Tag Archives: 2014

Block The Pirate Bay Within 10 Days, Dutch Court Tells ISPs

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/block-the-pirate-bay-within-10-days-dutch-court-tells-isps-170922/

Three years ago in 2014, The Court of The Hague handed down its decision in a long-running case which had previously forced two Dutch ISPs, Ziggo and XS4ALL, to block The Pirate Bay.

Ruling against local anti-piracy outfit BREIN, which brought the case, the Court decided that a blockade would be ineffective and also restrict the ISPs’ entrepreneurial freedoms.

The Pirate Bay was unblocked while BREIN took its case to the Supreme Court, which in turn referred the matter to the EU Court of Justice for clarification. This June, the ECJ ruled that as a platform effectively communicating copyright works to the public, The Pirate Bay can indeed be blocked.

The ruling meant there were no major obstacles preventing the Dutch Supreme Court from ordering a future ISP blockade. Clearly, however, BREIN wanted a blocking decision more quickly. A decision handed down today means the anti-piracy group will achieve that in just a few days’ time.

The Hague Court of Appeal today ruled (Dutch) that the 2014 decision, which lifted the blockade against The Pirate Bay, is now largely obsolete.

“According to the Court of Appeal, the Hague Court did not give sufficient weight to the interests of the beneficiaries represented by BREIN,” BREIN said in a statement.

“The Court also wrongly looked at whether torrent traffic had been reduced by the blockade. It should have also considered whether visits to the website of The Pirate Bay itself decreased with a blockade, which speaks for itself.”

As a result, an IP address and DNS blockade of The Pirate Bay, similar to those already in place in the UK and other EU countries, will soon be put in place. BREIN says that four IP addresses will be affected along with hundreds of domain names through which the torrent platform can be reached.

The ISPs have been given just 10 days to put the blocks in place and if they fail there are fines of 2,000 euros per day, up to a maximum of one million euros.

“It is nice that obviously harmful and illegal sites like The Pirate Bay will be blocked again in the Netherlands,” says BREIN chief Tim Kuik.

“A very bad time for our culture, which was free to access via these sites, is now happily behind us.”

Today’s interim decision by the Court of Appeal will stand until the Supreme Court hands down its decision in the main case between BREIN and Ziggo / XS4ALL.

Looking forward, it seems extremely unlikely that the Supreme Court will hand down a conflicting decision, so we’re probably already looking at the beginning of the end for direct accessibility of The Pirate Bay in the Netherlands.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

EU Piracy Report Suppression Raises Questions Over Transparency

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/eu-piracy-report-suppression-raises-questions-transparency-170922/

Over the years, copyright holders have made hundreds of statements against piracy, mainly that it risks bringing industries to their knees through widespread and uncontrolled downloading from the Internet.

But while TV shows like Game of Thrones have been downloaded millions of times, the big question (one could argue the only really important question) is whether this activity actually affects sales. After all, if piracy has a massive negative effect on industry, something needs to be done. If it does not, why all the panic?

Quite clearly, the EU Commission wanted to find out the answer to this potential multi-billion dollar question when it made the decision to invest a staggering 360,000 euros in a dedicated study back in January 2014.

With a final title of ‘Estimating displacement rates of copyrighted content in the EU’, the completed study is an intimidating 307 pages deep. Shockingly, until this week, few people even knew it existed because, for reasons unknown, the EU Commission decided not to release it.

However, thanks to the sheer persistence of Member of the European Parliament Julia Reda, the public now has a copy and it contains quite a few interesting conclusions. But first, some background.

The study uses data from 2014 and covers four broad types of content: music,
audio-visual material, books and videogames. Unlike other reports, the study also considered live attendances of music and cinema visits in the key regions of Germany, UK, Spain, France, Poland and Sweden.

On average, 51% of adults and 72% of minors in the EU were found to have illegally downloaded or streamed any form of creative content, with Poland and Spain coming out as the worst offenders. However, here’s the kicker.

“In general, the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements,” the study notes.

“That does not necessarily mean that piracy has no effect but only that the statistical analysis does not prove with sufficient reliability that there is an effect.”

For a study commissioned by the EU with huge sums of public money, this is a potentially damaging conclusion, not least for the countless industry bodies that lobby day in, day out, for tougher copyright law based on the “fact” that piracy is damaging to sales.

That being said, the study did find that certain sectors can be affected by piracy, notably recent top movies.

“The results show a displacement rate of 40 per cent which means that for every ten recent top films watched illegally, four fewer films are consumed legally,” the study notes.

“People do not watch many recent top films a second time but if it happens, displacement is lower: two legal consumptions are displaced by every ten illegal second views. This suggests that the displacement rate for older films is lower than the 40 per cent for recent top films. All in all, the estimated loss for recent top films is 5 per cent of current sales volumes.”

But while there is some negative effect on the movie industry, others can benefit. The study found that piracy had a slightly positive effect on the videogames industry, suggesting that those who play pirate games eventually become buyers of official content.

On top of displacement rates, the study also looked at the public’s willingness to pay for content, to assess whether price influences pirate consumption. Interestingly, the industry that had the most displaced sales – the movie industry – had the greatest number of people unhappy with its pricing model.

“Overall, the analysis indicates that for films and TV-series current prices are higher than 80 per cent of the illegal downloaders and streamers are willing to pay,” the study notes.

For other industries, where sales were not found to have been displaced or were positively affected by piracy, consumer satisfaction with pricing was greatest.

“For books, music and games, prices are at a level broadly corresponding to the
willingness to pay of illegal downloaders and streamers. This suggests that a
decrease in the price level would not change piracy rates for books, music and
games but that prices can have an effect on displacement rates for films and
TV-series,” the study concludes.

So, it appears that products that are priced fairly do not suffer significant displacement from piracy. Those that are priced too high, on the other hand, can expect to lose some sales.

Now that it’s been released, the findings of the study should help to paint a more comprehensive picture of the infringement climate in the EU, while laying to rest some of the wild claims of the copyright lobby. That being said, it shouldn’t have taken the toils of Julia Reda to bring them to light.

“This study may have remained buried in a drawer for several more years to come if it weren’t for an access to documents request I filed under the European Union’s Freedom of Information law on July 27, 2017, after having become aware of the public tender for this study dating back to 2013,” Reda explains.

“I would like to invite the Commission to become a provider of more solid and timely evidence to the copyright debate. Such data that is valuable both financially and in terms of its applicability should be available to everyone when it is financed by the European Union – it should not be gathering dust on a shelf until someone actively requests it.”

The full study can be downloaded here (pdf)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Astro Pi upgrades on the International Space Station

Post Syndicated from David Honess original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/astro-pi-upgrades/

In 2015, The Raspberry Pi Foundation built two space-hardened Raspberry Pi units, or Astro Pis, to run student code on board the International Space Station (ISS).

Astro Pi

A space-hardened Raspberry Pi

Astro Pi upgrades

Each school year we run an Astro Pi challenge to find the next generation of space scientists to program them. After the students have their code run in space, any output files are downloaded to ground and returned to them for analysis.

That download process was originally accomplished by an astronaut shutting down the Astro Pi, moving its micro SD card to a crew laptop and copying over the files manually. This used about 20 minutes of precious crew time.

space pi – Create, Discover and Share Awesome GIFs on Gfycat

Watch space pi GIF by sooperdave on Gfycat. Discover more GIFS online on Gfycat

Last year, we passed the qualification to allow the Astro Pi computers to be connected to the Local Area Network (LAN) on board the ISS. This allows us to remotely access them from the ground, upload student code and download the results without having to involve the crew.

This year, we have been preparing a new payload to upgrade the operational capabilities of the Astro Pi units.

The payload consists of the following items:

  • 2 × USB WiFi dongles
  • 5 × optical filters
  • 4 × 32GB micro SD cards

Before anyone asks – no, we’re not going outside into the vacuum of space!

USB WiFi dongle

Currently both Astro Pi units are located in the European Columbus module. They’re even visible on Google Street View (pan down and right)! You can see that we’ve created a bit of a bird’s nest of wires behind them.

