all, rarely care about the facts. They're inconvenient. They make people think. Thinking takes effort. They'd rather have other people tell them what to think. They'll jump at the obvious "µTorrent is working with RetSpan" hysteria because the facts of the situation are inconvenient.

Maybe I'm too paranoid. Maybe you aren't paranoid enough.

Maybe both are correct.

but...

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you... and anti-P2P groups, are, in fact, out to get you.

-- Smoovious

-- µTorrent Support Team

_________________

More from the Slyck forums

[nsane]

[16:44.27] the whole thing is dodgy as hell, they prolly needed that dll to build an anti-p2p torrent app, and you just handed it to them

exactly what i'm thinking. i mean, yes, the contract says it's for a legit P2P app (and by all mean, that might be what he truley intends to make the DLL for). but, once his work is done, the code will be THEIR property and they can do whatever the hell they want with it (such as use it to create anti-torrent apps...or sell it to companies that wanna use it that way). like fa said, it's just dodgy as hell B)

[Guest madascheese]

i did found out, in the latest beta's of uT (before 1.5)

when u search thro the internal engine it logs and sends data to diffrent torrent site's B)

but now i see a box for "send info to uT.com" in the latest 1.5 sooo..... yay.. this sort of put me off abit.

[x0o]

i see utorrent has been removed from the page, is this because of this?

edit: yes, it was :/

[LIW]

Hi,

I noticed that utorrent has been removed and sadly there is no 'staff pick' software for bittorrent client.

Regards,

Liw

[Lee]

like fa said, it's just dodgy as hell B)

But this has nothing to do with uTorrent directly, since the code is not from uTorrent? I'm sure many users will continue to use utorrent and therefore continue to provide updates. Give users a warning, point them to this topic. Like stated on the front page, it's up to the users what they do with the software listed.

[x0o]

i agree with lee. i think µtorrent should still be listed on the page. i really really doubt there is anything dodgy about the app.

[Imperceptible]

I trust the app. Don't know if any of you have seen but the utorrent website has been updated and this has been added to the front page:

µTorrent is not associated with any anti-P2P organization. Read More..

Recently, µTorrent has been the subject of numerous articles as a result of the contract between µTorrent's sole creator and developer, Ludvig Strigeus ("ludde"), and PeerFactor.

While PeerFactor has been involved in anti-P2P activities in the past, there is a large amount of misinformation being spread about µTorrent, PeerFactor and the nature of the agreement.

* No change has been made to µTorrent as a result of the contract, and no changes will be made in the future. µTorrent contains no anti-P2P component, IP logging or other monitoring as falsely reported by some websites, and is not affiliated with the RIAA or MPAA.

* PeerFactor is no longer associated with RetSpan, and furthermore, Ludvig is in no way affiliated with RetSpan. Ludvig does not "work for RetSpan", nor does he work for PeerFactor.

* The PeerFactor software that Ludvig is associated with is not anti-P2P software, unlike the PeerFactor program run by RetSpan in 2004, now discontinued. The head of PeerFactor states that "we do not distribute any fake file over P2P, but only useful content" (source).

* The PeerFactor agreement does not give PeerFactor access to µTorrent's source code. The only work done by Ludvig for PeerFactor consisted of the development of a single DLL which provides an implementation of BitTorrent for the PeerFactor software. Ludvig is not involved in the development of any other part of PeerFactor.

* PeerFactor's software is going to be used to create a legal downloading service for webmasters to distribute large content more easily, as specified in the contract, nothing else.

* Ludvig remains the only person with access to µTorrent's source code. µTorrent remains closed-source to prevent clones and modifications such as DHT hacks, not to conceal anti-P2P code. µTorrent will not become open-source as a result of the controversy over the agreement.

Please refrain from spreading misinformation about µTorrent. Should you have further concerns about the integrity of the program, please raise them in the µTorrent community forums.

[apcmiller]

I agree, and although I dont want to anger the almighty Mods here, I think that this is the close minded thinking that Smoovious is refering to in his post on slyck. If peerfactor was trying to do anything anti-p2p in this transaction it was to discredit uTorrent as a valid p2p app, and dropping it from sites like nsaneproductions is just falling into that.

[Lite]

Bittorrent is also open source.

BTW, posts like this won't make a difference on the desicion temp. de-list uTorrent.

[apcmiller]

Bittorrent is also open source.

BTW, posts like this won't make a difference on the desicion temp. de-list uTorrent.

yeah, I know......but why?

safe is better that sorry, yeah yeah

Even if its not available here, people still need to know whats going on. Many people still use uTorrent. When they all start getting sued I'll quit. But from what I've read from people who have watched every bit of information that comes out of it, its safer than most programs.

So I'll keep posting news on it when i can, I dont post the updates downloads because I was told not to, tell me not to post news and I wont do that either, but I will call you a Nazi. -K-

[x0o]

gj apcmiller.

[myidisbb]

yeah, I know......but why?

safe is better that sorry, yeah yeah

Even if its not available here, people still need to know whats going on. Many people still use uTorrent. When they all start getting sued I'll quit. But from what I've read from people who have watched every bit of information that comes out of it, its safer than most programs.

So I'll keep posting news on it when i can, I dont post the updates downloads because I was told not to, tell me not to post news and I wont do that either, but I will call you a Nazi. -K-

the problem is the servers being use by utorrent and the bad guy. when a b/t torrent / torrent site gets taken down and in control of the bad guys they will be ip block too by pg2 and the other ip blockers. actually ip blockers are worthless with b/t tracker sites anyway. thats is another reason to not use a server site that is in control of an outside group. this is like having xes without protection of anykind and with a paid for the night person in a country that has at least 25% aids rate. why take the chance?

you know you could put a link in your account information and maybe Signature section maybe.

[apcmiller]

uTorrent lives....thanx nsane, or whatever site staff, who was finally convinced to at least give the user the choice to download this program

See: uTorrent Download Page[

[Lee]

Took me far too much persuading... :sneaky:

[kazaaman]

I think its trustworthy enough. I mean why would Lude go through all this trouble to catch people? It mentions on his site that he hasn't given any of Utorrent's code to PeerFactor. Thats just what I think

-Thanx

[Guest NthDegree]

Hasn't anyone noticed the recent change to utorrent?

Get a nice IPS/IDS system and watch the new versions get reported as injecting code into processes and sending unauthorised data insecurely!

[Guest !MNc99]

How can we trust you?

[Nemesis]

How can we trust you?

ya, provide some evidence of this accusation.

[aNILEator]

I've noticed if i'm running utorrent (not downloading anything) my download speeds grind to a hault and webpages will hardly ever load in firefox, as soon as i exit utorrent ping the pages download, what's up with that?

EDIT: Seems to have fixed itself for now ;)

[Guest NthDegree]

I recommend bitspirit, it seems to work extremely well without the lag you get with azureus and without the exploits you commonly get with Java and C++ (Azureus being Java, BitComet being C++)

The anti-piracy agencies are scum, they want to ruin what great people created. Plus I personally don't give 2 sh!tz about the law, and with a nice copy of protowall and setting TCP/IP filtering up to only allow TCP and UDP keeps everything safe from them :)