From Analog Modems to Pirate Wireless

"Plain Old Telephone Service" is pretty much a Relic of the Past and with it the analog phone modem

but a little something dies with the analog phone modem and that is independent point to point network systems -- such as Fido Net, and the myriad of dial-up BBS systems that flourished in the 1980s

the new graphic internet interface has a lot of glitter, that's for sure, but it doesn't have any better information handling capability than the analog phone modem did. Documents loaded with graphics can take 100 times as much data storage as they would as text only. and so where a v.34 modem running 26KB/sec could paint a text screen in less than a second we now need a 3MB/sec broadband connection to do the same thing.

but with the broadband connections comes other content besides graphics and glitter and that is copyright music and video

irresponsible users have now thumbed their noses at the legitimate copyright holders to such a degree that copyright enforcement will likely move from the courts to the network system policies.

network operators may determine not to pass any data traffic that appears to be copyright material

the implications of this are very far reaching. what about encryption? enforcement will require all encryption to provide an ADK ( alternate decryption key ) registered with the network operators and a failure of the ADK will result in the network simply discarding any traffic that cannot be decrypted so that it can be checked for possible copyright type material

is this where we want to go ? i don't think anyone wants to go in this direction, not the network operators and not the users

what should be done instead is to simply amend the HMRA of 1992 to clarify the fact that posting copyright material onto a device that is accessible by the public is a copyright violation.

all the ditzies will yell and scream about this but guess what kids: ya ain't played by the rules and now ya gonna get a spanking. and ya got it coming.

the collateral side effect is the real damage though: as we will not be allowed encryption software unless the ADK is registered with the network operators.

Music labels have finally started seeing the light and are realizing that their customers are not the enemy. As this continues on a larger and larger scale, more competition will enter into the market, drawing prices downward as people compete for market share.

The requirements for scanning every packet on the Internet is never going to come into play. Since packets are routed on a best speed mapping, well - let’s put it this way. The page on FreeRepublic you’re reading now likely passed through three separate major network hubs, the top part of the page went down one path, the graphic for the freepathon went down another, and likely this reply went down a third.

Assembling all these pieces together to figure out if it’s a piece of copyrighted material, or even if it was encrypted, would be virtually impossible without putting in lengthy delays and picking out the other packets.

it is unlikely that network administrators would try to sniff packets as it would be much easier to simply check the files posted on a public share

in some cases such as a personal web page the public share is on a network server while in other cases such as in a P2P network the shared directory is on a client computer

on a network server it is easy for the network operator to scan the files on the public directory for copyright material.

on a P2P net all the files would have to be downloaded, — or — better — a crawler would be used

anyway you cut the cake they will put a stop to all this copyright violation activity the question in the air is how much collateral damage will occur

You’re welcome to believe that. I take a far more cynical viewpoint that for every counter that is attempted, it takes less than the development time of the countering technology to defeat it.

Unbreakable DVD encryption technology took three months before it was universally defeated, Microsoft’s DRM technology lasted 22 days, the Apple iPhone’s security measures were broken in about a month and a half. TIVO’s was smashed in six hours. SecureRun game protection lasted for 14 days.

At any one moment, there are probably a 4 trillion files available through the typical P2P network. About half of them are in the clear, the other half are wrapped in compression technology. To do what you suggest, network engineers would have to develop matching ‘digital fingerprints’ for known copyrighted works, and compare those digital fingerprints to files available in the public share.

When their first or second enforcement action is done, those digital fingerprints become meaningless as the slightest change to the data changes the digital fingerprint - if they’re going after 192k CBR mp3 files, change it to a VBR file, and it’s a completely different fingerprint, digitally considerably different than the originating piece of work.

Even shifting a couple bits in the header of the digital file, or changing the ID3 text embedded in the mp3 file, renders previous investigative work meaningless. Sure, the human ear can tell it’s a song by a well known artist, but to the digital eyes scanning the data, it’s nothing like what they’re looking for.

i think you underestimate the opposition

first, it won’t be necessary to check all of every file on every p2p machine. all they have to do is snoop enough to determine whether further checking is warranted

like they find 1 hit on 1 of some selected hot titles. based on the 1 hit they can then launch a more thorough analysis

second, pattern matching software has already been built that can identify tampered copies of copyright works

and this has nothing to do with whether the anti-piracy techniques worked. none did, we know that

what is at issue is: how much piracy is going on and what will be the collateral damage to our freedom of speech as a result of the reaction?

i could care less if pirates swipe all the music in china

but if they make us all register ADK keys with our ISP that will be a very serious concern because those ADKs would mean encryption software would not provide us with privacy

botnets are used to launch phishing attacks and they could launch a scan of p2p systems in the same way although likely using a lot of machines legally enlisted

or just use a battery of the new SUN/SPARC machines

Ok, they get a hit on x from ip address 192.168.1.25, using a local network example, but let’s say they get a hit. The machine alerts, I guess in your scenario, another machine that starts digging through the digital library, trying to figure out if there is indeed infringing material, at the speed defined by the machine’s upload speed. Say that the first check looks for keywords in file titles, the second check looks for more specific keywords, and the third defines a list of files to download and analyze. Pretty much what the RIAA did.

Once the files are downloaded a couple days later, and digital fingerprint checking is done, it’s identified that one of the mp3 files was one ripped by a known pirate in Milwaukee seven years ago, and thus a ‘known’ pirated copy of copyprotected works. Now what? This is what the RIAA faced, and their answer was shotgun lawsuits of John Does, and the courts went along with it for a while, then the judicial system turned a closer eye to what the RIAA was doing, their chain of evidence, their methods, and it brought up whole new legal questions.

Meanwhile, while the RIAA was examining one flavor of P2P networking, fourteen new versions popped up, all of which the RIAA didn’t have the time nor energy to follow up on. Time from file discovery to lawsuit filing? 279 days.

Total cost to the music industry and artists for RIAA’s witch hunt? 43 million dollars. Net total of collected ‘fines’ from ‘music pirates’: $279,000.

So now the thought is, AH HA! We’ll cut his off at the network interface between the user and the Internet, we’ll have providers be responsible for scanning and collecting information. The only problem with that theory is that it fails under the common carrier definition of a network provider. They’d have to strip that designation from network providers, and the network providers want nothing of it. They’re willing to let sniffers scan for open text keywords for national security concerns, but extending that to protect copyrighted works won’t fly with them, and no matter how well financed the MPAA or the RIAA are, they’ll never defeat the lobbyists and lawyers for the information networks.

So, no, your thoughts of the public networks becoming huge big brother eyepieces, sifting through everything, using alternative decryption keys, will not happen. Once an encryption scheme is thought to be vulnerable, three more are developed by independent developers which takes at most days to spread and use.

There was a proposal floated to require digitally signing every packet on the net, but was discarded as being unfeasible as just too many devices on the net today would be disabled by this requirement. Just remember; there are literally close to 80,000 law enforcement agents who are out there trying to stomp out child predators and the exploitive videos and images they share, have near universal cooperation in this effort from network operators, and yet, still, it goes on.

now if they do it that way RIAA et.al. will have a lot more trouble with enforcement

Notes

as HMRA(1992) stands now a PC is NOT a “music recording device” because while a PC can be used to record music, that is not its primary purpose, as required by HMRA

and so, if ya rip a CD and put the music on yer iPOD yer cool, but if ya put it on yer lap top you have made a copyright violation

( this needs to be fixed — but — as we don’t want to pay RIAA music tax on all computers we need to let RIAA have mjusic tax on sound cards only and if you have a sound card then your computer copies are OK )

the trouble for RIAA of course is that where the kids are saring rip copies using lap tops or FLASH sticks this is much harder to track than it would be looking a files on a P2P net

so I think RIAA may as well throw it in as far as buddy system sharing goes and just worry about illegal publishing — like p2p nets — and of course china, et.al. publishers

but, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere in this topic my concern is the collateral damage that might be dealt to our public key encryption systems, especially the possibility of an industry level demand for ADK keys

and it is that possibility of an industry level demand for ADK keys that we need to get ready to fight. and i say that because i looks to me like this music copyright broughhaha might be just the pretext Big Brother has been hoping for

now if they do it that way RIAA et.al. will have a lot more trouble with enforcement

Notes

as HMRA(1992) stands now a PC is NOT a “music recording device” because while a PC can be used to record music, that is not its primary purpose, as required by HMRA

and so, if ya rip a CD and put the music on yer iPOD yer cool, but if ya put it on yer lap top you have made a copyright violation

the trouble for RIAA of course is that where the kids are saring rip copies using lap tops or FLASH sticks this is much harder to track than it would be looking a files on a P2P net

so I think RIAA may as well throw it in as far as buddy system sharing goes and just worry about illegal publishing — like p2p nets — and of course china, et.al. publishers

it is certainly true that the network operators will resist efforts from the music/entertainment industry. in fact the DMCA has already made law that the network operators are to be held harmless for transmitting copryright material posted by their users — unless they receive a request from a copyright holder asking them to obtain compliance from one (or more) of their customers

this thread wasn’t really meant to pursue the copyright enforcement aspect of this issue but rather to explore the implications to the use of encryption software,— particularly PGP{GPG}

but, since we have touched on the question I would add a couple notes,—

first, the music industry could hire some geeks to pose as kids and hang out in the chat rooms looking for messages related to places to get copies of music or video. and it would be easy to follow up on the leads obtained that way. the problem with a public sharing system being simply that it is very easy for moles to infiltrate such systems

another avenue would be to assemble a battery of hunting computers. a very powerful SUN/SPARC station can be set up for something like $5,000 and with a budget of $50mm quite a few such computers could be put to work, — each searching for LimeWire or other sharing systems — and each would be capable of checking the content of a number of P2P clients concurrently — rendering the slow speed of such clients un-important

these hunters could operate 24x7. if web crawlers can index the content of the internet these hunters can surely search for copyright music files.

it’s not really clear how the P2P client would use PGP to disguise content intended to be shared publicly and the hunter computers would obtain necessary access codes in the same way that other P2P participants worked

it is certainly the case that individual transmissions could be encrypted and sent and if these were negotiated in the various chat rooms this activity would be caught by the hired geeks in addition to essentially negating the use of the p2p concept

if I were a betting man I’d wager copyright pirates are on rather thin ice

i certainly agree that it isn’t practicle to require a digital signature on all packets, — but I think we are going to see changes in eMail real soon ( see HR 964 and 1525 )

as this concept spreads we may soon see a requirement for all web sites to have certificates with the web site operator responsible for content. all content with executable code need to have signatures as well as it is necessary to put a stop to all un-authorized programming.

fun chat

"Plain Old Telephone Service" is pretty much a Relic of the Past and with it the analog phone modem < --- Missing punctuation? Or did you accidentally hit the ENTER key?

but a little something dies with the analog phone modem and that is independent point to point network systems -- such as Fido Net, and the myriad of dial-up BBS systems that flourished in the 1980s < --- The same questions can be asked here.

is the change Good or Bad

If we have to proofread you, then you won't be taken seriously.

if I were a betting man I’d wager copyright pirates are on rather thin ice

You'd lose that wager, every single time.

Let's take a very active field today, one which generates over a billion dollars a year in income. Spam filtering. On the one side, you have tens of thousands of programmers, working on stopping spam from appearing in your e-mail box, and on the other, you have less than a hundred working to fill it.

There is no larger group of people out there working actively on a singular goal. We have governments, private enterprise, individuals all working towards the common goal of eliminating unsolicited e-mail in your box. The e-mail filtering center for Yahoo and Google take up ten thousand processors, yet spam still gets through.

Now let's paint your bet - well over a hundred thousand working for many reasons - some simply to see if it can be done, others under the concept that the copyright should be violated, others for profit. On the opposing side, you have maybe sixty to eighty programmers, trying to come up with new concepts and ideas. A hundred to one longshot, or as those in the gaming industry say: easy money.

AT&T's filtering concept is that they'll not try to go after pirates, they'll simply decide what it is you're going to be permitted to see on the Internet, and lock up everything else. Moronic. You could lock up every port from being relayed, except you still end up with a series of ports that must be left open, that for viewing websites, transmitting or receiving e-mail, USENET. And all those are holes that hackers will exploit to use to further their copyright violations.

So, yeah, I'll take your bet. You'll lose.

as far as sniffing packets goes as a means of chasing music pirates, yep: i agree: that wouldn’t be the way to go

that is why when they start yappin up the wrong tree like that I wonder what they really after. we are always alert for scheems to suppress freedom of speech online and i kinda chaffed a bit when i read about AT&T packet sniffing plans

ya can’t sniff encrypted packets, ya gotta decrypt ‘em and that would require ADKs for everyone using encryption

and that would essentially wreck encryption

now as far as going after music pirates is concerned those guys are toast. they advertise too much. when ya running a legitimate business advertising is good. but if ya running something shady ya gotta check to see who yer customers are otherwise ya get moles in and then ya land in the can

sharing music or video over a p2p net does not qualify under “private, non-commercial use”. and that’s gonna be the end of that mess

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.