Astro Pi

The D-Link DWA-171

The decision to add WiFi capability is partly to clean up the cabling situation, but mainly so that the Astro Pi units can be deployed in ISS locations other than the Columbus module, where we won’t have access to an Ethernet switch.

The Raspberry Pi used in the Astro Pi flight units is the B+ (released in 2014), which does not have any built in wireless connectivity, so we need to use a USB dongle. This particular D-Link dongle was recommended by the European Space Agency (ESA) because a number of other payloads are already using it.

Astro Pi

An Astro Pi unit with WiFi dongle installed

Plans have been made for one of the Astro Pi units to be deployed on an Earth-facing window, to allow Earth-observation student experiments. This is where WiFi connectivity will be required to maintain LAN access for ground control.

Optical filters

With Earth-observation experiments in mind, we are also sending some flexible film optical filters. These are made from the same material as the blue square which is shipped with the Pi NoIR camera module, as noted in this post from when the product was launched. You can find the data sheet here.

Astro Pi

Rosco Roscalux #2007 Storaro Blue

To permit the filter to be easily attached to the Astro Pi unit, the film is laser-cut to friction-fit onto the 12 inner heatsink pins on the base, so that the camera aperture is covered.

Astro Pi

Laser cutting at Makespace

The laser-cutting work was done right here in Cambridge at Makespace by our own Alex Bate, and local artist Diana Probst.

Astro Pi

An Astro Pi with the optical filter installed

32GB micro SD cards

A consequence of running Earth observation experiments is a dramatic increase in the amount of disk space needed. To avoid a high frequency of commanding windows to download imagery to ground, we’re also flying some larger 32GB micro SD cards to replace the current 8GB cards.

Astro Pi

The Samsung Evo MB-MP32DA/EU

This particular type of micro SD card is X-ray proof, waterproof, and resistant to magnetism and heat. Operationally speaking there is no difference, other than the additional available disk space.

Astro Pi

An Astro Pi unit with the new micro SD card installed

The micro SD cards will be flown with a security-hardened version of Raspbian pre-installed.

Crew activities

We have several crew activities planned for when this payload arrives on the ISS. These include the installation of the upgrade items on both Astro Pi units; moving one of the units from Columbus to an earth-facing window (possibly in Node 2); and then moving it back a few weeks later.

Currently it is expected that these activities will be carried out by German ESA astronaut Alexander Gerst who launches to the ISS in November (and will also be the ISS commander for Expedition 57).

Payload launch

We are targeting a January 2018 launch date for the payload. The exact launch vehicle is yet to be determined, but it could be SpaceX CRS 14. We will update you closer to the time.

Questions?

If you have any questions about this payload, how an item works, or why that specific model was chosen, please post them in the comments below, and we’ll try to answer them.

The post Astro Pi upgrades on the International Space Station appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

On the Equifax Data Breach

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/09/on_the_equifax_.html

Last Thursday, Equifax reported a data breach that affects 143 million US customers, about 44% of the population. It’s an extremely serious breach; hackers got access to full names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, driver’s license numbers — exactly the sort of information criminals can use to impersonate victims to banks, credit card companies, insurance companies, and other businesses vulnerable to fraud.

Many sites posted guides to protecting yourself now that it’s happened. But if you want to prevent this kind of thing from happening again, your only solution is government regulation (as unlikely as that may be at the moment).

The market can’t fix this. Markets work because buyers choose between sellers, and sellers compete for buyers. In case you didn’t notice, you’re not Equifax’s customer. You’re its product.

This happened because your personal information is valuable, and Equifax is in the business of selling it. The company is much more than a credit reporting agency. It’s a data broker. It collects information about all of us, analyzes it all, and then sells those insights.

Its customers are people and organizations who want to buy information: banks looking to lend you money, landlords deciding whether to rent you an apartment, employers deciding whether to hire you, companies trying to figure out whether you’d be a profitable customer — everyone who wants to sell you something, even governments.

It’s not just Equifax. It might be one of the biggest, but there are 2,500 to 4,000 other data brokers that are collecting, storing, and selling information about you — almost all of them companies you’ve never heard of and have no business relationship with.

Surveillance capitalism fuels the Internet, and sometimes it seems that everyone is spying on you. You’re secretly tracked on pretty much every commercial website you visit. Facebook is the largest surveillance organization mankind has created; collecting data on you is its business model. I don’t have a Facebook account, but Facebook still keeps a surprisingly complete dossier on me and my associations — just in case I ever decide to join.

I also don’t have a Gmail account, because I don’t want Google storing my e-mail. But my guess is that it has about half of my e-mail anyway, because so many people I correspond with have accounts. I can’t even avoid it by choosing not to write to gmail.com addresses, because I have no way of knowing if [email protected] is hosted at Gmail.

And again, many companies that track us do so in secret, without our knowledge and consent. And most of the time we can’t opt out. Sometimes it’s a company like Equifax that doesn’t answer to us in any way. Sometimes it’s a company like Facebook, which is effectively a monopoly because of its sheer size. And sometimes it’s our cell phone provider. All of them have decided to track us and not compete by offering consumers privacy. Sure, you can tell people not to have an e-mail account or cell phone, but that’s not a realistic option for most people living in 21st-century America.

The companies that collect and sell our data don’t need to keep it secure in order to maintain their market share. They don’t have to answer to us, their products. They know it’s more profitable to save money on security and weather the occasional bout of bad press after a data loss. Yes, we are the ones who suffer when criminals get our data, or when our private information is exposed to the public, but ultimately why should Equifax care?

Yes, it’s a huge black eye for the company — this week. Soon, another company will have suffered a massive data breach and few will remember Equifax’s problem. Does anyone remember last year when Yahoo admitted that it exposed personal information of a billion users in 2013 and another half billion in 2014?

This market failure isn’t unique to data security. There is little improvement in safety and security in any industry until government steps in. Think of food, pharmaceuticals, cars, airplanes, restaurants, workplace conditions, and flame-retardant pajamas.

Market failures like this can only be solved through government intervention. By regulating the security practices of companies that store our data, and fining companies that fail to comply, governments can raise the cost of insecurity high enough that security becomes a cheaper alternative. They can do the same thing by giving individuals affected by these breaches the ability to sue successfully, citing the exposure of personal data itself as a harm.

By all means, take the recommended steps to protect yourself from identity theft in the wake of Equifax’s data breach, but recognize that these steps are only effective on the margins, and that most data security is out of your hands. Perhaps the Federal Trade Commission will get involved, but without evidence of “unfair and deceptive trade practices,” there’s nothing it can do. Perhaps there will be a class-action lawsuit, but because it’s hard to draw a line between any of the many data breaches you’re subjected to and a specific harm, courts are not likely to side with you.

If you don’t like how careless Equifax was with your data, don’t waste your breath complaining to Equifax. Complain to your government.

This essay previously appeared on CNN.com.

EDITED TO ADD: In the early hours of this breach, I did a radio interview where I minimized the ramifications of this. I didn’t know the full extent of the breach, and thought it was just another in an endless string of breaches. I wondered why the press was covering this one and not many of the others. I don’t remember which radio show interviewed me. I kind of hope it didn’t air.

KinoX / Movie4K Admin Detained in Kosovo After Three-Year Manhunt

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/kinox-movie4k-admin-detained-in-kosovo-after-three-year-manhunt-170912/

In June 2011, police across Europe carried out the largest anti-piracy operation the region had ever seen. Their target was massive streaming portal Kino.to and several affiliates with links to Spain, France and the Netherlands.

With many sites demonstrating phoenix-like abilities these days, it didn’t take long for a replacement to appear.

Replacement platform KinoX soon attracted a large fanbase and with that almost immediate attention from the authorities. In October 2014, Germany-based investigators acting on behalf of the Attorney General carried out raids in several regions of the country looking for four main suspects.

One raid, focused on a village near to the northern city of Lübeck, targeted two brothers, then aged 21 and 25-years-old. The pair, who were said to have lived with their parents, were claimed to be the main operators of Kinox.to and another large streaming site, Movie4K.to. Although two other men were arrested elsewhere in Germany, the brothers couldn’t be found.

This was to be no ordinary manhunt by the police. In addition to accusing the brothers of copyright infringement and tax evasion, authorities indicated they were wanted for fraud, extortion, and arson too. The suggestion was that they’d targeted a vehicle owned by a pirate competitor, causing it to “burst into flames”.

The brothers were later named as Kastriot and Kreshnik Selimi. Born in 1992, 21-year-old Kreshnik was born in Sweden. 25-year-old Kastriot was born in Kosovo in 1989 and along with his brother, later became a German citizen.

With authorities piling on the charges, the pair were accused of being behind not only KinoX and Movie4K, but also other hosting and sharing platforms including BitShare, Stream4k.to, Shared.sx, Mygully.com and Boerse.sx.

Now, almost three years later, German police are one step closer to getting their men. According to a Handelsblatt report via Tarnkappe, Kreshnik Selimi has been detained by authorities.

The now 24-year-old suspect reportedly handed himself to the German embassy located in the capital of Kosovo, Prestina. The location of the arrest isn’t really a surprise. Older brother Kastriot previously published a picture on Instagram which appeared to show a ticket in his name destined for Kosovo from Zurich in Switzerland.

But while Kreshnik’s arrest reportedly took place in July, there’s still no news of Kastriot. The older brother is still on the run, maybe in Kosovo, or by now, potentially anywhere else in the world.

While his whereabouts remain a mystery, the other puzzle faced by German authorities is the status of the two main sites the brothers were said to maintain.

Despite all the drama and unprecedented allegations of violence and other serious offenses, both Movie4K and KinoX remain stubbornly online, apparently oblivious to the action.

There have been consequences for people connected to the latter, however.

In December 2015, Arvit O (aka “Pedro”) who handled technical issues on KinoX, was sentenced to 40 months in prison for his involvement in the site.

Arvit O, who made a partial confession, was found guilty of copyright infringement by the District Court of Leipzig. The then 29-year-old admitted to infringing 2,889 works. The Court also found that he hacked the computers of two competitors in order to improve Kinox’s market share.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

No, Google Drive is Definitely Not The New Pirate Bay

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/no-google-drive-is-definitely-not-the-new-pirate-bay-170910/

Running close to two decades old, the world of true mainstream file-sharing is less of a mystery to the general public than it’s ever been.

Most people now understand the concept of shifting files from one place to another, and a significant majority will be aware of the opportunities to do so with infringing content.

Unsurprisingly, this is a major thorn in the side of rightsholders all over the world, who have been scrambling since the turn of the century in a considerable effort to stem the tide. The results of their work have varied, with some sectors hit harder than others.

One area that has taken a bit of a battering recently involves the dominant peer-to-peer platforms reliant on underlying BitTorrent transfers. Several large-scale sites have shut down recently, not least KickassTorrents, Torrentz, and ExtraTorrent, raising questions of what bad news may arrive next for inhabitants of Torrent Land.

Of course, like any other Internet-related activity, sharing has continued to evolve over the years, with streaming and cloud-hosting now a major hit with consumers. In the main, sites which skirt the borders of legality have been the major hosting and streaming players over the years, but more recently it’s become clear that even the most legitimate companies can become unwittingly involved in the piracy scene.

As reported here on TF back in 2014 and again several times this year (1,2,3), cloud-hosting services operated by Google, including Google Drive, are being used to store and distribute pirate content.

That news was echoed again this week, with a report on Gadgets360 reiterating that Google Drive is still being used for movie piracy. What followed were a string of follow up reports, some of which declared Google’s service to be ‘The New Pirate Bay.’

No. Just no.

While it’s always tempting for publications to squeeze a reference to The Pirate Bay into a piracy article due to the site’s popularity, it’s particularly out of place in this comparison. In no way, shape, or form can a centralized store of data like Google Drive ever replace the underlying technology of sites like The Pirate Bay.

While the casual pirate might love the idea of streaming a movie with a couple of clicks to a browser of his or her choice, the weakness of the cloud system cannot be understated. To begin with, anything hosted by Google is vulnerable to immediate takedown on demand, usually within a matter of hours.

“Google Drive has a variety of piracy counter-measures in place,” a spokesperson told Mashable this week, “and we are continuously working to improve our protections to prevent piracy across all of our products.”

When will we ever hear anything like that from The Pirate Bay? Answer: When hell freezes over. But it’s not just compliance with takedown requests that make Google Drive-hosted files vulnerable.

At the point Google Drive responds to a takedown request, it takes down the actual file. On the other hand, even if Pirate Bay responded to notices (which it doesn’t), it would be unable to do anything about the sharing going on underneath. Removing a torrent file or magnet link from TPB does nothing to negatively affect the decentralized swarm of people sharing files among themselves. Those files stay intact and sharing continues, no matter what happens to the links above.

Importantly, people sharing using BitTorrent do so without any need for central servers – the whole process is decentralized as long as a user can lay his or her hands on a torrent file or magnet link. Those using Google Drive, however, rely on a totally centralized system, where not only is Google king, but it can and will stop the entire party after receiving a few lines of text from a rightsholder.

There is a very good reason why sites like The Pirate Bay have been around for close to 15 years while platforms such as Megaupload, Hotfile, Rapidshare, and similar platforms have all met their makers. File-hosting platforms are expensive-to-run warehouses full of files, each of which brings direct liability for their hosts, once they’re made aware that those files are infringing. These days the choice is clear – take the files down or get brought down, it’s as simple as that.

The Pirate Bay, on the other hand, is nothing more than a treasure map (albeit a valuable one) that points the way to content spread all around the globe in the most decentralized way possible. There are no files to delete, no content to disappear. Comparing a vulnerable Google Drive to this kind of robust system couldn’t be further from the mark.

That being said, this is the way things are going. The cloud, it seems, is here to stay in all its forms. Everyone has access to it and uploading content is easier – much easier – than uploading it to a BitTorrent network. A Google Drive upload is simplicity itself for anyone with a mouse and a file; the same cannot be said about The Pirate Bay.

For this reason alone, platforms like Google Drive and the many dozens of others offering a similar service will continue to become havens for pirated content, until the next big round of legislative change. At the moment, each piece of content has to be removed individually but in the future, it’s possible that pre-emptive filters will kill uploads of pirated content before they see the light of day.

When this comes to pass, millions of people will understand why Google Drive, with its bots checking every file upload for alleged infringement, is not The Pirate Bay. At this point, if people have left it too long, it might be too late to reinvigorate BitTorrent networks to their former glory.

People will try to rebuild them, of course, but realizing why they shouldn’t have been left behind at all is probably the best protection.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Disabling Intel Hyper-Threading Technology on Amazon EC2 Windows Instances

Post Syndicated from Brian Beach original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/disabling-intel-hyper-threading-technology-on-amazon-ec2-windows-instances/

In a prior post, Disabling Intel Hyper-Threading on Amazon Linux, I investigated how the Linux kernel enumerates CPUs. I also discussed the options to disable Intel Hyper-Threading (HT Technology) in Amazon Linux running on Amazon EC2.

In this post, I do the same for Microsoft Windows Server 2016 running on EC2 instances. I begin with a quick review of HT Technology and the reasons you might want to disable it. I also recommend that you take a moment to review the prior post for a more thorough foundation.

HT Technology

HT Technology makes a single physical processor appear as multiple logical processors. Each core in an Intel Xeon processor has two threads of execution. Most of the time, these threads can progress independently; one thread executing while the other is waiting on a relatively slow operation (for example, reading from memory) to occur. However, the two threads do share resources and occasionally one thread is forced to wait while the other is executing.

There a few unique situations where disabling HT Technology can improve performance. One example is high performance computing (HPC) workloads that rely heavily on floating point operations. In these rare cases, it can be advantageous to disable HT Technology. However, these cases are rare, and for the overwhelming majority of workloads you should leave it enabled. I recommend that you test with and without HT Technology enabled, and only disable threads if you are sure it will improve performance.

Exploring HT Technology on Microsoft Windows

Here’s how Microsoft Windows enumerates CPUs. As before, I am running these examples on an m4.2xlarge. I also chose to run Windows Server 2016, but you can walk through these exercises on any version of Windows. Remember that the m4.2xlarge has eight vCPUs, and each vCPU is a thread of an Intel Xeon core. Therefore, the m4.2xlarge has four cores, each of which run two threads, resulting in eight vCPUs.

