Possible warning for P2P file sharers?

I just posted the article Possible warning for P2P file sharers?.

The House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection recently heard discussions related to H.R. 1319, “The Informed P2P User Act.”

Specifically, the bill aims to put…

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/15905-Possible-warning-for-P2P-file-sharers.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/15905-Possible-warning-for-P2P-file-sharers.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

If you use torrents, nothing is shared…

I dont understand how could such personal information be unwillingly “shared” even with a program as crappy as limewire. Unless when configuring your shared forlders you put everything under C, D etc. In which case, evolution needs to take place since stupidity hardly qualifies a species to make it to the next level

I agree w/ Hemispasm on this point.

“I think anyone who installs a P2P program on their PC should expect that nothing on their hard drive is secure”

That is the most retarted comment I’ve ever heard. If you install a P2P program, YOU are the one that tells it what to share. So if you say Share C drive, then its YOUR fault for sharing everything.

P2P ??? Does anyone still use that garbage ?..LOL

“I think anyone who installs a P2P program on their PC should expect that nothing on their hard drive is secure”

NO this is not the most retarded comment.
Hemispasm and Vikampion your comments are obviously based on your Limited knowledge of computing.

Yes in a P2P program you get to say which folder or folders you wish to share and yes you would have to be crazy to share folders containing personal information.

Now Who is willing to step forward and swear on their Life that a hacker cannot use the P2P program to access Other folders. For a Hacker this would be like taking candy from a baby.

The statement Holds. It’s Good.

The Retarded person is the one using a file sharing program on a PC that has personal information on it.

Another example of how lobbies run the United Corporate States of America. The world is crashing around our ears and our Representitives are “working” on lobbyist written “law” that they wont bother to read (like the 700B bailout bill) and then vote for (or another Representitive will most likely hit the button for them at their empty seat ) in order to spread FUD to their constituency and also simultaneously line their pockets with “campaign funds”.

The sole purpose is only to strengthen new revenue streams for the people the lobbyists work for. It has NOTHING to do with protection of personal information.

The corporations get hacked on a daily basis and are the real problem. They should pass laws that criminalize the loss of personal information by banks, hospitals, employers and the like. By LAW they should have to make SURE no information can be stolen fromn their networks and keep accounts safe. Not to mention the corporate dipsticks that leave their laptops lying around to get stolen with millions of accounts in unencrypted folders.

But, this wont happen as the politicians wont bite the hand that feeds them.

P2P is not used for mostly illegal purposes. Veogh uses it exclusively. There are many P2P and Bt services that are 100% legal. There’s not even convincing evidence services in the grey areas hurt current industries. Google for the “sampling effect” for reports done outside of trade organization support.

The advancement of P2P and Bt has been hampered by 19th century thinking in a 21st century world. It’s extremely damaging to the economy to attack new technology and it’s uses so quickly. It’s become “politically correct” to misinform and kill new internet technologies and software applications. It’s wrong to attack technology because some people are using it improperly. That thinking is putting us back into the dark ages. Sony and MS have spent more R&D on restricting users than on helping them.

I am much more concerned about the major reason for identity theft and that is data processing centers (privacy.org). There is no law saying they have to inform us of a breach.

Because data streams are out of the US, they can’t be prosecuted even if they could track the crooks down.

That’s not addressing cases of theft taken place in foreign countries by employees by agencies legitimately sending private data; Credit reporting agencies, Medicare, US government, states, veterans, universities, etc. US privacy laws just don’t apply elsewhere. They have agreements, not laws.

I also discovered the hard way there isn’t anyone to complain to when the information has been breached.

The US does buy data from commercial third parties and I’ve wondered if that’s one of the reasons security has been so lax. Few lawmakers have looked into these issues seriously because it’s so much easier to make individual people feel responsible - protect their pocketbooks - and that’s hooey.

Why aren’t people outraged over that?

