How "safe" is Usenet

[heiska]

It would be nice to live in a country where Cease and Desist letters have absolutely no effect at all, wouldn't it? If I was ever sent one, I could sue the one who sent the letter for harassing me. God bless the laws of this (Nordic) welfare state.

[Zeusola]

Everyone should know the present system is living on borrowed time. Money makes the world go round. Several parties want a bit of the money cake too.

Therefore, t's only time before the bigger funded mobs get their way.

However, I would guess this war will rage on for at least 30 year as there is too much to be done before you could even contemplate defeating piracy, with the systems as they stand.

Additionally the entire world is skint so them keeping hold of their market share is a problem in itself, never mind hangin' wee Joe Public out to dry.

Analytically sound?

Don't worry.Be happy.

[Beck38]

Really, the BIGGEST #1 contributor to all of this is cheap rentals.

There is a big acknowledgment of this when the studios bought off Netflix in the U.S. to give them an expanded 'window' between when a disc is out for sale and when it becomes 'available' for rental.

However, the more independent rental outfits have not gone along, so there are loopholes. And of course, if one simply waits a bit...

As far as the internet, especially for those in more restrictive countries, I think we'll see a rapid rise in the use of VPN providers.

[cola]

VPN wouldn't protect you, and why would you need a VPN to download?

[Beck38]

VPN wouldn't protect you, and why would you need a VPN to download?

Rethink your statement. Most of the ISP's (particularly those that use 'shared/partyline' systems (like cablecos) have pretty strict AUP's (acceptable use provisions) that specifically target P2P, Newsgroups, ect. They can (and have) blocked and messed around with both ports and traffic they see going to and from known IP addresses of (for usenet) large servers.

Of course, for that they don't block, they do have limits/caps, particularly on 'consumer' level accounts (Comcast, for instance, is universally at 250GB/Month); most of the other cablecos and even some DSL providers are MUCH lower (Frontier has a 5GB/Month cap).

VPN's completely and totally hide BOTH the actual traffic (like SSL) but ALSO the destination/source addresses, except, of course, the VPN providers, who constantly rotate their IP addresses.

[cola]

Most usenet providers have SSL already, don't need a VPN for that. Not to mention that they use multiple ports, including nonstandard ports. Don't see a need for a VPN.

Your ISP doesn't care what you download until they get a C&D letter, and you won't get one by downloading on a common carrier protected service.

[asad]

don't recall any news of ppl downloading on usenet being caught....

[Ted-Celle]

Isn't the problem here more on the side of the usenet service provider? After all, they are the ones that hold the logs of what you upload/download? Linux ISOs, no problem. But, for leechers, they should be more concerned about the usenet provider logs than they are with ISPs. Use SSL and the ISP can't see your traffic and likely doesn't care. But logs can exist forever. Most usenet providers claim to not retain them, but how does one really know? Especially considering the consequences of being wrong.

[cola]

Isn't the problem here more on the side of the usenet service provider? After all, they are the ones that hold the logs of what you upload/download? Linux ISOs, no problem. But, for leechers, they should be more concerned about the usenet provider logs than they are with ISPs. Use SSL and the ISP can't see your traffic and likely doesn't care. But logs can exist forever. Most usenet providers claim to not retain them, but how does one really know? Especially considering the consequences of being wrong.

Usenet providers don't log downloads, and they don't log uploads (thats what X-Trace header is for). ISPs don't care what you're downloading either, until they're hit with a C&D.

[Ted-Celle]

Isn't the problem here more on the side of the usenet service provider? After all, they are the ones that hold the logs of what you upload/download? Linux ISOs, no problem. But, for leechers, they should be more concerned about the usenet provider logs than they are with ISPs. Use SSL and the ISP can't see your traffic and likely doesn't care. But logs can exist forever. Most usenet providers claim to not retain them, but how does one really know? Especially considering the consequences of being wrong.

Usenet providers don't log downloads, and they don't log uploads (thats what X-Trace header is for). ISPs don't care what you're downloading either, until they're hit with a C&D.

That's my point, how do we REALLY know that? Astraweb says they do not log up/downloads, but how do we know? Are they a reputable company or a small shop being run out of a basement that has grown due to demand? They don't even use encryption on their login page to the website. Not the sign of a professional company. I'm not against Astraweb here, but just using them as an example. How does one really know they do not keep logs? I think it just comes down to trust.