Windows does not have a built-in utility to examine CPU configuration, but you can download the Sysinternals coreinfo utility from Microsoft’s website. This utility provides useful information about the system CPU and memory topology. For this walkthrough, you enumerate the individual CPUs, which you can do by running coreinfo -c. For example:

C:\Users\Administrator >coreinfo -c

Coreinfo v3.31 - Dump information on system CPU and memory topology
Copyright (C) 2008-2014 Mark Russinovich
Sysinternals - www.sysinternals.com

Logical to Physical Processor Map:
**------ Physical Processor 0 (Hyperthreaded)
--**---- Physical Processor 1 (Hyperthreaded)
----**-- Physical Processor 2 (Hyperthreaded)
------** Physical Processor 3 (Hyperthreaded)

As you can see from the screenshot, the coreinfo utility displays a table where each row is a physical core and each column is a logical CPU. In other words, the two asterisks on the first line indicate that CPU 0 and CPU 1 are the two threads in the first physical core. Therefore, my m4.2xlarge has for four physical processors and each processor has two threads resulting in eight total CPUs, just as expected.

It is interesting to note that Windows Server 2016 enumerates CPUs in a different order than Linux. Remember from the prior post that Linux enumerated the first thread in each core, followed by the second thread in each core. You can see from the output earlier that Windows Server 2016, enumerates both threads in the first core, then both threads in the second core, and so on. The diagram below shows the relationship of CPUs to cores and threads in both operating systems.

In the Linux post, I disabled CPUs 4–6, leaving one thread per core, and effectively disabling HT Technology. You can see from the diagram that you must disable the odd-numbered threads (that is, 1, 3, 5, and 7) to achieve the same result in Windows. Here’s how to do that.

Disabling HT Technology on Microsoft Windows

In Linux, you can globally disable CPUs dynamically. In Windows, there is no direct equivalent that I could find, but there are a few alternatives.

First, you can disable CPUs using the msconfig.exe tool. If you choose Boot, Advanced Options, you have the option to set the number of processors. In the example below, I limit my m4.2xlarge to four CPUs. Restart for this change to take effect.

Unfortunately, Windows does not disable hyperthreaded CPUs first and then real cores, as Linux does. As you can see in the following output, coreinfo reports that my c4.2xlarge has two real cores and four hyperthreads, after rebooting. Msconfig.exe is useful for disabling cores, but it does not allow you to disable HT Technology.

Note: If you have been following along, you can re-enable all your CPUs by unselecting the Number of processors check box and rebooting your system.

 

C:\Users\Administrator >coreinfo -c

Coreinfo v3.31 - Dump information on system CPU and memory topology
Copyright (C) 2008-2014 Mark Russinovich
Sysinternals - www.sysinternals.com

Logical to Physical Processor Map:
**-- Physical Processor 0 (Hyperthreaded)
--** Physical Processor 1 (Hyperthreaded)

While you cannot disable HT Technology systemwide, Windows does allow you to associate a particular process with one or more CPUs. Microsoft calls this, “processor affinity”. To see an example, use the following steps.

  1. Launch an instance of Notepad.
  2. Open Windows Task Manager and choose Processes.
  3. Open the context (right click) menu on notepad.exe and choose Set Affinity….

This brings up the Processor Affinity dialog box.

As you can see, all the CPUs are allowed to run this instance of notepad.exe. You can uncheck a few CPUs to exclude them. Windows is smart enough to allow any scheduled operations to continue to completion on disabled CPUs. It then saves its state at the next scheduling event, and resumes those operations on another CPU. To ensure that only one thread in each core is able to run a process, you uncheck every other core. This effectively disables HT Technology for this process. For example:

Of course, this can be tedious when you have a large number of cores. Remember that the x1.32xlarge has 128 CPUs. Luckily, you can set the affinity of a running process from PowerShell using the Get-Process cmdlet. For example:

PS C:\> (Get-Process -Name 'notepad').ProcessorAffinity = 0x55;

The ProcessorAffinity attribute takes a bitmask in hexadecimal format. 0x55 in hex is equivalent to 01010101 in binary. Think of the binary encoding as 1=enabled and 0=disabled. This is slightly confusing, but we work left to right so that CPU 0 is the rightmost bit and CPU 7 is the leftmost bit. Therefore, 01010101 means that the first thread in each CPU is enabled just as it was in the diagram earlier.

The calculator built into Windows includes a “programmer view” that helps you convert from hexadecimal to binary. In addition, the ProcessorAffinity attribute is a 64-bit number. Therefore, you can only configure the processor affinity on systems up to 64 CPUs. At the moment, only the x1.32xlarge has more than 64 vCPUs.

In the preceding examples, you changed the processor affinity of a running process. Sometimes, you want to start a process with the affinity already configured. You can do this using the start command. The start command includes an affinity flag that takes a hexadecimal number like the PowerShell example earlier.

C:\Users\Administrator>start /affinity 55 notepad.exe

It is interesting to note that a child process inherits the affinity from its parent. For example, the following commands create a batch file that launches Notepad, and starts the batch file with the affinity set. If you examine the instance of Notepad launched by the batch file, you see that the affinity has been applied to as well.

C:\Users\Administrator>echo notepad.exe > test.bat
C:\Users\Administrator>start /affinity 55 test.bat

This means that you can set the affinity of your task scheduler and any tasks that the scheduler starts inherits the affinity. So, you can disable every other thread when you launch the scheduler and effectively disable HT Technology for all of the tasks as well. Be sure to test this point, however, as some schedulers override the normal inheritance behavior and explicitly set processor affinity when starting a child process.

Conclusion

While the Windows operating system does not allow you to disable logical CPUs, you can set processor affinity on individual processes. You also learned that Windows Server 2016 enumerates CPUs in a different order than Linux. Therefore, you can effectively disable HT Technology by restricting a process to every other CPU. Finally, you learned how to set affinity of both new and running processes using Task Manager, PowerShell, and the start command.

Note: this technical approach has nothing to do with control over software licensing, or licensing rights, which are sometimes linked to the number of “CPUs” or “cores.” For licensing purposes, those are legal terms, not technical terms. This post did not cover anything about software licensing or licensing rights.

If you have questions or suggestions, please comment below.

Perfect 10 Takes Giganews to Supreme Court, Says It’s Worse Than Megaupload

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/perfect-10-takes-giganews-supreme-court-says-worse-megaupload-170906/

Adult publisher Perfect 10 has developed a reputation for being a serial copyright litigant.

Over the years the company targeted a number of high-profile defendants, including Google, Amazon, Mastercard, and Visa. Around two dozen of Perfect 10’s lawsuits ended in cash settlements and defaults, in the publisher’s favor.

Perhaps buoyed by this success, the company went after Usenet provider Giganews but instead of a company willing to roll over, Perfect 10 found a highly defensive and indeed aggressive opponent. The initial copyright case filed by Perfect 10 alleged that Giganews effectively sold access to Perfect 10 content but things went badly for the publisher.

In November 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California found that Giganews was not liable for the infringing activities of its users. Perfect 10 was ordered to pay Giganews $5.6m in attorney’s fees and costs. Perfect 10 lost again at the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

As a result of these failed actions, Giganews is owned millions by Perfect 10 but the publisher has thus far refused to pay up. That resulted in Giganews filing a $20m lawsuit, accusing Perfect 10 and President Dr. Norman Zada of fraud.

With all this litigation boiling around in the background and Perfect 10 already bankrupt as a result, one might think the story would be near to a conclusion. That doesn’t seem to be the case. In a fresh announcement, Perfect 10 says it has now appealed its case to the US Supreme Court.

“This is an extraordinarily important case, because for the first time, an appellate court has allowed defendants to copy and sell movies, songs, images, and other copyrighted works, without permission or payment to copyright holders,” says Zada.

“In this particular case, evidence was presented that defendants were copying and selling access to approximately 25,000 terabytes of unlicensed movies, songs, images, software, and magazines.”

