Newsgroup download security question

[neverwake021]

Is SSL encryption to the Usenet provider enough to stay safe, or is purchasing a VPN to cover traffic, which still transmits through the ISP and modern firewalls can do packet inspection, leading me to believe that a simple port mirror would allow them to capture anything necessary to rebuild a downloaded collection. Does the VPN completely secure and negate those concerns? Thanks for any advice. I'm sure it's been asked 1000 times already.

[MacGyverSG1]

A VPN should prevent your ISP from knowing what you are downloading. I'm sure they know what you are doing.

VPN is mandatory for Torrent, unless you live in a country that couldn't care less.

[ltc27613]

SSL and/or VPN help avoid protocol throttling and easy monitoring. Nothing is 100% safe. Every ISP and network operation is required to have Lawful Intercept that when the authority demand, they can direct all incoming/outgoing traffic from any user to a server to be captured and analyzed.

[anon]

https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/142833/does-https-encrypt-metadata

[dapez]

I've been using usenet for more than 10 years, without a VPN, and even without activating SSL encryption (though my usenet provider has this option)...
Today I have a VPN subscription, that I only activate for BT - never for NZB...
The risk depends on what country you live in, I guess.

[anon]

Usenet has no "risk" in the first place, since you only download from a single server and don't have to upload anything back. Without encryption, your ISP is fully able to see all data you exchange with the news server, but since they won't be struck with copyright letters in the first place, they have better things to do.

Note that this only applies to downloading from newsgroups. Uploading (posting articles) is a different thing and has been prosecuted in the past.

[MacGyverSG1]

That's why a lot of stuff is password protected now.

[Jdm2005]

I have never had any issues with usenet downloading but did have an email for uploading by the provider, even though there terms of use stated they didn’t monitor uploads, however someone had reported me to them, since changed provider and gone with one that genuinely doesn’t monitor uploads. But downloading is absolutely fine, I do use ssl though

[shaina]

Usenet has no "risk" in the first place, since you only download from a single server and don't have to upload anything back. Without encryption, your ISP is fully able to see all data you exchange with the news server, but since they won't be struck with copyright letters in the first place, they have better things to do.

Really i don't agree with you here Anon, the SSL feature that pretty much every Usenet Provider gives you it for a reason, In the older Usenet Posts the actual movie or TV show name was used in the upload, or the NFO file matched the upload, so your ISP could actually see what you were downloading. With the SSL that blocks/scrambles/stealth's, the actual files, and your ISP only sees the physical download size not the name or files itself. Now is that really relevant today?? No, because most of the Uploads are either scrambled/obfuscated/or password protected. And the same with SABnzbd being one of the most used/popular programs for Usenet, and most of the bigger NZB private sites promote it, and have input on the program, to keep up with there stealth protocols or how the uploaders try to hide there stuff, or how you can extract the files/information........
I agree with you ,VPN's are useless when it comes to Usenet, but SSL does help with blocking what you are downloading from your ISP.....


Note that this only applies to downloading from newsgroups. Uploading (posting articles) is a different thing and has been prosecuted in the past.

No shit Sherlock:lol:, again that is literately piracy right :01:

Strange tho, if you go back and think that Usenet was really a service of communication and having the ability to transfer files anywhere in the world and with some sort of security, kind of like Email today. And if you think about this, in the beginning when i started using Usenet, it was pretty much the same few uploaders/group and really all they did was move around in different Binary Groups to hide:bye:, now you got way more uploaders....


That's why a lot of stuff is password protected now.

Just to elaborate more on your statement, it is not just password protection, but stealth/obfuscation, and also extractor programs designed by the uploaders/NZB private sites etc. Again i think it is great for these things, but one problem i have is it forces you to use there programs and not one you choose, be it ease of use or more control for yourself.....
But i guess that is a sacrifice for getting sort of free things, even know really they are not completely free;)

[anon]

Without encryption, your ISP is fully able to see all data you exchange with the news server, but since they won't be struck with copyright letters in the first place, they have better things to do.


Really i don't agree with you here Anon, the SSL feature that pretty much every Usenet Provider gives you it for a reason, In the older Usenet Posts the actual movie or TV show name was used in the upload, or the NFO file matched the upload, so your ISP could actually see what you were downloading. With the SSL that blocks/scrambles/stealth's, the actual files, and your ISP only sees the physical download size not the name or files itself.

In other words... we're thinking the same thing :unsure:

[shaina]

Usenet has no "risk" in the first place, since you only download from a single server and don't have to upload anything back. Without encryption, your ISP is fully able to see all data you exchange with the news server, but since they won't be struck with copyright letters in the first place, they have better things to do.
Note that this only applies to downloading from newsgroups. Uploading (posting articles) is a different thing and has been prosecuted in the past.

Sorry Anon you are right we are on the same page buddy my bad!!.. I was really focusing on your first point and didn't pay attention to your agreement of using the SSL offered with provider.....

Saying that, funny now that they are not really going after NZB listing sites either, if i remember a few got shut down because of piracy, now that is not happening??

