bsaambl

Uploader
  • Content count

    1,275
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10
  • Feedback

    100%

bsaambl last won the day on March 24

bsaambl had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

58 Distinguished

About bsaambl

  • Rank
    New Scene

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,740 profile views

Mood

  • Happy
  • Currently Feeling Happy
  1. bsaambl

    Junior Moderator + Support Team Additions

    Congrats @Len and @scavenger101 great work for sure.
  2. bsaambl

    BeyondHD: News

    Effective immediately all version 3 variants of uTorrent are blacklisted due to confirmed vulnerabilities with the exception of the latest release v3.5.3 build 44358. Effective immediately all versions of BitTorrent are blacklisted due to confirmed vulnerabilities with the exception of the latest release 7.10.3.44359. Effective immediately all versions of uTorrent Web are blacklisted. I will allow the latest version of uTorrent v3.5.3 build 44358 and Bittorrent Stable 7.10.3.44359 . However it has yet to be proven that these versions are vulnerability free. They do not yet appear to have been properly audited. Utorrents first attempt at a patch was a spectacular fail. uTorrent v1 and v2 are also still very popular, at this time it does not appear that they contain the endpoints required to be dangerous, so for the time being they will stay. If a useful exploit is proven to exist we will cross that bridge only if we ever come to it. If you are using one of the older uTorrent versions you should ensure that the WebUI is disabled and, in advanced settings, set net.discoverable to false. This should mitigate some of the potential for vulnerability in the client. Whilst we are on allowed versions Transmission users should ensure they are on version 2.93 as earlier versions have vulnerabilities to.
  3. Four men sentenced last year for their part in running several pirate sites have been told they will no longer have to spend time behind bars. After being ordered to spend up to ten months in prison, the court of appeal has now decided that for their activities on Dreamfilm, TFplay, Tankafetast and PirateHub, the men should walk free but pay increased damages to the entertainment industries. With The Pirate Bay proving to be somewhat of an elusive and irritating target, in 2014 police took on a site capturing an increasing portion of the Swedish pirate market.Unlike The Pirate Bay which uses torrents, Dreamfilm was a portal for streaming content and it quickly grew alongside the now-defunct Swefilmer to dominate the local illicit in-browser viewing sector. But after impressive growth, things came to a sudden halt.In January 2015, Dreamfilm announced that the site would be shut down after one of its administrators was detained by the authorities and interrogated. A month later, several more Sweden-based sites went down including the country’s second largest torrent site Tankefetast, torrent site PirateHub, and streaming portal Tankefetast Play (TFPlay).Anti-piracy group Rights Alliance described the four-site networks as one of “Europe’s leading players for illegal file sharing and streaming.”Image published by Dreamfilm after the raiddreamfilm https://torrentfreak.com/images/dreamfilm-polis.jpgAfter admitting they’d been involved in the sites but insisting they’d committed no crimes, last year four men aged between 21 and 31-years-old appeared in court charged with copyright infringement. It didn’t go well.The Linköping District Court found them guilty and decided they should all go to prison, with the then 23-year-old founder receiving the harshest sentence of 10 months, a member of the Pirate Party who reportedly handled advertising receiving 8 months, and two others getting six months each. On top, they were ordered to pay damages of SEK 1,000,000 ($122,330) to film industry plaintiffs.Like many similar cases in Sweden, the case went to appeal and late last week the court handed down its decision which amends the earlier decision in several ways.Firstly, the Hovrätten (Court of Appeals) agreed that with the District Court’s ruling that the defendants had used dreamfilm.se, tfplay.org, tankafetast.com and piratehub.net as platforms to deliver movies stored on Russian servers to the public.One defendant owned the domains, another worked as a site supervisor, while the other pair worked as a programmer and in server acquisition, the Court said.Dagens Juridik reports that the defendants argued that the websites were not a prerequisite for people to access the films, and therefore they had not been made available to a new market.However, the Court of Appeal agreed with the District Court’s assessment that the links meant that the movies had been made available to a “new audience”, which under EU law means that a copyright infringement had been committed. As far as the samples presented in the case would allow, the men were found to have committed between 45 and 118 breaches of copyright law.The Court also found that the website operation had a clear financial motive, delivering movies to the public for free while earning money from advertising. While agreeing with the District Court on most points, the Court of Appeals decided to boost the damages award from SEK 1,000,000 ($122,330) to SEK 4,250,000 ($519,902). However, there was much better news in respect of the prison sentences.Taking into consideration the young age of the men (who before this case had no criminal records) and the unlikely event that they would offend again, the Court decided that none would have to go to prison as previously determined.Instead, all of the men were handed conditional sentences with two ordered to pay daily fines, which are penalties based on the offender’s daily personal income.Last week it was reported that Sweden is preparing to take a tougher line with large-scale online copyright infringers. Proposals currently with the government foresee a new crime of “gross infringement” under both copyright and trademark law, which could lead to sentences of up to six years in prison.
  4. The top 10 most downloaded movies on BitTorrent are in again. 'Justice League' tops the chart this week, followed by ‘Thor Ragnarok'. 'Black Panther' completes the top three. This week we have two newcomers in our chart.Justice League is the most downloaded movie.The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. All the movies in the list are Web-DL/Webrip/HDRip/BDrip/DVDrip unless stated otherwise.RSS feed for the weekly movie download chart.This week’s most downloaded movies are: Movie Rank Rank last week Movie name IMDb Rating / Trailer Most downloaded movies via torrents 1 (1) Justice League 7.1 / trailer 2 (2) Thor Ragnarok 8.1 / trailer 3 (…) Black Panther (HDTS) 7.9 / trailer 4 (5) The Shape of Water (DVDScr) 8.0 / trailer 5 (4) Coco 8.9 / trailer 6 (8) Lady Bird 7.7 / trailer 7 (3) Pitch Perfect 3 6.2 / trailer 8 (…) The Disaster Artist 7.7 / trailer 9 (6) Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri 8.3 / trailer 10 (7) Daddy’s Home 2 6.0 / trailer
  5. I post this opinion found in another forum because I agree 100% with the whole argument: I feel compelled to write this post because there's a bit of misinformation & scattered discussion. There might be (common) opinion that all (previous) versions of uT (including 2.2.1) is vulnerable to the recent RPC attack (or under certain conditions), but sites are starting to ban all of uT, even versions that aren't vulnerable. This is not intended as a thread to discuss uT alternatives as dT & qBT have their own quirks (forced rechecking on drive disconnect & foldering/naming issues). ** This thread is mainly intended to provide & garner accurate info/updates/discussion & to persuade sites to allow 2.2.1. To sites that have banned 2.2.1: I hope you reconsider. To sites that have not banned 2.2.1: Kudos to you (especially if you have changed position)** There is only evidence that Travis only tested 3.5 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-...-lg==&inline=1 *Actually, 2.2.1 is not vulnerable even when net.discoverable isn't set to false From user 3***: "Even without setting net.discoverable to false, uTorrent 2.2.1 doesn't have any endpoints that can crash the client or obtain info about the user's system. So in it's default state the worst somebody can do is annoying popups." "I disassembled it myself; it has less than half a dozen RPC endpoints" (3*** supposedly disassembled it too). Nevertheless it is generally advised to set net.discoverable=false Some tests show that 221 might not be vulnerable https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-...il?id=1524#c24 (i tested it myself too) Maybe some other versions might not be vulnerable From another user: "A few self reports show now of 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 not being vulnerable." "I have run the PoC tests against v2.0.4 and v3.3.1, and the result is the same as described in previous comments. Only the popups showed." https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-...il?id=1524#c30 I haven't tested these myself But uT 221 is bad & so it's old!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_novelty But uT 221 is bad & it won't be fixed!!! It's old, but not vulnerable. "As far as I know, old versions are not security supported - I wouldn't recommend using them. I haven't looked, and as the vendor wouldn't patch it anyway, it doesn't seem useful to audit old versions. " https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-...il?id=1524#c16 Travis said he hasn't tested it. Possible confuction may arise from his phrasing "I haven't looked, and as [it's vulnerable] the vendor wouldn't patch it anyway" Correct interpretation: "I haven't looked, and as [it's not security supported] the vendor wouldn't patch it [if it's vulnerable]" But uT 221 might have other security holes since it's old & unsupported!!! uT 221 has proven itself time & time again through multiple fiascos that it is not vulnerable to them (flash ads, this RPC) My opinion: I believe banning uT 2.2.1 is the dumbest decision private trackers admins have ever made, and the truth is they already have a bunch of them in the past. You can't hurry and take snappy actions in a state of panic. The whole thing will probably backfire soon enough, but the consequences are going to be nasty unfortunately (for all of us).You can't screw with one of the best things that trackers are built on and expect nothing bad will come out of it.uT 2.2.1 has proven itself to be the best client in many years and is illogical to be written off in a night's time without adequate evidence to support that.If it ain't broken, don't fix it.