Referencing an Amicus brief previously filed by the RIAA which described Giganews as “blatant copyright pirates,” Perfect 10 accuses the Ninth Circuit of allowing Giganews to copy and sell trillions of dollars of other people’s intellectual property “because their copying and selling was done in an automated fashion using a computer.”

Noting that “everything is done via computer” these days and with an undertone that the ruling encouraged others to infringe, Perfect 10 says there are now 88 companies similar to Giganews which rely on the automation defense to commit infringement – even involving content owned by people in the US Government.

“These exploiters of other people’s property are fearless. They are copying and selling access to pirated versions of pretty much every movie ever made, including films co-produced by treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin,” Nada says.

“You would think the justice department would do something to protect the viability of this nation’s movie and recording studios, as unfettered piracy harms jobs and tax revenues, but they have done nothing.”

But Zada doesn’t stop at blaming Usenet services, the California District Court, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Department of Justice for his problems – Congress is to blame too.

“Copyright holders have nowhere to turn other than the Federal courts, whose judges are ridiculously overworked. For years, Congress has failed to provide the Federal courts with adequate funding. As a result, judges can make mistakes,” he adds.

For Zada, those mistakes are particularly notable, particularly since at least one other super high-profile company was shut down in the most aggressive manner possible for allegedly being involved in less piracy than Giganews.

Pointing to the now-infamous Megaupload case, Perfect 10 notes that the Department of Justice completely shut that operation down, filing charges of criminal copyright infringement against Kim Dotcom and seizing $175 million “for selling access to movies and songs which they did not own.”

“Perfect 10 provided evidence that [Giganews] offered more than 200 times as many full length movies as did megaupload.com. But our evidence fell on deaf ears,” Zada complains.

In contrast, Perfect 10 adds, a California District Court found that Giganews had done nothing wrong, allowed it to continue copying and selling access to Perfect 10’s content, and awarded the Usenet provider $5.63m in attorneys fees.

“Prior to this case, no court had ever awarded fees to an alleged infringer, unless they were found to either own the copyrights at issue, or established a fair use defense. Neither was the case here,” Zada adds.

While Perfect 10 has filed a petition with the Supreme Court, the odds of being granted a review are particularly small. Only time will tell how this case will end, but it seems unlikely that the adult publisher will enjoy a happy ending, one in which it doesn’t have to pay Giganews millions of dollars in attorney’s fees.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Security Flaw in Estonian National ID Card

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/09/security_flaw_i.html

We have no idea how bad this really is:

On 30 August, an international team of researchers informed the Estonian Information System Authority (RIA) of a vulnerability potentially affecting the digital use of Estonian ID cards. The possible vulnerability affects a total of almost 750,000 ID-cards issued starting from October 2014, including cards issued to e-residents. The ID-cards issued before 16 October 2014 use a different chip and are not affected. Mobile-IDs are also not impacted.

My guess is that it’s worse than the politicians are saying:

According to Peterkop, the current data shows this risk to be theoretical and there is no evidence of anyone’s digital identity being misused. “All ID-card operations are still valid and we will take appropriate actions to secure the functioning of our national digital-ID infrastructure. For example, we have restricted the access to Estonian ID-card public key database to prevent illegal use.”

And because this system is so important in local politics, the effects are significant:

In the light of current events, some Estonian politicians called to postpone the upcoming local elections, due to take place on 16 October. In Estonia, approximately 35% of the voters use digital identity to vote online.

But the Estonian prime minister, Jüri Ratas, said at a press conference on 5 September that “this incident will not affect the course of the Estonian e-state.” Ratas also recommended to use Mobile-IDs where possible. The prime minister said that the State Electoral Office will decide whether it will allow the usage of ID cards at the upcoming local elections.

The Estonian Police and Border Guard estimates it will take approximately two months to fix the issue with faulty cards. The authority will involve as many Estonian experts as possible in the process.

This is exactly the sort of thing I worry about as ID systems become more prevalent and more centralized. Anyone want to place bets on whether a foreign country is going to try to hack the next Estonian election?

Another article.

State of MAC address randomization

Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/09/state-of-mac-address-randomization.html

tldr: I went to DragonCon, a conference of 85,000 people, so sniff WiFi packets and test how many phones now uses MAC address randomization. Almost all iPhones nowadays do, but it seems only a third of Android phones do.

Ten years ago at BlackHat, we presented the “data seepage” problem, how the broadcasts from your devices allow you to be tracked. Among the things we highlighted was how WiFi probes looking to connect to access-points expose the unique hardware address burned into the phone, the MAC address. This hardware address is unique to your phone, shared by no other device in the world. Evildoers, such as the NSA or GRU, could install passive listening devices in airports and train-stations around the world in order to track your movements. This could be done with $25 devices sprinkled around a few thousand places — within the budget of not only a police state, but also the average hacker.

In 2014, with the release of iOS 8, Apple addressed this problem by randomizing the MAC address. Every time you restart your phone, it picks a new, random, hardware address for connecting to WiFi. This causes a few problems: every time you restart your iOS devices, your home network sees a completely new device, which can fill up your router’s connection table. Since that table usually has at least 100 entries, this shouldn’t be a problem for your home, but corporations and other owners of big networks saw their connection tables suddenly get big with iOS 8.

In 2015, Google added the feature to Android as well. However, even though most Android phones today support this feature in theory, it’s usually not enabled.

Recently, I went to DragonCon in order to test out how well this works. DragonCon is a huge sci-fi/fantasy conference in Atlanta in August, second to San Diego’s ComicCon in popularity. It’s spread across several neighboring hotels in the downtown area. A lot of the traffic funnels through the Marriot Marquis hotel, which has a large open area where, from above, you can see thousands of people at a time.

And, with a laptop, see their broadcast packets.

So I went up on a higher floor and setup my laptop in order to capture “probe” broadcasts coming from phones, in order to record the hardware MAC addresses. I’ve done this in years past, before address randomization, in order to record the popularity of iPhones. The first three bytes of an old-style, non-randomized address, identifies the manufacturer. This time, I should see a lot fewer manufacturer IDs, and mostly just random addresses instead.

I recorded 9,095 unique probes over a couple hours. I’m not sure exactly how long — my laptop would go to sleep occasionally because of lack of activity on the keyboard. I should probably setup a Raspberry Pi somewhere next year to get a more consistent result.

A quick summary of the results are:

The 9,000 devices were split almost evenly between Apple and Android. Almost all of the Apple devices randomized their addresses. About a third of the Android devices randomized. (This assumes Android only randomizes the final 3 bytes of the address, and that Apple randomizes all 6 bytes — my assumption may be wrong).

A table of the major results are below. A little explanation:

  • The first item in the table is the number of phones that randomized the full 6 bytes of the MAC address. I’m guessing these are either mostly or all Apple iOS devices. They are nearly half of the total, or 4498 out of 9095 unique probes.
  • The second number is those that randomized the final 3 bytes of the MAC address, but left the first three bytes identifying themselves as Android devices. I’m guessing this represents all the Android devices that randomize. My guesses may be wrong, maybe some Androids randomize the full 6 bytes, which would get them counted in the first number.
  • The following numbers are phones from major Android manufacturers like Motorola, LG, HTC, Huawei, OnePlus, ZTE. Remember: the first 3 bytes of an un-randomized address identifies who made it. There are roughly 2500 of these devices.
  • There is a count for 309 Apple devices. These are either older iOS devices pre iOS 8, or which have turned off the feature (some corporations demand this), or which are actually MacBooks instead of phones.
  • The vendor of the access-points that Marriot uses is “Ruckus”. There have a lot of access-points in the hotel.
  • The “TCT mobile” entry is actually BlackBerry. Apparently, BlackBerry stopped making phones and instead just licenses the software/brand to other hardware makers. If you buy a BlackBerry from the phone store, it’s likely going to be a TCT phone instead.
  • I’m assuming the “Amazon” devices are Kindle ebooks.
  • Lastly, I’d like to point out the two records for “Ford”. I was capturing while walking out of the building, I think I got a few cars driving by.

