What.cd and Waffles ban Azureus and Deluge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringhunter

His custom title tempts users to go exploring. :dry:

---

Custom title or not, people that want to cheat can simply google their way to that info, as with pretty much anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringhunter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IdolEyes787

How about this show me one way that simply allowing anon to post has a negative effect on anyone and you can have your way and I will ban him.

---

His custom title tempts users to go exploring. :dry:

In all seriousness, though, do not ban him. From what I've seen of him on here (wouldn't know anything about his personality down at SBI) he is a decent fellow. Wouldn't make much sense to ban a person based on his actions at another forum, when all he tries to share here is thoughts.

---

He is one of the most knowledgeable and active members on this board in the past month.
Also his knowledge in Bt client modification and coding that is used by BT clients is really helpful when topics such as this one come up.

Even the thought of banning such a golden member is absurd.

The newest version of Deluge will be whitelisted, at least @ What.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by What's IRC

-Global- [A9] Update regarding Deluge, effective monday, All versions of Deluge < 1.2.1 will be banned, but users will have the option to use the newly released version which fixes the overdownloading issue.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringhunter

His custom title tempts users to go exploring. :dry:

---

The ironic thing is I didn't have any clue that there was a cheating forum associated with the initials sbi until polarbear , the very person so stridently denouncing anon, made me aware of it in another thread.
So maybe I should ban polarbear?:idunno:

PtP banned Azureus too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IdolEyes787

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringhunter

His custom title tempts users to go exploring. :dry:

---

The ironic thing is I didn't have any clue that there was a cheating forum associated with the initials sbi until polarbear , the very person so stridently denouncing anon, made me aware of it in another thread.
So maybe I should ban polarbear?:idunno:

---

Haha, I didn't know until Anon himself said something along the lines of "Google my name, however it's not the kind of forum you'd want to be caught browsing". Didn't know that his initials meant anything, either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anon-sbi

You don't need experience to avoid cheating on that kind of torrents, just common sense.

Quote:

---

in perfect world imo, client has to report to server transferred amount for every peer, of course it would meant more cpu load for the tracker but i'm sure there could be some workarounds to make this work okay...

---

Not to mention the higher bandwidth usage. But what you're talking about is a subset of the "if no one is downloading, you can't be uploading" argument, something which is actually true but has yet to be taken to the form of anti-cheating scripts in a 100% effective way, which is impossible.

Anyway, I think that if you were a tracker admin and the amount of cheating on your site grew to such proportions, you should lower the river (i.e. check what's the real reason for it, and how you can fix that) instead of raising the bridge (coding every time tighter scripts).

---

well not quite true
thats the point in what.cd banning the old version of deluge and azureus.
their cheat scripts match the downloaded amounts with uploaded amounts, and find discrepancies.

so if somebody cheats and reports upload that isn't evenly reported as download within the swarm, it will trigger alerts and the swarm will be investigated.

this is actually already done fairly efficiently on what, but deluges habit of over downloading, and azureus habit of reporting very low upload speeds when not seeding has been creating a large amount of false positives within this type of cheat detection.

there will always be factors that cause upload/download amounts to never match perfect, like a client crash before an announce, but thats where what.cd's scripts become so impressive. they detect uploading when the torrent file hasn't been snatched. they detect repetative incomplete downloads when the torrent file has been snatched. they also detect repetative missed announcements(stops, scrapes, client exits, torrent completed, etc.).

the banning of azureus isn't simply because its ease of cheat mods. dont you think the what staff know it has spoof mods that let it mascaraed as another client. the ban is more because of the low, false upload amounts being reported to the tracker, causing false positives in the cheat scripts.

it'll be interesting to see what methods you come up with next. personally i find it much easier to do what the majority of fair users do and do nothing, just leave my client open and let it seed. instead of spending hours upon hours trying to work my way round anti-cheat scripts, and creating new accounts after being banned.

anon-sbi isn't that bad of a guy shows peeps respect here seems to love these to help others out,
however he needs to one day realize when using cheats mods the only ones your hurting are the fellow members of that site,as your not seeding back to them.
If everyone did it guess what, no one would get any files or they get them very slowly.

