Wednesday, January 4, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

RIAA Wants $250,000 in Attorneys' Fees from Yout, Without Delay
Ernesto Van der Sar, 04 Jan 11:51 AM

RIAAIn 2020, YouTube-ripper Yout.com sued the RIAA, asking a Connecticut district court to declare that the site does not violate the DMCA's anti-circumvention provision.

This was a bold move, but not one without consequences. After a legal battle of nearly two years, the verdict meant disappointment for Yout.

Last October, Judge Stefan Underhill ultimately concluded that the service had failed to show that it doesn't circumvent YouTube's technological protection measures. Soon after, the RIAA submitted a request to have Yout pay $250,000 in attorneys fees incurred by the RIAA thus far.

Motion to Stay

Yout is not giving up on the case. Site operator Johnathan Nader will appeal the case as he believes that YouTube rippers don't violate the DMCA. A few weeks ago, his legal team requested the court to put the attorney fees decision on hold while his appeal is pending.

The appeal could be crippled if any fees have to be paid right away, Yout argued. This would cause irreparable harm, one of the factors that weigh in favor of granting a stay.

The RIAA has a different outlook on the matter. The music group asked the court to deny Yout's request because, among other things, it doesn't believe that Yout lacks the means to fund its legal campaign.

"The record in this case suggests that Yout does not lack resources: Yout admits that its service is still operational and it has hired three new lawyers for the appeal," the RIAA writes in its opposition brief.

yout fees

Even if Yout does lack resources, it wouldn't necessarily be irreparably harmed. It has the option of posting a bond and appealing that decision while the appeal is pending, which will conserve financial resources, the RIAA says.

The RIAA further argues that Yout is unlikely to win on appeal, which weighs against a stay. In addition, the RIAA says that it would be harmed by any further delays because it's already $250,000 out of pocket after defending itself against the "meritless suit".

Public Interest?

Yout told the court that staying the matter would be in the public interest, as many other site operators and the public at large are affected by the verdict, which essentially declared commonly used YouTube ripping tools illegal.

The RIAA's response turns this argument on its head. The music group says that protecting artists' copyrights is in the public interest too.

"Yout correctly states that copyright protection serves the public interest — but has the analysis exactly backward. Those interests are served by protecting creators of music from the massive circumvention of technological measures for which Yout is liable."

The Copyright Act allows rightsholders to request attorneys' fees to deter parties from bringing unreasonable claims without repercussions. That is exactly what's at stake here, the RIAA believes.

A copy of RIAA's opposition to Yout's request to stay the motion for attorneys fees is available here (pdf)

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Major Private Torrent Sites Have a Security Disaster to Fix Right Now
Andy Maxwell, 03 Jan 10:10 PM

Pirate FirePrivate torrent sites, or private trackers as they're commonly known, are designed to be difficult to access.

In many cases, prospective members will need an invitation from someone who is already a member, although some sites will open their front doors when people open their wallets. This presents a challenge for people who want to give them valuable, urgent information but must pay to do so.

Background and Dilemma

Just a few hours ago, TorrentFreak received a rather detailed tip from a security researcher who prefers to remain anonymous. The information relates to three major/well-known private trackers and their users directly, but from the evidence presented, the security debacle exposes other sites too.

The researcher came to us with the story because, after trying to get the attention of the sites' operators, even through other sites that might forward the message, nothing has been done. Surprising, given the scale of the problem.

The researcher's goal is to protect the sites' users but if we publicly name the sites here, that will not buy enough time for the admins to hear about the news and plug the gaps. Instead, we'll provide enough information for the sites' operators to recognize their own site from the inside and then one minute later, the problem should be fixed.

The Security Issue

To get their hands on the latest releases as quickly as possible, trackers often rely on outside sources that have access to so-called 0-Day content, i.e, content released today. The three affected sites seem to have little difficulty obtaining some of their content within minutes. At least in part, that's achieved via automation.

When outside suppliers of content are other torrent sites, a piece of software called Torrent Auto Uploader steps in. It can automatically download torrents, descriptions, and associated NFO files from one site and upload them to another, complete with a new .torrent file containing the tracker's announce URL.

taud-1

The management page above has been heavily redacted because the content has the potential to identify at least one of the sites. It's a web interface, one that has no password protection and is readily accessible by anyone with a web browser. The same problem affects at least three different servers operated by the three sites in question.

Web Interface For Torrent Clients

Torrent Auto Uploader relies on torrent clients to transfer content. The three sites in question all use rTorrent clients with a ruTorrent Web UI. We know this because the researcher sent over a whole bunch of screenshots and supporting information which confirms access to the torrent clients as well as the Torrent Auto Uploader software.

rutorrent-gui

The image above shows redactions on the tracker tab for good reason. In a regular setup, torrent users can see the names of the trackers coordinating their downloads. This setup is no different except that these URLs reference three different trackers supplying the content to one of the three compromised sites.

Can it Get Any Worse?

Rather than publish a sequence of completely redacted screenshots, we'll try to explain what they contain. One begins with a GET request to another tracker, which responds with a torrent file. It's then uploaded to the requesting site which updates its SQL database accordingly.

From there the script starts checking for any new entries on a specific RSS feed which is hidden away on another site that has nothing to do with torrents. The feed is protected with a passkey but that's only useful when nobody knows what it is.

The same security hole also grants direct access to one of the sites tracker 'bots' through the panel that controls it.

torrents-clientru

Then there's access to 'Staff Tools' on the same page which connect to other pages allowing username changes, uploader application reviews, and a list of misbehaving users that need to be monitored. That's on top of user profiles, the number of torrents they have active, and everything else one could imagine.

Another screenshot featuring a torrent related to a 2022 movie reveals the URL of yet another third-party supplier tracker. Some basic queries on that URL lead to even more torrent sites. And from there, more, and more, and more – revealing torrent passkeys for every single one on the way.

Security holes need to be fixed sooner rather than later but getting hold of operators in this niche is difficult by design. Users of all sites might want to make a bit of noise in the hope that the three that matter actually do something.

Update: Two shut down, one to go

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: