Offline
@VONCROFT16 This is a sign that traffic may not be getting routed to the tracker properly. Try opening this link:
https://tracker.gaytor.rent/stmdd
Does this link open a stats page, or does the page fail to load? If it fails to load, then you may need to use a different VPN server location to route around the issue that is causing the packet to drop.
@harry76 For your ISP, it becomes more of a legal protection. No ISP wants to be known as the ISP that allows copyright infringement on their network. In the case of a user who gets a multitude of requests, this obviously increases the risk that the copyright troll can start litigation against the provider for allowing such activity on their network.
I personally do not use a VPN when logging into the site just to browse or use the forums, however on the machine that I use for the actual torrent traffic, I absolutely use a VPN. I know that in the DPI state of Canada, my ISP can most definitely see what I'm doing behind the VPN, however it is not my ISP I am worried about. It's more of a protection so that nothing attaches my actual IP address to any torrent traffic so that my actual IP address does not appear in the peers pool. This way, my ISP can most definitely still see what I'm doing, but potential copyright trolls cannot tie my identity to any specific torrent.
The other added benefit of using a VPN is that if I do hit on a torrent that is being monitored by copyright trolls, they'll have to approach my VPN provider for further information, however my VPN provider has a strict no logging policy, so they are not able to disclose information that they do not actually have. This saves me from having my ISP account tied to any of the torrents I may have active at any given time, which both protects me from being tied to the torrent, and also stops my ISP from receiving any potential notice.
It is generally assumed that although in a DPI state such as Canada that the big players to the market can see what kind of traffic you have going even through the VPN, they typically do not give a damn what you're actually doing, as long as they don't have copyright holders knocking on their door with infringement claims.
That said, depending on where you are in the world, it may be a wise idea to use the VPN even when logging into the site, just to make sure that even the sites themselves cannot tie your actual IP address to your account. This is particularly helpful if the security of the site or its staff are compromised somehow. A person may be able to tie the VPN IP to different torrents, and may even be able to tie your VPN IP to your account, but if they are not able to sniff out your actual IP address, then the link they need to get your subscriber information is missing, thereby making the VPN IP address a dead end (assuming that your VPN provider has a no logging policy).
@VONCROFT16 I'm not seeing anything on your account that would prevent you from downloading. What is the particular error message you're getting from the tracker?
Another thing worth noting....
Functionally, there is NO difference between "Low" and "Strong" for your privacy settings. Regardless of your settings, you will be shown as "Anonymous" to other users on all torrents. The only thing that becomes visible to other users if they look at your profile on the "Normal" setting is your ratio information such as overall ratio, upload/download totals, and SBP information.
Regardless of what privacy setting you choose, your torrent history is NOT visible to anyone other than staff. The only real difference between "Low" or "Strong" and "Normal" aside from overall ratio and SBP information is that if you have it set to "Normal", other users can see the button to PM you, add you to friends, or add you to blocks.
EDIT: Just to give you a visual, with my account, I have my setting set on "Normal" so that other users can PM me directly if they need assistance. When on "Normal", this is what my profile will appear as for a regular user.
The only "damaging" (for lack of a better term) info that is shown to other users when on "Normal" mode is my ratio, as well as my upload/download totals. Under Canadian law though, this is hardly "damning" information, as this does not link to any specific torrent, so it cannot (at least in Canada) be used as evidence that any given torrent was downloaded and/or shared in full.
Just to further provide an example, even with my profile security set to "Normal", when viewed from a regular user account, my information does NOT appear anywhere for other users, even if I comment on my own torrents.
See... I show as "Anonymous", even though my security settings are set to "Normal".
And when I put a test comment on my torrent, it shows to a normal user like this...
For the current moment, the only time my username on a torrent will appear to other users if if they use the button to send the uploader a PM, but as I said, that is soon going to change, I'm just not sure how.
So even with your profile set to "Normal", there is nothing (outside of the send uploader a PM button) that will show my username attached to any torrent I have uploaded, even with my security settings set to "Normal".
@ianfontinell Interesting... Let me hop onto my regular user account so I can test this theory to see what shows up from a regular user account.
EDIT: I just hopped onto my regular user account, and it doesn't seem to matter what the user's privacy settings are set to... If you only have a regular user account, you can only see the name of the uploader if you click the button to send the uploader a message. This will soon change. I'm not sure if we're going to remove the button, or change it so that the uploader is only revealed if they respond to the PM, but either way, it will be addressed.
@cp2000 Not only do copyright holders have accounts here, so they're able to see the forums just the same as other users, but there's another problem still... ANY content published on the internet can be subjected to a subpoena, meaning even if the forum were not visible to the public in any way without a membership, its contents can still be accessed through the legal system.