@John: The slow upload speeds when nobody's leeching is caused by a cheating mod as well.

That's why I'm so pissed. An unmodified version of Azureus works perfectly fine. It's the cheaters who ruin it for the rest.

indeed there is cheat mods that do this, the client itself also does though, which is probably the reasoning behind the cheat mods using such an unusual tactic to cheat.

without cheaters though, its certain that azureus would still be whitelisted. im massively in favour of open sourced software, its a shame that such software is so abused in this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j0hn

without cheaters though, its certain that azureus would still be whitelisted. im massively in favour of open sourced software, its a shame that such software is so abused in this situation.

---

I shake your hand. :yup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anon-sbi

Sorry for the delay, my proxy often pukes when submitting forms.



How can you compare my would-be double personalities when you don't even know "the anon at the cheating forum"? One would think you can't compare things when you don't know one of them, but I guess everything is indeed possible online.

Just in case you care, I have written about legit seeding and given tips a lot of times there, too. Even once wrote a long post on how one of our users, who wanted to actually seed and even upload his own material to a specific tracker, could do so, instead of just cheating.Needless to say, due to the very nature of my forum, you won't find me speaking about why I cheat or "the spirit of P2P" as much as I do here, of course. Only when the topic springs up. Which obviously isn't as often.

---

Uhm, I didn't know that, that's true. But honestly if you're such a good guy, then why cheat in the first place? I'm sure that if you were just honest from the start (and maybe whine a little about your slow connection :lol:), you would have been helped so much by now that you would not even need to think about cheating any time soon.

I hate hypocrisy. Speaking of the true spirit of filesharing at one point and then ignoring it when it benefits you (no matter in how hard of a spot you are) is just that.

PS: I don't cheat, never have and I did have big problems at the very start with keeping a 1:1 ratio at my first tracker, RevoTT (mind you, no bonus system there). Cheating has very little to do with having a slow connection. If that were true, no Romanian would cheat.

PPS: The connections are not as good as in Portugal, Hugo. :naughty:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulreaper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j0hn

well said, though i think your being a little too nice
bittorrent relies on sharing, without it, there would be no bittorrent, period. retards like above are the scum that stopped me posting here over the past year or 2. FST has a bad name because of its policy to allow traders, but even worse now, cheaters.
shit sticks, and it stinks.

---

The way I see it , anon has been nothing short of resourceful(technically) and also helped a lot of members here. I don't recall seeing any posts of his which encouraged fsters to cheat. As far as I'm concerned he can do what he likes in his private/professional life as long as it causes no harm to fsters. Heck I don't even know the guy, just judging from his posts.
More power to you anon,keep posting mate.:)

I love the way FST doesn't judge its members by their reputation on a particular torrent site or another forum. I feel privileged and proud to be a part of FST because of the unbiased treatment meted out to members. People would never express their views openly without fear if it wasn't for the free spirited nature of FST.

---

agreed.
you can't reduce anon-sbi to a insignificant cheater, his vision of torrenting and his attitude toward sharing have nothing to do with his 'legitimacy' of being a member here, not to mention that he has been very helpful and courteous with every members so far.
our protectors of the right morals should remember that fst is not a private tracker nor the BT police.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cocegas

For me utorrent is enough... looking topics like this looks like I am the only who is looking to download something, not worring about client or any conspiratory theory envolved as long i get good speed.

---

same here.
i don't care about the client as long as i get my stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ca_aok

The newest version of Deluge will be whitelisted, at least @ What.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by What's IRC

-Global- [A9] Update regarding Deluge, effective monday, All versions of Deluge < 1.2.1 will be banned, but users will have the option to use the newly released version which fixes the overdownloading issue.