(random)  4498
(Android)  1562
Samsung  646
Motorola  579
Murata  505
LG  412
Apple  309
HTC-phone  226
Huawei  66
Ruckus  60
OnePlus Tec  40
ZTE  23
TCT mobile  20
Amazon Tech  19
Nintendo  17
Intel  14
Microsoft  9
-hp-  8
BLU Product  8
Kyocera  8
AsusTek  6
Yulong Comp  6
Lite-On  4
Sony Mobile  4
Z-COM, INC.  4
ARRIS Group  2
AzureWave  2
Barnes&Nobl  2
Canon  2
Ford Motor  2
Foxconn  2
Google, Inc  2
Motorola (W  2
Sonos, Inc.  2
SparkLAN Co  2
Wi2Wi, Inc  2
Xiaomi Comm  2
Alps Electr  1
Askey  1
BlackBerry  1
Chi Mei Com  1
Clover Netw  1
CNet Techno  1
eSSys Co.,L  1
GoPro  1
InPro Comm  1
JJPlus Corp  1
Private  1
Quanta  1
Raspberry P  1
Roku, Inc.  1
Sonim Techn  1
Texas Instr  1
TP-LINK TEC  1
Vizio, Inc  1

Докъде сме с електронната идентификация

Post Syndicated from Bozho original https://blog.bozho.net/blog/2928

(статията е публикувана първоначално в Капитал)

Проектът за електронна идентификация е основен и централен за развитието на електронното управление. Както в изискванията на оперативна програма „Добро управление“ (ОПДУ), така и в законовата рамка, има изисквания всички системи да бъдат интегрирани със системата за електронна идентификация, за да може гражданите да ползват всички услуги на държавата с едно средство. От тази гледна точка проектът е с много висок приоритет.

Докъде е стигнал той? Законът за електронната идентификация беше приет през май миналата година, а подзаконовата уредба – няколко месеца по-късно. На база на това до края на 2016-а беше подготвено техническо задание. Обществената поръчка за самата система беше обявена през май тази година, след като беше сключен договор с управляващия орган на оперативна програма „Добро управление“ за финансирането и беше подготвена цялата документация по ЗОП.

Това представлява известно забавяне от първоначалните планове, заложени в пътната карта за електронно управление, но предвид, че всички останали системи също имат забавяне, тази за електронна идентификация ще бъде стартирана първа и забавянето няма да има силен негативен ефект.

Какво ще получим в резултат на този проект – цялостна инфраструктура, чрез която всички държавни системи да могат да идентифицират граждани. Системите ще трябва да бъдат надградени, но за това има предвидено финансиране по ОПДУ, а и самото надграждане е тривиална задача от технологична гледна точка. Освен това наредбата към Закона за електронното управление допуска използване на съществуващите средства за идентификация и занапред, като те ще могат да минават през същия процес, през който и новата електронна идентичност. Това са например квалифицираният електронен подпис и ПИК-ът на НАП. От гледна точка на гражданина това ще изглежда така – влизане в сайта на администрацията, натискане на бутон „вход“, избор на средство за вход (eID, КЕП, ПИК). В допълнение ще получим и национална точка за интеграция с други държави членки (съгласно Регламент 910/2014 на ЕС), така че български граждани да могат да използват електронни услуги навсякъде в Европа.

Забавянето, споменато по-горе, има риск да стане по-сериозен проблем обаче заради обжалване на поръчката. Справка в регистъра на КЗК показва, че откакто е обявена поръчката, са постъпили две жалби. Едната е на фирма „Теко“, а втората – от физическо лице. По първата КЗК се е произнесла в полза на възложителя (МВР), но предстои евентуално обжалване пред ВАС. Съдържанието на жалбите не е видно на сайта на КЗК.

Паралелно с това би трябвало да се движи и проектът за електронни лични карти, в които да бъде записано удостоверението за електронна идентичност. Личните карти няма да са единственият възможен носител на електронна идентичност, т.е. дори без тях проектът за електронна идентификация няма да е напразно – в него са включени определен брой карти, които гражданите могат да получат отделно от личната си карта. Доставчиците на електронни подписи също ще могат да издават такива карти (или да записват удостоверенията за електронна идентичност директно на „флашката“, на която вече е записано такова за електронен подпис).

Но все пак личните карти биха осигурили необходимата масовост, която досегашните решения като квалифицирания електронен подпис не успяват да постигнат. Т.е., за да бъде целият комплекс от проекти и мерки наистина успешен, електронните лични карти са необходими, какъвто е и примерът на Естония. В този смисъл решението на правителството да отложи с една година (от 2018 за 2019) въвеждането на новите лични карти, както и липсата на видима работа по проекта, е притеснително. През 2016-а беше обявена обществена поръчка за електронни лични карти, документацията на която е до голяма степен достатъчна за нова поръчка. Проблемът с предишната беше твърде завишената цена. Няма рационално обяснение защо година и половина по-късно липсва развитие по иначе готовата документация.

Дали така изградената система за електронна идентификация най-после ще „отпуши“ електронното управление зависи от това как ще бъде реализирана системата, колко още ще се забавят личните карти и колко бързо други държавни системи ще се включат. Държавна агенция „Електронно управление“ и МВР имат задачата да осигурят случването на този процес, но както всичко друго, това много зависи от политическата воля. Иначе казано – дали някой в Министерския съвет държи това да се случи, или нещата ще се движат по инерция.

Hardening the Kernel in Android Oreo (Android Developers Blog)

Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/732475/rss

The Android Developers Blog has an
overview of the security features
added to the kernel in the Android
“Oreo” release. “Usercopy functions are used by the kernel to
transfer data from user space to kernel space memory and back again. Since
2014, missing or invalid bounds checking has caused about 45% of Android’s
kernel vulnerabilities. Hardened usercopy adds bounds checking to usercopy
functions, which helps developers spot misuse and fix bugs in their
code. Also, if obscure driver bugs slip through, hardening these functions
prevents the exploitation of such bugs.

The NSA’s 2014 Media Engagement and Outreach Plan

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/08/the_nsas_2014_m.html

Interesting post-Snowden reading, just declassified.

(U) External Communication will address at least one of “fresh look” narratives:

  1. (U) NSA does not access everything.
  2. (U) NSA does not collect indiscriminately on U.S. Persons and foreign nationals.
  3. (U) NSA does not weaken encryption.
  4. (U) NSA has value to the nation.

There’s lots more.

Piracy Fines For Dutch Pirates, Starting This Autumn

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-fines-for-dutch-pirates-starting-this-autumn-170828/

In 2014, the European Court of Justice ruled that the “piracy levy”, used in the Netherlands to compensate rightsholders for illicit downloading, was unlawful. In the immediate aftermath, downloading from unauthorized sources was banned.

Three years on and illegal downloading is still considered by rightsholders to be a problem that needs to be brought under control. This means that BitTorrent users are the number one target since their activities also involve uploading, something that most courts consider to be a relatively serious offense.

With that in mind, Dutch film distributor Dutch Filmworks (DFW) is preparing a wave of anti-piracy activity that looks set to mimic the copyright-trolling activities of similar outfits all over the world.

A recent application to the Dutch Data Protection Authority (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens), revealed that DFW wishes to combat “the unlawful dissemination of copyright protected works” by monitoring the activities of BitTorrent users.

“DFW intends to collect data from people who exchange files over the Internet through BitTorrent networks. The data processing consists of capturing proof of exchange of files via IP addresses for the purpose of researching involvement of these users in the distribution or reproduction of copyrighted works,” it reads.

People who are monitored sharing DFW titles (the company says it intends to track people sharing dozens of releases) will get a letter with an offer to settle in advance of being taken to court. Speaking with NOS, DFW CEO Willem Pruijsserts now reveals that the campaign will begin in the autumn.

“[The lettter] will propose a fee,” he says. “If someone does not agree [to pay], the organization can start a lawsuit.”

Quite how much DFW will ask for is not yet clear, but Pruijsserts says the Dutch model will be more reasonable than similar schemes underway in other regions.

“In Germany, this costs between €800 and €1,000, although we find this a bit excessive. But of course it has to be a deterrent, so it will be more than a tenner or two,” he said.

In comments to RTLZ, Pruijsserts confirmed ‘fines’ of at least hundreds of euros.