That is a good thing:)

[anon]

Saying that, funny now that they are not really going after NZB listing sites either, if i remember a few got shut down because of piracy, now that is not happening??

Those shutdowns were fairly surprising. Usenet was always a small target because you have to pay for a news provider and the learning curve is somewhat higher than say, BitTorrent. However, in the last years the alternatives have improved (speeds on public torrents and file hosts don't suck, and there's Kodi), and when you combine that with having to deal with obfuscation and archive passwords, maybe it's an even smaller target than in the past now :)

[shaina]

Saying that, funny now that they are not really going after NZB listing sites either, if i remember a few got shut down because of piracy, now that is not happening??

Those shutdowns were fairly surprising. Usenet was always a small target because you have to pay for a news provider and the learning curve is somewhat higher than say, BitTorrent. However, in the last years the alternatives have improved (speeds on public torrents and file hosts don't suck, and there's Kodi), and when you combine that with having to deal with obfuscation and archive passwords, maybe it's an even smaller target than in the past now :)

True to all Anon, Torrents are much easier to Download, but i just dislike the Seeding Crap and having to share bandwidth, And the beginning it was tricky with Usenet, until you tweaked everything to make it easier from start to finished file...Like MacGyverf i liked to control everything from the download, what files i extracted and then renaming for file HDD purpose, but now i just use SABnzb and let it do everything, and really changing to SSHD, i get zero lag or freeze ups on multitasking :). But i wish you lived closer and could make a house call to Tweak Windows 7, i know i could get even more efficiency/speed out of my pc;)....

When it came to the NZB lawsuits...... What was really strange and controversial about that, there really is no storage of any files, really it is just direct link to files that are on a public access server farms.. Then the thought of a few of those that were charged and shut down were not only funding a NZB site but also selling Usenet services as well, and really i think they just put so much fear and legal costs to the owners they crumpled, again i don't blame them in some senses, but at that time there was only a few really good alternatives (for what i was looking for), and some were hard to get into, now it is flooded with half decent NZB sites out there , including the one here (Great work Cabby, and Toriless of course;)).... And like we agree and i think you have good points why they stopped going after the bigger NZB sites...
I am glad about that especially now that i am happy with the ones i pay/use.......
As for the 4k Ultra HD remuxes or full blown rips (They are massive size files!!!), there is a ton out there and i know Cabby and Toriless already do a great job and enough, but they are becoming popular, and i know this by seeing the hits/downloads on the private sites i go too.. I also see Plex and UMS has made some major updates to stream the rips with ease and efficiently....

Just saying my last point:)

[Caballero]

Saying that, funny now that they are not really going after NZB listing sites either, if i remember a few got shut down because of piracy, now that is not happening??

Those shutdowns were fairly surprising. Usenet was always a small target because you have to pay for a news provider and the learning curve is somewhat higher than say, BitTorrent. However, in the last years the alternatives have improved (speeds on public torrents and file hosts don't suck, and there's Kodi), and when you combine that with having to deal with obfuscation and archive passwords, maybe it's an even smaller target than in the past now :)

I always figured it's because we don't actually post anything illegal (no actual content posted, just a sign with an arrow), and if push came to shove you could probably construct a 1st Amendment case to defend what we're doing (isn't creating and posting an NZB just "speech"?).

Actually uploading the stuff into the newsgroups is an entirely different beast, of course. Wouldn't touch that with a ten-foot pole.

[anon]

But i wish you lived closer and could make a house call to Tweak Windows 7, i know i could get even more efficiency/speed out of my pc;)....

I once offered to give you all the documentation I've been saving up since I first installed Windows 7, and got no response :unsure: But if you're interested, the offer still stands.


When it came to the NZB lawsuits...... What was really strange and controversial about that, there really is no storage of any files, really it is just direct link to files that are on a public access server farms..


I always figured it's because we don't actually post anything illegal (no actual content posted, just a sign with an arrow), and if push came to shove you could probably construct a 1st Amendment case to defend what we're doing (isn't creating and posting an NZB just "speech"?).

I was going to mention the "not files, just pointers to files" defense in my previous post, but I'm not sure how effective it is nowadays. I mean, torrent indexes hosted .torrent files (which are metadata), and now they only have magnet links (which are meta-metadata), but this hasn't stopped law enforcement from going after them...

In the end, I guess it all depends on what the law says where your server(s) and domain are registered, where the site staff lives, and who has the best lawyers.

[cwf]

Thanks Good to know.

[bbneo]

Thanks for debating this topic. I was wondering if the VPN was really that useful if we are already using SSL encryption. :)

[afragler]

Just a suggestion, if you're going to download anything that is remotely shady you should do it through a vpn. a logless random ip assigment vpn. This applies to anything you download irc,newgroups,https,torrent,vps, streaming content. And good antivirus, antimalware, good antiintrusion (or a linux machine).

[anon]

a logless random ip assigment vpn. This applies to anything you download irc,newgroups,https,torrent,vps, streaming content.

Of all the filesharing methods you mention, I believe that using a VPN for anything other than torrents is overkill. IRC is not really a target due to its small userbase, relative difficulty of use and the "specialized" content shared within. And the others are download-only, therefore the risk is much smaller if non-existent, as discussed in this thread.

[Jdm2005]

I only use a vpn when accessing torrents, and have in the past hard a warning from my isp when I hadn’t got one, never had any issues with usenet.

[Caballero]

I was going to mention the "not files, just pointers to files" defense in my previous post, but I'm not sure how effective it is nowadays. I mean, torrent indexes hosted .torrent files (which are metadata), and now they only have magnet links (which are meta-metadata), but this hasn't stopped law enforcement from going after them...

In the end, I guess it all depends on what the law says where your server(s) and domain are registered, where the site staff lives, and who has the best lawyers.

Mostly the latter, I guess... Just came across this little gem:

--> https://torrentfreak.com/operator-of-popcorn-time-info-site-is-liable-for-piracy-supreme-court-rules-200115/

Not a one-to-one translation of what we do, but it might send up some smoke signals... Especially that last sentence.

[anon]

Just finished reading that article. If anything, they were at less risk than we are, since they only "talked" about Popcorn Time; here we discuss all kinds of filesharing (streaming or not) and have NZBs to boot.

Anyway, during the entire time I've been in the staff, there haven't been any threats of legal action against this forum. I don't know if it's due to good management or simply insane luck, but let's hope it stays that way in either case.

[dragutin]

But SSL encryption or VPN is not enough for the Usenet provider to know which files I download from the server or am I wrong?

[anon]

But SSL encryption or VPN is not enough for the Usenet provider to know which files I download from the server or am I wrong?

I recommend reading this thread from the beginning. :)

[dragutin]

Yes, I missed some sentences :) thanks.

[shaina]

But SSL encryption or VPN is not enough for the Usenet provider to know which files I download from the server or am I wrong?

Really your Usenet provider doesn't give 2 shits what you download, it is your ISP (internet service provider) that does. And even saying that I have only used SSL, and yes your ISP sees how much you download/traffic, there is nothing that can block that, but they have no idea what any of it is;), it just comes up gibberish....

[dragutin]

I believed that the Usenet provider was obliged to log what I downloaded and from which groups, and for my ISP I know that it is harder to find out the content if I use SSL and I don't care about size :)

[shaina]

I believed that the Usenet provider was obliged to log what I downloaded and from which groups, and for my ISP I know that it is harder to find out the content if I use SSL and I don't care about size :)

Usenet , Not what you download, only if you have limits and not unlimited they keep track of your use ;), again they don't give a shit what you download, and again with SSL all your downloads are encrypted so your ISP only sees gibberish, using a VPN does nothing when it comes to Usenet......

[anon]

I think we can all agree that your news provider would be in a much better position to log than your ISP if they were so inclined, since they can decrypt the data and see every request you made. But for the most part, they don't do it because not monitoring their customers is better marketing.

Logging policies for posts/uploads may differ, though, so watch out ;)

[shaina]

I think we can all agree that your news provider would be in a much better position to log than your ISP if they were so inclined, since they can decrypt the data and see every request you made. But for the most part, they don't do it because not monitoring their customers is better marketing.

Logging policies for posts/uploads may differ, though, so watch out ;)

So your explanation is the SSL doesn't work for the Usenet provider:unsure:

The same Anon, i do know they meter your use, but really one do they really care what you download or upload, unless the provider gets a notice for takedown??

or two, they advertise fast speed connections, and access to where most of the pirated stuff is located in the binary groups?? If they didn't give you access to those groups?? Who the heck would pay for that provider:idunno:..

I can say in all the years of using Usenet, i have never got a notice from my ISP for downloading copy-write things?? and i am talking on average over a Terra byte a month easy. But i can't say the same when i did occasionally use Torrents...

That may be the reason for paying for top NZB sites and having a good Usenet provider:D

Just sayin buddy;)

PS. i should add that like some hoarders here do the same and keep all of the shit!!, most of the time i may end up moving a quarter of the downloads to my mock server for keeps the rest i delete .....

[anon]

So your explanation is the SSL doesn't work for the Usenet provider:unsure:

Encryption, no matter how strong, won't do anything for you if:

the second party is also your adversary, or
a third party who is also your adversary relays messages between the first two, and the encryption is not end-to-end.

That's why I giggle at Cloudflare's claim of offering "end-to-end encryption" (most of their services would be infeasible if that were true), or when people say Facebook Chat is safe because it's encrypted.

Though, as I said, for Usenet downloads at least this is all purely hypothetical. There is no evidence that they log them and they have reasons not to.


they advertise fast speed connections, and access to where most of the pirated stuff is located in the binary groups?? If they didn't give you access to those groups?? Who the heck would pay for that provider:idunno:..

There's also text groups... Usenet was the original social network that most ISPs don't provide access to anymore, don't forget that :mushy: