What.cd and Waffles ban Azureus and Deluge

[anon]

His custom title tempts users to go exploring.

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

[Tv Controls you]

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.

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.

[ca_aok]

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

-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.

[IdolEyes787]

His custom title tempts users to go exploring.

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?

[TP635]

PtP banned Azureus too.

[Quarterquack]

His custom title tempts users to go exploring.

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?

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.

[j0hn]

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

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.

[ExtraDry]

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.

[Polarbear]

@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.

[j0hn]

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.