According to documents filed with the Dutch data protection authority, DFW will employ an external German-based tracking company to monitor alleged pirates which will “automatically participate in swarms in which works from DFW are being shared.” The company has been named by RTL Z as German company Excipion, which could be linked to the monitoring outfit Tecxipio, which began as Excipio.

In conversation with NOS, Pruijsserts said that “hundreds of thousands” of people watched films like Mechanic: Resurrection without paying. This particular movie is notable for appearing in many piracy cases in the United States. It is one of the titles pursued relentlessly by lawyers acting in concert with notorious copyright-trolling outfit Guardaley.

Perhaps the most crucial element moving forward is whether DFW will be able to get ISPs to cooperate in handing over the personal details of allegedly infringing subscribers. Thus far, ISPs Ziggo and KPN have indicated they won’t do so without a court order, so further legal action will be required for DFW to progress.

When DFW’s application for discovery is heard by the court, it will be interesting to see how far the ISPs dig into the anti-piracy scheme. Finding out more about Guardaley, if the company is indeed involved, would be an intriguing approach, especially given the outfit’s tendency to scurry away (1,2) when coming under intense scrutiny.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit Secures Funding Until 2019

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/police-intellectual-property-crime-unit-secures-funding-until-2019-170823/

When compared to the wide range of offenses usually handled by the police, copyright infringement is a relatively rare offense.

Historically most connected to physical counterfeiting, in recent years infringement has regularly featured a significant online component.

Formed four years ago and run by the City of London Police, the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) has a mission to tackle IP crime wherever it may take place but with a special online focus. It is tightly linked to the music, movie, and publishing industries so can most often be viewed protecting their products from infringement.

PIPCU announced its arrival in the summer of 2013 and officially launched a few months later in December 2013, complete with £2.56million in funding from the UK government’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO). However, the unit had been already in operation for some time, writing warning letters to torrent and streaming site advising them to shut down – or else.

PIPCU’s initial funding secured the future of the unit until June 2015 but in October 2014, well in advance of that deadline, PIPCU secured another £3m from the IPO to fund the unit to September 2017.

Having received £5.56 million in public funds over three years, PIPCU needed to show some bang for its buck. As a result, the unit publicised numerous actions including streaming arrests, attempted domain seizures, torrent site closures and advertising disruptions. PIPCU also shut down several sports streaming and ebook sites plus a large number of proxies

With August 2017 already upon us, PIPCU should be officially out of funds in a month’s time but according to the Law Gazette, the unit is going nowhere.

An Intellectual Property Office (IPO) spokesperson told the publication that PIPCU has received £3.32m in additional funding from the government which runs from July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2019 – the unit’s sixth anniversary.

Much of PIPCU’s more recent activity appears to have been focused in two key areas, both operated under its ‘Operation Creative’ banner. The first concerns PIPCU’s Infringing Website List, which aims to deter advertisers from inadvertently finding ‘pirate’ sites.

Earlier this year, PIPCU claimed success after revealing a 64% drop in “mainstream advertising” revenue on 200 unauthorized platforms between January 2016 and January 2017. More recently, PIPCU revealed that gambling advertising, which is often seen on ‘pirate’ platforms, had reduced by 87% on IWL sites over the previous 12 months.

Finally, PIPCU has been taking action alongside local police forces, FACT, Sky, Virgin, BT, and The Premier League, against suppliers of so-called ‘fully loaded’ set-top boxes, many featuring Kodi bundled with illicit third party addons. However, after a fairly sustained initial flurry, the last publicized operation was in February 2017.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

MPAA Wins Movie Piracy Case in China After Failed Anti-Piracy Deal

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-wins-movie-piracy-case-in-china-after-failed-anti-piracy-deal-170822/

As one of China’s top 10 Internet companies, Xunlei is a massive operation with hundreds of millions of monthly users.

Among other file-sharing ventures, Xunlei operates ‘Thunder’, the world’s most popular torrent client. This and other almost inevitable copyright-related issues put the company on the radar of the MPAA.

With Xunlei pursuing an IPO in the United States in 2014, relationships with the MPAA began to thaw, resulting in the breakthrough signing of a Content Protection Agreement (CPA) requiring Xunlei to protect MPAA studio content including movies and TV shows.

But in October 2014, with things clearly not going to plan, the MPAA reported Xunlei to the U.S. government, complaining of rampant piracy on the service. In January 2015, the MPAA stepped up a gear and sued Xunlei for copyright infringement.

“For too long we have witnessed valuable creative content being taken and monetized without the permission of the copyright owner. That has to stop and stop now,” said MPAA Asia-Pacific chief Mike Ellis.

Now, more than two-and-a-half years later, the case has come to a close. Yesterday, the Shenzhen Nanshan District People’s Court found Xunlei Networking Technologies Co. guilty of copyright infringement.

The Court found that Xunlei made 28 movie titles (belonging to companies including Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Universal Pictures, Disney and Warner Bros.) available to the public via its platforms without proper authorization, “in serious violation” of the movie group’s rights.

Xunlei was ordered to cease-and-desist and told to pay compensation of 1.4 million yuan ($210,368) plus the MPA’s litigation costs of $24,400. In its original complaint, the MPA demanded a public apology from Xunlei but it’s unclear whether that forms part of the ruling. The outcome was welcomed by the MPA.

“We are heartened that the court in Shenzhen has found in favor of strong copyright,” said MPAA Asia-Pacific chief Mike Ellis.

“The legitimate Chinese film and television industry has worked hard to provide audiences with a wide range of legal options for their audio-visual entertainment — a marketplace that has flourished because of the rights afforded to copyright owners under the law.”

How the MPAA and Xunlei move ahead from here is unclear. This case has taken more than two-and-a-half years to come to a conclusion so further litigation seems somewhat unlikely, if not unwieldy. Then there’s the question of the anti-piracy agreement signed in 2014 and whether that is still on the table.

As previously revealed, the agreement not only compelled Xunlei to use pre-emptive content filtering technology but also required the platform to terminate the accounts of people who attempt to infringe copyright in any way.

“[The] filter will identify each and every instance of a user attempting to infringe a studio work, by uploading or downloading,” an internal MPAA document revealed.

All that being said, the document also contained advice for the MPAA not to sue Xunlei, so at this point anything could happen.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

AWS Cost Explorer Update – Better Filtering & Grouping, Report Management, RI Reports

Post Syndicated from Jeff Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-cost-explorer-update-better-filtering-grouping-report-management-ri-reports/

Our customers use Cost Explorer to better understand and manage their AWS spending, making heavy use of the reporting, analytics, and visualization tools that it provides. We launched Cost Explorer in 2014 with a focus on simplicity – single click signup, preconfigured default views, and a clean user interface (take a look back at The New AWS Cost Explorer to see where we started). The Cost Explorer has been very popular and we’ve received a lot of great feedback from our customers.

Last week we launched a major upgrade to Cost Explorer. We’ve redesigned the user interface to optimize many common workflows including filtering, report management, selection of date ranges, and grouping of data. We have also included some default reports to make it easier for you to explore the costs related to your use of Reserved Instances.

Looking at Cost Explorer
Since pictures are reportedly worth 1000 words, let’s take a closer look! Cost Explorer is part of the Billing Dashboard so I can start there:

Here’s the Billing Dashboard. I click on Cost Explorer to move ahead:

I can open up Cost Explorer or access one of three preconfigured views. I’ll go for the first option:

The default report shows my EC2 costs and usage (running hours) for the past 3 months:

I can use the Group By menu to break the costs down by EC2 instance type:

I have many other grouping options:

The filtering options are now easier to access and to edit. Here’s the full set:

I can explore my EC2 costs in any set of desired regions:

I can filter and then group by instance type to see how my spending breaks down:

I can click on Download CSV and then process the data locally:

I can also exclude certain instance types from the report. Here’s how I exclude my m4.xlarge, t2.micro, and t2.nano usage:

Report Management
Cost Explorer allows me to customize my existing reports and to create new reports from scratch. I can click on Save As to save my customized report with a new name:

I can see and manage all of my reports on the Saved Reports page (The padlock denotes a default report that cannot be edited and then overwritten):

When I click on New report I can start from a template:

After I click on Create Report, I set up my date range and filters as desired, and click on Save As. I created a report that displays my year-to-date usage of several AWS database services (Amazon Redshift, DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX), Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS), and AWS Database Migration Service):

All of my reports are accessible from the Reports menu so I can check on my costs with a click:

We also simplified the process of selecting a range of dates for a report, including options to select common date ranges:

Reserved Instance Reports
Cost Explorer also includes a pair of reports that will help you to understand and optimize your usage of Reserved Instances. I don’t own an RI’s so I used screen shots supplied by the team.