@HercBe, you are obviously a troll. Only such would doubt Hemi’s computing knowledge. However, if you would like to explain how using uTorrent to download an image of Yellow Dog Linux exposes my other files to hackers, I am all ears. Great big balrog ears.

Hmmmm…my limited computer knowlege…I guess me being a software developer is limited knowlege. Your response is that a hacker can use a bug in the software to get into the system…hmmm…NEWS FLASH…NO Software is 100% free of bugs. So your reasoning is flawed. I guess from your reasoning I should never use a computer to store any data since it can get hacked.

The statement would better be suited as such if you factor in hacking: “Anyone who plugs there computer up to the internet should expect that nothing on their hard drive is secure”

Did you know that your computer can be compromised just by plugging it into the internet and leaving it on. The fact that P2P is installed or not is irrelevant

OK. Let’s put this in perspective. The Lobbyists need P2P shutdown all together and this is purely a political move to stop file sharing cause they don’t like it.

People should still be mindful of what personal information they store on computers connected to the net AND used for file sharing.

If a hacker gains previleged access and is able to change settings on a P2P program, then he’ll also be able to do other nefarious things. Like stealing information, etc. This being the case, I don’t know why P2P is being singled out as being risky?

@ IcyMt: lol :slight_smile:

Anyways, I also agree that all our data can theoretically be compromized just by pluging our computer to the internet, but i strongly believe that this newspost is merely only about people mistakenly sharing their “My credit card folder”'s in limewire and the rest… and not about Mr Spath spending 3 days hacking into Joe Doe’s computer to get his hands on Doe’s electricity bill.

Usenet, SSL 256 bit encryption, do I need to say more? I get my favorite TV shows in 720HD all the time commercial free. I wouldn’t take ANY chances on P2P or Torrents nowadays.

Usenet: “Usenet providers do keep usage logs, but this logging information is not casually available to outside parties like the RIAA.”
“most P2P users distributing content are typically immediately identifiable to all other users by their network address, but the origin information for a usenet posting can be completely obscured and unobtainable once it has propagated past the origin server”

Ergo: Content posters are relatively safe compared to P2P (as post headers can be falsified, and tracking is difficult once the content has propagated to other servers), but downloaders are not anonymous & can be tracked via usenet logs.

" but downloaders are not anonymous & can be tracked via usenet logs."

Usenet is global. There is no way a person is going to know what you are downloading off of a Usenet server but the Usenet provider itself. Your ISP can’t know since the line is encrypted. All they can tell is that you are downloading something. Unless MPAA has ESP or something, they are not going to know what you are downloading either. The only way they could is if they could get the records from the Usenet provider which they couldn’t without having proof which they can’t get. With torrents and P2P, it is easy to get this information to prosecute someone.

Also, Usenet servers “mirror” each other. That also throws a pickel in the mix too.

Here we go again, our “benevolent” guppermint setting the stage to lock up and control as much digital content as it can, thereby regulating the internet. Watch out for diversion techniques, such as the swine-flu “pendemic”, deception like the idiot file sharers above, and just plain out right lies that this guppermint will resort to to achieve its goal. Hell they might decide file sharing is a hate/terrorist crime and bring in Homeland Security and a whole slew of other guppermint agencies to go after us!

They have claimed file sharing supports terrorism to get Homeland Security into the act. It was made a felony so thet FBI would do their dirty work at taxpayer expense.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/03/hollywood-funde/

Never mind that every study done outside of industry support claims otherwise: http://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/vaneijk/Ups_And_Downs_authorised_translation.pdf

Let’s be serious, to share something you must personally add it to a list of some kind or specify clearly that you want that file shared. Only idiots share personal files or folders. Unfortunately the world is full of idiots.:a

Seems we’ve strayed from the point… P2P programs are just what they are - end of story. As pointed out in the previous comments if one adds all the files from drive, B:, C: , ad infinitum, then it isn’t the programmers fault, it’s the end user.