---

---

This is good news. But honestly, I'm pretty happy with Transmission right now(rtorrent was a no go). I forgot how much I liked this tiny client. I switched to Deluge because of the superior interface. But now I'm kind of liking the minimalistic approach that Transmission goes for. The options I used on Deluge are available on Transmission. And like I said...it is extremely lightweight. Might just stick with it...

But it's good to know that if I want to switch back I'll be able to. The Deluge devs are definitely a great team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringhunter

Depends on the size of torrents you are downloading. Deluge tends to misrepresent numbers when they get too large, in order to compensate for the fact that its peering and packet pick-ups is absolutely flawed. On large torrents the number misrepresentation can be as much as 20% of the torrent size, hardly ignorable. A month back a bug was found, and the devs were alerted and they said they would fix it, but I am yet to see it happen.

---

I missed this. Thanks for the explanation ringhunter, you're the first person to give me. Probably 99% of my downloads through bittorrent is music. So I rarely find a file that's over 1GB in size. Most are anywhere from 200MB to 400MB. So maybe this is why I haven't seen any over downloading.

This is a shame and I hope that the banning of Vuze does not become commonplace. I've been using it for years and would seriously consider moving trackers if I was forced to use Utorrent. Not that I have anything against it in particular but I happen to be very happy with the Vuze client. Seems i'm in the minority here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j0hn

well not quite true
thats the point in what.cd banning the old version of deluge and azureus.
their cheat scripts match the downloaded amounts with uploaded amounts, and find discrepancies.

---

"If no one is downloading you can't be uploading" is a completely true statement, but in practice you can't take it to a 100% working script. There are things passing under the radar, and there will always be.

Quote:

---

so if somebody cheats and reports upload that isn't evenly reported as download within the swarm, it will trigger alerts and the swarm will be investigated.

---

You know there's a problem with the alerts when people can do things like faking 10MB/s on torrents with next to no activity and get away with it... :ermm:

Quote:

---

there will always be factors that cause upload/download amounts to never match perfect, like a client crash before an announce, but thats where what.cd's scripts become so impressive. ...

---

Agreed. What.cd is what we call an improvement star. I've been been using it since the days you could cheat 50GB in 1 minute and not even get noticed. Then that stopped working. And as time passed, so did other stuff. Now their anti-cheat detection is great, that's true. But not perfect, no site's is.

Quote:

---

the banning of azureus isn't simply because its ease of cheat mods. dont you think the what staff know it has spoof mods that let it mascaraed as another client. the ban is more because of the low, false upload amounts being reported to the tracker, causing false positives in the cheat scripts.

---

So the official Azureus reports very slow upload speeds when the user isn't uploading anything? OK, that's a new one. Is there any proof? :unsure:

Quote:

---

it'll be interesting to see what methods you come up with next.

---

We'll see what the future holds for us. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Martinator

Uhm, I didn't know that, that's true. But honestly if you're such a good guy, then why cheat in the first place?

---

I feel like I'm talking to a wall :frusty:

Quote:

---

I hate hypocrisy. Speaking of the true spirit of filesharing at one point and then ignoring it when it benefits you (no matter in how hard of a spot you are) is just that.

---

So doing exactly the same you do with the difference of faking the stats that get reported to the tracker (which when BitTorrent was created had absolutely no use other than purely statistical purposes, by the way) when I risk getting disabled for having a bad ratio is hypocrisy... mmm... yeah, well, maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anon-sbi

So doing exactly the same you do with the difference of faking the stats that get reported to the tracker (which when BitTorrent was created had absolutely no use other than purely statistical purposes, by the way) when I risk getting disabled for having a bad ratio is hypocrisy... mmm... yeah, well, maybe.