The RI Utilization report allows you to see how much of your purchased RI capacity is being put to use (the dashed red line represents a utilization target that you can specify):

The RI Coverage report tells you how much of your EC2 usage is being handled by Reserved Instances (this time, the dashed red line represents the desired amount of coverage):

I hope you have enjoyed this tour of the updated Cost Explorer. It is available now and you can start using it today!

Jeff;

Internet Archive Blocked in 2,650 Site Anti-Piracy Sweep

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/internet-archive-blocked-in-2650-site-anti-piracy-sweep-170810/

Reports of sites becoming mysteriously inaccessible in India have been a regular occurance over the past several years. In many cases, sites simply stop functioning, leaving users wondering whether sites are actually down or whether there’s a technical issue.

Due to their increasing prevalence, fingers are often pointed at so-called ‘John Doe’ orders, which are handed down by the court to prevent Internet piracy. Often sweeping in nature (and in some cases pre-emptive rather than preventative), these injunctions have been known to block access to both file-sharing platforms and innocent bystanders.

Earlier this week (and again for no apparent reason), the world renowned Internet Archive was rendered inaccessible to millions of users in India. The platform, which is considered by many to be one of the Internet’s most valued resources, hosts more than 15 petabytes of data, a figure which grows on a daily basis. Yet despite numerous requests for information, none was forthcoming from authorities.

The ‘blocked’ message seen by users accessing Archive.org

Quoted by local news outlet Medianama, Chris Butler, Office Manager at the Internet Archive, said that their attempts to contact the Indian Department of Telecom (DoT) and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (Meity) had proven fruitless.

Noting that site had previously been blocked in India, Butler said they were no clearer on the reasons why the same kind of action had seemingly been taken this week.

“We have no information about why a block would have been implemented,” he said. “Obviously, we are disappointed and concerned by this situation and are very eager to understand why it’s happening and see full access restored to archive.org.”

Now, however, the mystery has been solved. The BBC says a local government agency provided a copy of a court order obtained by two Bollywood production companies who are attempting to slow down piracy of their films in India.

Issued by a local judge, the sweeping order compels local ISPs to block access to 2,650 mainly file-sharing websites, including The Pirate Bay, RARBG, the revived KickassTorrents, and hundreds of other ‘usual suspects’. However, it also includes the URL for the Internet Archive, hence the problems with accessibility this week.

The injunction, which appears to be another John Doe order as previously suspected, was granted by the High Court of the Judicature at Madras on August 2, 2017. Two film productions companies – Prakash Jah Productions and Red Chillies Entertainment – obtained the order to protect their films Lipstick Under My Burkha and Jab Harry Met Sejal.

While India-based visitors to blocked resources are often greeted with a message saying that domains have been blocked at the orders of the Department of Telecommunications, these pages never give a reason why.

This always leads to confusion, with news outlets having to pressure local government agencies to discover the reason behind the blockades. In the interests of transparency, providing a link to a copy of a relevant court order would probably benefit all involved.

A few hours ago, the Internet Archive published a statement questioning the process undertaken before the court order was handed down.

“Is the Court aware of and did it consider the fact that the Internet Archive has a well-established and standard procedure for rights holders to submit take down requests and processes them expeditiously?” the platform said.

“We find several instances of take down requests submitted for one of the plaintiffs, Red Chillies Entertainments, throughout the past year, each of which were processed and responded to promptly.

“After a preliminary review, we find no instance of our having been contacted by anyone at all about these films. Is there a specific claim that someone posted these films to archive.org? If so, we’d be eager to address it directly with the claimant.”

But while the Internet Archive appears to be the highest profile collateral damage following the ISP blocks, it isn’t the only victim. Now that the court orders have become available (1,2), it’s clear that other non-pirate entities have also been affected including news site WN.com, website hosting service Weebly, and French ISP Free.fr.

Also, in a sign that sites aren’t being checked to see if they host the movies in question, one of the orders demands that former torrent index BitSnoop is blocked. The site shut down earlier this year. The same is true for Shaanig.org.

This is not the first time that the Internet Archive has been blocked in India. In 2014/2015, Archive.org was rendered inaccessible after it was accused of hosting extremist material. In common with Google, the site copies and stores huge amounts of data, much of it in automated processes. This can leave it exposed to these kinds of accusations.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Man Leaks New ‘Power’ Episodes Online, Records His Own Face

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/man-leaks-new-power-episodes-online-records-his-own-face-170809/

With the whole world going crazy for Game of Thrones, another TV series has been turning some serious numbers. Produced by Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson, crime drama ‘Power’ has been pulling in around eight million viewers per episode.

After premiering in June 2014, Power is now seven episodes into season four, which is set to reach its climax on August 27. But somewhat typically for the Internet these days, fans won’t necessarily have to wait another three weeks to find out what happens. During the past few hours, the final three episodes of ‘Power’ leaked online.

While that’s something in itself, this leak is possibly the most bizarre to take place in the history of piracy. Having been tipped off that screener episodes were available online, TF went looking for evidence. We found it, but it wasn’t what we expected.

The leaks consist of the three episodes (one complete, the other two missing a few minutes) being played back on an iPhone. A white one. With a broken screen.

Power leaks: Broken iPhone edition

The off-center nature of the image above isn’t typical though and most of the time the main picture is both central and well-defined, with surprisingly clear audio. It’s certainly not going to win any prizes for quality but for the extremely impatient it offers some kind of relief.

The big question, of course, is how these episodes happened to find their way onto that battered iPhone in the first place. Incredibly, the videos themselves provide the answers, with the thoughtful ‘cammer’ explaining in several voice-overs how he gained access to one of STARZ hottest properties.

“This is like the special, this is only for the people that work at STARZ that watch this shit. My man sent me the whole log-in shit. I had to pay that n******r though,” he said.

The log-in referenced by the leaker appears to unlock press access to unreleased content on mediaroom.starz.com. That page has been taken down since, quite possibly due to the leak. Thanks to the video though, we can see how the portal looked on the leaker’s phone.

Unreleased ‘Power’ episodes on the STARZ portal

“That’s the whole series bitch, but I can’t log out though, so I can’t send it to you. The man says don’t log out. So i’m gonna watch these last two episodes and then spoil it for y’all,” the ‘cammer’ said over one of the episodes.

The original claim that theses were screener copies holds up. Throughout all three episodes, an occasional message appears across the bottom of the screen, declaring that the episodes are “for screening purposes only.”

Screener copies, for your eyes only

If the whole situation isn’t bizarre enough so far, the episodes contain quite a bit of complaining from the ‘cammer’, mainly due to his arm aching from holding up the recording phone for such a long time.

Why he didn’t simply place it down on the table isn’t clear. He managed it with the playback phone, which is seen leaning against a large water container throughout, something the ‘cammer’ believes is pretty badass.

“You see, I got my shit propped up like a G,” he said, placing the phone against the water bottle. “Next episode, definitely not holdin’ this shit, so you n*****s gotta relax.”

If this whole scenario isn’t crazy enough, the ‘cammer’ polishes off his virtuoso performance by turning the ‘cam’ phone around and recording his own face for several seconds. To save his embarrassment we won’t publish an image here but needless to say, he is extremely easy to identify, as is his Facebook page, where the content seems to have first appeared.

While there’s clearly no criminal mastermind behind these leaks, dumping unreleased TV shows online can result in a hefty jail sentence, no matter how poorly it’s done. The gentleman involved should hope that STARZ and the FBI are prepared to see the funny side. Fingers crossed….

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.