So regardless of whether or not it is private, your point is invalid. Private or not, copyright holders still have any number of ways of accessing the content for their purposes.
@ianfontinell As far as I am aware, the uploader of any torrent (regardless of their privacy settings) is only visible to staff. Regular users and public search indexes will only see "Anonymous"
You guys haven't heard back yet because we are in the process of investigating the issue so we can figure out how to fix it.
@ianfontinell Actually, we're working on a workaround to that with the new inbox system so that if you upload a torrent and someone sends you a PM from the torrent page, your username only becomes known to that user if you choose to respond to the PM.
@Kevin4fm You would think, but in one particular case that I'm intimately familiar with, all that it took for someone (me) to get arrested, sent straight to jail, denied bail, and have things like medical records subject to a subpoena was literally nothing more than a verbal allegation alone with absolutely ZERO physical evidence.
What's worse about that particular case is that I absolutely did NOT do what I was accused of, but despite the overwhelming evidence to support my innocence, the verbal allegation alone was all that was needed to sink me. Now, many years later, I have finally been granted a pardon, as the Parole Board of Canada finally acknowledged that both in relation to the charges against me, as well as everything that has been submitted to them since, there was (and I quote) "insufficient evidence of criminal activity".
So just because it should, in theory, require some sort of substance to the claim being made, this is not always the case.
As for the benefits of the forum being visible to public search engines, the biggest benefit that I can think of is it makes content such as help and how to's that are in the forum more easily searchable, even if our internal search of the forum does not yield the results you are looking for. So simply put, it makes answers to common problems more easily searchable and accessible.
@cp2000 There's only one problem... In the digital age, privacy is a myth. Literally anything on the internet (whether it's public or not) can be subjected to a subpoena by the courts. So regardless of whether or not it's private makes ZERO difference to the ability of the legal system to obtain it through a subpoena process.
I'll bet you didn't even know that the same applies to things like medical records, which are supposed to be held with the strictest of confidentiality.
@ianfontinell Either that, or they're blissfully unaware of the precedents that have been set by TekSavvy in the Canadian courts. They can throw his IP address around all they want, but an IP address is insufficient proof of identity for the previously mentioned reasons.
Hi, as per what we were told the situation is actually worse in terms of what FW might have one to get this info, it was believed they hacked into one of the mods accounts as to get it since they have no other way to access it, plus the old "thanks" to know who downloaded what, also they can't access the information of seeders/leechers, as it happens here, unless you are an admin.
I don't know what happens if you live outside the US, as it is my case. All this said, I don't believe it will be that easy for them to follow up with any of us, especially as what @ianfontinell since I never cared for their material either.
Sorry I can't be more specific but I would rather be safe than sorry.
I don't know about in the USA, but in Canada, a simple thanks on a torrent is insufficient to take any action on as a simple thank you does not prove that the user downloaded the content in its entirety, or that the user shared the content with other users (again, see Voltage Pictures Inc v TekSavvy).
I'm actually rather glad that TekSavvy decided to fight back and fight back HARD when Voltage tried to take them to the cleaners a few years back, as it set a number of precedents for our court systems that gave substantial protections to Canadians. One of these precedents that was set was that they have to prove the identity of the end-user of the device, OR have to prove that the service subscriber was aware of the infringing activity and failed to act in a way that ceased the activity in question.
So with the Notice & Notice System, it is a bit more difficult to go after users in the Canadian courts, and pretty well ALL cases since this landmark case have been the result of user stupidity, usually because they got the cease & desist notice, but failed to stop the infringing activity by the end of the deadline.
The only catch to the Notice & Notice System is that if your ISP receives too many complaints (as is determned by your ISP as no precedent has yet to be set on that), your ISP may reserve the right to terminate your service and refuse any future subscription. A VPN however will get around this though, as it will make the VPN IP show in the peers pool, rather than your actual IP address, so it keeps the identity of your ISP out of the equation.
https://torrentfreak.com/porn-producer-targets-members-of-gay-torrent-site-in-court-251104/
They also tried to sue this pvt torrent tracker too
This one is particularly interesting because it was a Canadian who they went after. See, Canada has what we call the "Notice & Notice System". When your IP address is identified in the peers pool, it was ruled in the case of Voltage Pictures Inc v TekSavvy Solutions that an IP address alone is insufficient to warrant the disclosure of the subscriber information as an IP address alone does not prove the physical device that was used, that the end user of said physical device is the service subscriber, or even that the physical device was actually physically present at the service address of the subscriber (thanks to things like WiFi).
The only thing they can do for the regular downloader pirates in Canada is send their ISP a cease and desist notice, which then gets forwarded to the subscriber. They are given a chance to first cease the infringing activity, and if they comply, no further action can be taken. It is only if the service subscriber is made aware of the allegations and fails to act to stop the infringing activity that either any action can be taken, or that the subscriber information can be revealed to the copyright holder. Also, for lawsuit purposes, the IP address alone was ruled in the same court ruling to be insufficient evidence to prove that the content was downloaded in its entirety, or was shared to other users.
Now after reading that article, it seems that the Canadian in question was identified by the unique watermark on the content, which linked to their paid account on the site, which is a whole different ball of wax, as this information most definitely IS sufficient evidence to prove not only the tie to that particular person, but also prove that the content was distributed in its entirety.
I'd be really interested in seeing if any of the other "John Doe" users in that claim are Canadian.
@rentboy If you are concerned about what may be tied back to you due to copyright trolls, then the only thing I would suggest is to not post anything that would tie you to having uploaded or downloaded a torrent.
Keep in mind that making a comment thanking a user for having uploaded a torrent is not evidence that you have downloaded said torrent. Also, on comments you make on your own torrents, to anyone other than staff, your username does not appear, but rather you show up as "Uploader".
If another site gets compromised, any information from that site is likely already in their hands, so nothing from this site could be used to do any damage beyond what has already been done from the other site.
I'm not sure how the restriction works on the new system, but I know on the old system, you were only able to send messages to staff for the first 6 months of membership, but once you reached the 6 month mark, you could message anyone on the site whose privacy settings allowed for PMs.
The reason for this was because we had issues with spam bots somehow getting through the system and mass PM'ing spam to just about everyone on the site. The restriction became a necessary evil in order to stop this kind of spam bot abuse.
I'll have to look into the details of the restrictions on the new system, but I would be very surprised if the reason for the restriction isn't still the same.
@raphjd It should also be noted that for most of the world, when a government blocks the use of a site or service, these blocks do not usually go beyond basic DNS interception, so that even if you're using a DNS server other than your provider's, it will sniff out requests for certain banned domains or keywords, then drop the packets.
Blocking the use of a VPN is usually done either the exact same way (so you can just use a service or host on a domain they don't know about yet), or more commonly, is restricted by protocol type and destination port. In the case of the more common port restrictions, using an alternate port (even without the use of stealth VPN) such as TCP 443 will get around this in a jiffy.
Most networks that I've encountered that block the use of VPN traffic do so either by specifically blocking the default ports for VPN services, or in some cases, have a blanket policy to only allow certain ports, and deny everything else. In the case of either of these two methods, using TCP 443 will get around this as any website that uses HTTPS uses TCP 443, so if you block this port, you basically kill like 99% of the internet.
@raphjd That depends on a couple of things... The first is if they run a DPI system, and if so, how elaborate it is. The second has to do with the kind of VPN that you use.
If they have a DPI that goes really in depth, it may not be possible to get around it, as the DPI will eventually detect the use of a VPN (regardless of the workaround) and start dropping the packets.
If the DPI (like most of the world that has it) only looks at the more basic details of the connection, then there are still two potential ways in which you can get around this.
The first is that services like the one I use offer what is known as stealth VPN, which usually does slow down the VPN connection some, however skirts around the usual restrictions by using DNS overrides in their app, as well as using one of two ports that would more or less break the entire internet if they were to filter said traffic. TCP 443 is the most common port to use for stealth VPN, as you cannot restrict this port without breaking the vast majority of the internet.
The second (which my provider supports for countries like China) is very similar to the first, only the stealth VPN also uses a different hostname on a different domain, as well as a different IP address on a different subnet to sneak under the radar of the more sensitive DPI systems.
In the case of Canada, if the Canadian government does succeed in banning the use of a VPN, this could get very tricky for a lot of us, it is a lot more complicated to fly under the radar. In the case of a service such as GoldTV, which was banned some time ago, the only way it can be accessed in Canada is with both the use of a VPN AND Tor together, as the DPI can still sniff out the DNS and destination IP of the packet, even through pretty well all VPN services.
@ianfontinell Custom DNS will only work if the country you are in and the provider you are using does not have/use a DPI system. If DPI is involved, even changing your DNS to a public DNS is not enough. Canada is a perfect example of this. When the Canadian government bans certain sites or domains (which DOES happen), the big player providers in the market (who basically own a monopoly) make use of a DPI system, so even if you try using Google DNS, the moment you try to do anything with a banned domain, the request will fail. The ONLY way around this is to use a VPN AND Tor as for most of these blocks (at least in a DPI state like Canada), a VPN alone is not enough.
@Kevin4fm This is correct. Most VPN providers do not allow port forwarding. There are some however that do forward at least ONE port for doing things like P2P, but usually this is a random port and will change every time you connect to the VPN.
Now, my provider (PrivateVPN) does support port forwarding. On ALL servers, they support forwarding one port, however on some servers (which you can find in a dedicated IP tab) will forward ALL ports through the VPN.