BitComet Banned From Private Trackers

An anonymous reader writes "Slyck news is reporting that because BitComet does not recognize the 'private flag' on torrents originating from pirate BitTorrent trackers, this client is being banned from these communities. Private trackers are finding their torrents spread via the private DHT layer, allowing leechers to bypass ratios and download content freely."

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

for KDE users ktorrent is better :^)

They CLAIM bitcomet is blocked

[theheff]

...but it isn't. I'm part of a private tracker group that banned Bitcomet 3 days ago... I've been using BitComet since, and nothing at all has changed. I'll change clients when things actually change.

Re:This has always been a problem

[Laebshade]

I call bullshit. The tracker itself can be privatized simply by doing authentication based on IP address (several bittorrent communities do this). Even if you get the torrent file that uses the tracker, it will deny you access.

OK pretty much it's this

[bobertfishbone]

Bittorrent private trackers are sites that depend on a healthy share ratio for success. If you download something, it's tracked, and you must then upload a comparable number in order to stay a member of that site or receive certain benefits of membership. This creates a healthy environment of seeders--not like many public trackers, which have an inordinate amount of leechers. Bitcomet doesn't recognize or follow the conventions that enable such private trackers to exist. It can bypass that, and enable anyone to download from a private tracker site without worrying about a ratio. This is extremely detrimental to the private tracker. I'm in favor of this move by the private trackers; Bitcomet is misrepresenting itself as a fully-functional BT client.

this is under better coverage at Slyck

[Anonymous Coward]

Go to www.slyck.com

And no it is private not 'pirate' as one user says.

The jist of the change is since Bitcomet can spread downloaded files through its DHT layer, it bypasses the IP logging that private trackers have. Anyone thus can then download the file without having to bow under sharing ratios.

In better terms, Bitcomet is a leeching client. Even though I don't subscribe to any private torrent websites, I'd avoid Bitcomet for now, and switch to a nearly equal client, utorrent.

utorrent and Azureus also have DHT layers built in them, but they do it a somewhat better way.

Re:So?

[paulius_g]

Azureus is the best for multi-platform.

But for Windows, uTorrent [utorrent.com] is the best. It's small (115KB), uses not alot of RAM (~5mb) and has most of the features that Azureus has! It even has a bandwidth scheduling function.

Re:This has always been a problem

[The Amazing Fish Boy]

In so doing, they block anyone with a dynamic IP.

Don't you have to log in to a web site to use private trackers? So when you log in it updates your IP address on the seeder's list, or however it works. I wouldn't think dynamic IP addresses would be a problem.

Re:Azureus Is Shite

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Buy better hardware. The java footprint is negligible on a modern machine.

2) Get a better platform. Java on Windows sucks because Windows sucks. Java on Linux isn't bad at all. There are plenty of low-overhead clients for Linux/Unix (rtorrent, ctorrent, ktorrent) but most people use Azureus because it's better.

Is this article just FUD?

[mr_stinky_britches]

What is the DHT Layer? I would consider myself as being torrent savvy, but I have no clue what this means.

A little bit of research later...

DHT stands for Distributed Hash Table ... DHT is a networking protocol that enhances the scalability and efficiency of decentralized networks by creating a virtual index rather than broadcasting search queries. Decentralized networks that utilized DHT technology are able to search and locate files significantly faster than networks that do not use it.
source (non-authoritative): http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=772 [slyck.com]

DHT is a layer added on top of the BitTorrent network to assist in Azureus' performance. BitTorrent is a distinct networking protocol, of which is specified by creator Bram Cohen. Anything existing outside of those specifications is not BitTorrent.
source (non-authoritative): http://www.unitethecows.com/forums/showthread.php? t=10991 [unitethecows.com]
(So DHT is not part of the bittorrent specification; At least, it wasn't in May 2005, but who knows now...)

So basically, my understanding now is that the DHT Layer is what allows for the decentralization of torrents. Thus, by not respecting the "private" flag, the clients can leech all day without it affecting their ratio. Slap me if I am wrong or missing something, but aren't most (re:99.999%) of these "communities" that care about leechers, ratios, and keeping their torrents to themselves going to be trading/torrenting copyrighted content/material? Call me crazy, but I just have this hunch that this isn't exactly the latest Knoppix torrent. And then you can call me crazy again, but I must ask why we care what these "communities" ban or don't ban?

But then again, this is slashdot where anything that approaches conservative or rational gets modded down by the mob.

Re:In English?

[Bacon Bits]

DHT = "Trackerless". The P2P traffic is not managed by the tracker, like it normally is, but by the clients. This enables faster transfer, but interferes with the tracker's ability to manage piece distribution.

Private = "Tracker only". Well-behaved clients see the private tag and ignore trackerless requests. Usually for sites that have download ratios or other mthods that force users to upload a certain amount of content in order to continue to download.

The problem with using DHT on a private torrent is that the data in the torrent file you download that identifies who you are (for your account ratio) gets passed to other users. That screws up your ratio because others are downloading with your account info. You can very quickly find yourself below the enforced limit if you don't disable DHT.

Re:So?

[XplosiveX]

It's the only client that has the 'Protocol Header Encrypt' option which is very useful for those of us who's ISP's use services like P-Cube software [p-cube.com]. The P-Cube service engines are VERY capable of doing IP selective throttling and BitComet is the only solution I've found that can has an option that can get around it.

About Azureus...

[bobertfishbone]

This is the message from one of the private trackers I frequent:
# Show 2005-12-10 - BitComet

We are following the example led by other private bittorrent trackers and we have banned all BitComet clients. Perhaps having so many sites banning it will encourage their developers to do something about it.