---

Of course you do exaclty the same as me. You prolly have hundreds of torrents seeding in your client atm and have been seeding them for months (not that I have hundreds seeding, but I am seeding over a 100 of them, some for more than half a year).
You know what I get my rush from as far as BT goes? Seeding something for so long that I'm the only seeder and then when someone decides to DL it, giving them all my speed (which would prolly still be shitty in your book since you hate iTS for their speeds amongst other things), but some people do appreciate that. Not that I want anything in return, but to me that's the spirit of filesharing.

I'm sure you find me pathetic, though. :01:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Martinator

I'm sure you find me pathetic, though. :01:

---

I don't. Being the sole seeder for a torrent and taking responsability it's kept-alive feels kind of nice, actually.

Don't forget to enable super-seeding until someone else snatches a full copy. :happy:

oh, another thing about torrent clients and cheating. utorrent can easily make people cheat with dual announcing... when adding manually, it asks user if he wants to add a new tracker and blabla, but when torrent is added automatically from the watch folder - he could care less. i already caught myself once with dual reporting to what/waffles on active torrent, and when seeding about thousand of torrents at each of them, i found about .5% of torrents to be the same at both sites.... so utorrent just like other clients banned at those sites can help with submitting wrong stats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kukushka

oh, another thing about torrent clients and cheating. utorrent can easily make people cheat with dual announcing...

---

The torrent's info_hash must be the same for that to happen. It isn't the best method... most of the time the "cheaters" caught using that are people that like in your case, added multiple private tracker URLs to the same torrent (manually or otherwise), and got banned on one of them for reporting upload/download activity it otherwise wasn't tracking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anon-sbi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kukushka

oh, another thing about torrent clients and cheating. utorrent can easily make people cheat with dual announcing...

---

The torrent's info_hash must be the same for that to happen. It isn't the best method... most of the time the "cheaters" caught using that are people that like in your case, added multiple private tracker URLs to the same torrent (manually or otherwise), and got banned on one of them for reporting upload/download activity it otherwise wasn't tracking.

---

you're looking from different angle, i'm speaking about non-intentional violations of stats reporting, just like those +15/20% in deluge. one more time - when automatically adding .torrents if the same hash is found, utorrent just quietly add the next announce string to the torrent without giving any notice to user and placing him in potentially dangerous situation. rtorrent as example just says to gtfo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kukushka

one more time - when automatically adding .torrents if the same hash is found, utorrent just quietly add the next announce string to the torrent without giving any notice to user and placing him in potentially dangerous situation.

---

Yes, we can agree on that.

Just to point out anon isn't 'just' a cheater. He codes cheating clients and mods/runs a cheating board. Comparing anon to the average cheater is like comparing The coders and sysops of a tracker with its members.

yay deluge is unbanned at What! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sear

Just to point out anon isn't 'just' a cheater. He codes cheating clients and mods/runs a cheating board. Comparing anon to the average cheater is like comparing The coders and sysops of a tracker with its members.

---

You're saying he's worse tha just a cheater or that he's better than most cheaters?

Just so I understand, I don't want to make any conclusions (but I do all the time :P).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sear

Just to point out anon isn't 'just' a cheater. He codes cheating clients and mods/runs a cheating board. Comparing anon to the average cheater is like comparing The coders and sysops of a tracker with its members.

---

Yay, you revived my thread :hooray:

I'm saying he (and his kind) are a blight on the private tracker community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sear

I'm saying he (and his kind) are a blight on the private tracker community.

---

Would you rather some internal coder for internal private communities making all the cheats?

Sure, anon might be a cheater, but you have to have some respect for him not denying it, and constantly standing up for what he believes in.

Sorry if this sounds a bit weird, but cheaters usually want to reap the advantages of cheating, while also expecting the respect that comes with being an honored member. They make the decision to cheat, yet are unable to stick with their choices, so much that they deny it, and hope that they can still be looked upon as a decent, respectable member.

In that regard, Anon is sane. He fully understands what he's doing and is not afraid of admitting it, he understands that whatever the choice he makes, he cannot pick and choose the advantages/disadvantages that come with it.