The reason why: BitComet, like Azureus, allows the sharing of peers via a DHT system. Azureus implemented SecureTorrents into their client, which we coded into our tracker. BitComet followed and implemented a similar private flag. Unfortunately, the BitComet authors decided not to code what they said ("BitComet will not add DHT Network as Backup Tracker even all the trackers can not be connected later, and will also disable Peer Exchange between peers") and instead ignore this flag after a period of time.

If the BitComet developers create a new version which behaves as it should, we will happily change our stance on this. But at the moment, BitComet is not welcome here.

If you want a replacement client, we recommend Torrent and Azureus.

In other words: Private Trackers ban themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

Here are the bittorrent stats seem by my mldonkey bittorrent client for the last month(non-stop)

According to this they are banning 60% of bittorrent traffic... not a intelligent move IMHO.

BitTorrent Total Uptime: 29 days, 20h:10m 2578216 seconds
Brand Seen
Total 88212 (100%)
BitComet 52601 (60%)
BitLord 30318 (34%)
Azureus 2392 (3%)
Mainline 839 (1%)
BitTornado 466 (1%)
MLdonkey 433 (0%)
ABC 345 (0%)
uTorrent 334 (0%)
Shareaza 206 (0%)

Re:Azureus Is Shite

[CyricZ]

Azureus uses SWT, and can, like Eclipse, be compiled to native binaries using GCJ (or various other native Java compilers). Such binaries are often far faster and less memory-hungry than JVM-run Java applications.

Re:with the what and the who and the what?

[Otter]

Now that you've been chastised by the youngster, I'd like to step in with the old-school analogy you're looking for:

Remember how back in the olden days FTP servers allowed w4r3z site admins to set minimum upload:download ratios for users? Imagine if someone created a client that evaded those limits and the ftpd maintainers, who were shocked -- shocked! -- to find that w4r3z kiddies lack integrity and respect for the rights of others, locked it out.

That seems to be what happened here, except with some newfangled file transfer protocol that these lousy kids today use.

Re:Isn't DHT a good thing?

[JonXP]

There is a "standard" implementation. It's called the Mainline network for BT and is part of the standard client, as well as many other BT clients. The problem is Azureus created their DHT network first, and is loathe to drop it for the "official" version since it is less robust.

So clients behave in one of two ways, like Azureus, or like Mainline.

As far as it being advantageous, the problem is that private trackers don't want to be publicly accessible, which DHT would do, and BitComet ignores that fact. For public torrents, it's great.

You're all missing whats really happening..error!

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't allow them to totally skirt the ratio system at all. It allows them to start downloading the file without the wait time restrictions due to low ratio...and BECAUSE they technically aren't supposed to be getting the file, no record of the status of the ratio is kept UNTIL the tracker sees that the wait time is up.
    This actually results in their ratio being inflated as they are not tracked for the download and then are usually already seeding when the tracker finally starts recording their ratio thus allowing them to always seem as if they only seed and never leech..it's a great way to eliminate the ratio wait time quickly by getting a high one that effectively removes the wait time for future torrents.

Re:Cry me a river

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, do actually grok the problem. Seeders and leechers are a zero-sum game. Go look it up.

The problem is that in a ratio system, people are rewarded not because of seeding and leeching, but due to the amount of available bandwidth. One guy sitting on a 10mb upstream connection can distribute 30 times the one who's sitting on the 384kb upstream connection. So if you get into the group late, and there's no leechers to take what you have, you're ratio will always be below one.

So it rewards getting into the streams early. It punishes getting into the streams late. So if you don't get the stream in the first 8-24 hours of it's life, it hurts your ratio, regardless of how you would stream if there were leechers asking for pieces from you. And even if one or two do show up you're competing with the 10mb seeder who can give out 30 times as many bytes as you can.

This leads to silly things of getting into a torrent early just to seed it even though you have no use for it.

BitTorrent wasn't made to deal with ratios, and I wonder why people bother. Once critical saturation exists your 5/400 torrent will quickly become 250/50. So really, you're asking whether it will be done in 4 hours or 6.

Now if you form a community to prevent the RIAA from finding out who you are, then you could in fact be sued under RICO. Because, you are a currupt organization. Isn't that a pleasant thought?
   

Re:In English?

[wolrahnaes]

I don't think the grandparent poster understands private tracker security. Every private tracker I've ever used handles everything by IP, not some arbitrary tag embedded in the torrent file. You log in to the tracker via HTTP and it "OKs" that IP for an X amount of time.

It makes things interesting for users of larger trackers who try to access them from public internet behind a NAT router, since you can end up with two users of the same tracker unknowingly sharing the same outside IP, and from the tracker's perspective they are then treated as the same user.

Re:Children and their childish games

[calculadoru]

Why the hell would someone want to restrict themselves to a small group of file sharers ?

Mate. You've obviously never been a member of a serious, hardcore BT site. Restricting membership and being strict about ratios works because
a. it keeps the leeches away. It really does.
b. the speeds are fantastic, since everyone is very interested in seeding for weeks and weeks.
c. one quick request in the forums and you're guaranteed to find ANYTHING you want. no matter how obscure the album/performer/version. If you're serious about music, this is the best thing about private trackers.
And no, I won't tell you which sites are like that, I value my invites :)

Re:Nope

[fLameDogg]

This [google.com] might get you started,

While this [google.com] looks a little more specific.

And this [findlaw.com] might just be close to a bullseye. I think I'll curl up with this one myself.