I have a question..maybe it has already been answered. From what I know of security we have hash and other collisions in Virtual Machine systems and obviously that can be used to gain access. with Mega using always two hosts for a a piece of data assuming that they might be using some cloud structure how would this type of attack be prevented?
Mega has launched
251–260 of 272 posts
Re: Mega has launched
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
Define 'reasonable measures'. People use Dropbox to share copyrighted material all the time. Ditto S3, gmail, external hard drives, and any file storage method in existence. Enforcement of the standard you're promoting would require pervasive surveillance of every data storage and transfer method in the world, and backdoor access for all forms of encryption. Freedom of information and communication is orders of magni…
Arguing against piracy on the internet is a giant waste of my time because if you have it in your head that piracy is "good" or "ok" then you will rationalize bad arguments all day defending an incorrect position. To address your latest spurious post, dropbox, gmail, etc. Facilitate file sharing on a small scale. Public links to megaupload listed on public aggregating websites that list the latest 'releases' are an e…
First of all, MegaUpload did take preventative measures, at least that is what they argue. It's clear you don't understand how dangerous it is to take down the provider for a users actions.
Re: Mega has launched
#253Does anyone understand how their implementation of client-side encryption is actually supposed to make my data safer? After logging in for the first time, a 2048-bit RSA key pair was generated, but it seems that every time I log in I just use a username (email) and password. Does that mean the RSA private key is stored on MEGA's servers? If so, doesn't that render the whole "client side encryption" bit moot? If MEGA…
In my eyes, it's not secure because the AES key is stored, albeit encrypted by a password, on the server side along with a file of the password hashes. Even when best practices are followed, it's still relatively easy for an attacker to recover passwords from their hashes via a brute force attack.
If the goal was actually to create something very secure, I would say that the keys would need to stay entirely on the client side, but this of course has its own usability problems. As it is, I'm curious as to how password resets can be carried out.
That being said, it's probably relatively secure as long as the cloud provider isn't raided or coerced to act badly. They can reasonably say that the data is encrypted and that they don't have access to the key.
I would be interested to see what the crypto looks like when the site is used for file sharing (e.g. I upload once, then post a link for many to download). Or am I just assuming that there's an option for this use case?
Re: Mega has launched
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's not "just like" at all. And that's for the not-difficult-to-discern reason that people and pigs are not interchangeable, which why you can have bacon for breakfast without being charged as an accessory to murder. And I'm sorry that think that getting the artists out of art and just handing the satisfaction of the human intellect to machines is a situation where "everyone wins." A liberal education may not ge…
> No, it's not "just like" at all. And that's for the not-difficult-to-discern reason that people and pigs are not interchangeable You're arguing against something I never even claimed. However, what you said still doesn't change the fact that pigs are being used . Problem? > And I'm sorry that think that getting the artists out of art and just handing the satisfaction of the human intellect to machines is a situatio…
Comments such as these never cease to astonish me; I'm not sure what musicians/artists have done to warrant your unremitting contempt, but it is that which oozes out of every statement you make.
- "People who are creative can stil create things as much as they like": no, they are constrained by their budget and time. Piracy destroys the potential for remuneration on the back of e.g. recorded music, thus restricting the ability of the artist to create. Stop pretending like all worthwhile (by which I mean to say in-demand, whether legally or not) art can be made on a Sunday afternoon by a single person.
- "Artsy person...": I resent your suggestion that art is axiomatically a hobby, and those that create it -- "artsy persons", really? -- are all mere hobbyists. You seem to value music/film/etc. enough to unilaterally grant yourself unlimited rights to it, yet you use belittling terms, the better to convey your perceived superiority (presumably because you think programming requires more intelligence?) when discussing it. Not cool.
- "who can't adapt to the ever-accelerating technological progress we're going through": Yes, we musicians are all such idiots, we simply don't get revolutionary rockstar technologies like node.js and mongodb.
- "we can now share information": Please stop invoking lofty principles like liberty and the right to information to justify your consumption of the latest hollywood-made blockbuster movie or pop single without compensation the artists who created it.
- "Of course it would be ideal that I could create X, set it a price Y and then people would pay for it if they consider my product worth it's price. However, because of the way the world changes, it isn't possible in a strict sense."
"Of course it would be ideal for me not to whack you on the head with a club and take your possessions, but it's just not realistic in a strict sense; at least not without sacrificing vital liberties and the creation of a police force with godlike authority."
Re: Mega has launched
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wasn't MegaUpload popularity due to streaming video content? Doesn't the encryption make video streaming impossible in the way it was being done before (i.e. to a large psudononymous userbase)?
Yes, megavideo was a large part of their platform. I think it is only a matter of time before we see them build a video player on top of mega. I suspect there are technical hurdles to over come with decrypting and then playing the video using javascript though.
The MediaSource APIs will make this possible
Re: Mega has launched
#256and... it's down.
Re: Mega has launched
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
As soon as a file goes public and anybody can get it, then it seems to me irrelevant that its encrypted on mega servers. They'll have to respond to takedown requests because the contents are known. And if mega is de-duping content then that could technically eliminate "whack a mole" for the copyright holders (except for people re-encoding the file and re-uploading). I had heard in the past that mega would only take d…
> As soon as a file goes public This is the important bit. Files can be shared between private groups, using Mega as an intermediary, without them ever becoming indexed on the public web. Previously, files shared in this manner could still be a target of a takedown, because Megaupload would know they had them, even if nobody else did. Now Mega can make a stronger guarantee about keeping this kind of sharing "safe", b…
I would think this type of sharing would not be as much of a concern for copyright holders since a private group is not really mass distribution.
As soon as the sharing group got big enough to notice, then there could be agents in the group reporting infringement.
Re: Mega has launched
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No, it's not "just like" at all. And that's for the not-difficult-to-discern reason that people and pigs are not interchangeable You're arguing against something I never even claimed. However, what you said still doesn't change the fact that pigs are being used . Problem? > And I'm sorry that think that getting the artists out of art and just handing the satisfaction of the human intellect to machines is a situatio…
Comments such as these never cease to astonish me; I'm not sure what musicians/artists have done to warrant your unremitting contempt, but it is that which oozes out of every statement you make. - "People who are creative can stil create things as much as they like": no, they are constrained by their budget and time. Piracy destroys the potential for remuneration on the back of e.g. recorded music, thus restricting t…
> ""People who are creative can stil create things as much as they like": no, they are constrained by their budget and time. Piracy destroys the potential for remuneration on the back of e.g. recorded music, thus restricting the ability of the artist to create. Stop pretending like all worthwhile (by which I mean to say in-demand, whether legally or not) art can be made on a Sunday afternoon by a single person."
I never said anything about piracy in my reply nor I implied it. I guess I can assume machine learning and AI advancements pose a similar threat? So it would be wrong if there was something which would make creating art less profitable, such as for example computer aided creation of things? I mean of course that would put a few useless people out of their jobs when machines can increase the productivity enough. Horrible? Not really, cheaper art for people and increased amount of "indie" art in circulation. I'm all for it.
> "- "Artsy person...": I resent your suggestion that art is axiomatically a hobby, and those that create it -- "artsy persons", really? -- are all mere hobbyists. You seem to value music/film/etc. enough to unilaterally grant yourself unlimited rights to it, yet you use belittling terms, the better to convey your perceived superiority (presumably because you think programming requires more intelligence?) when discussing it. Not cool."
I guess the word artsy carries a negative tone, it wasn't my intention to imply that. Bear with me for not being a native English speaker. However, my whole point has been that the whole discussion about piracy revolves around people who are not doing art as a hobby but who are reliant on being paid for what they are doing.
> "- "who can't adapt to the ever-accelerating technological progress we're going through": Yes, we musicians are all such idiots, we simply don't get revolutionary rockstar technologies like node.js and mongodb."
Interesting, "we musicians". Spot on. However, again it seems that you are purposefully(?) missing the point. If we can recreate art with ease and as such we need less producers and distributors, what's the big deal? They go out of job because technology makes their work obsolete? It's a shame, but if there's something we can learn from the past, it's that you can't stop technology from advancing. My friend as a cab driver will lose his job once self-diriving cars become mainstream. My friend as a cashier already lost her job because of automation. Millions are going out of work at Foxconn during the next few years because of advanced robots. It's everywhere, technology reigns supreme and people go out of jobs at exponential rate from now on. Things change.
> "- "we can now share information": Please stop invoking lofty principles like liberty and the right to information to justify your consumption of the latest hollywood-made blockbuster movie or pop single without compensation the artists who created it."
Justify my what? Your assumption is completely false. Even if it were true and I actually did consume mainstream entertainment and especially without compensating the artists the fact that we can now share information easier than ever before holds true, and will (hopefully) hold true in the future too. After all services like youtube, dropbox, Mega etc. are here to stay and for obvious reasons. Oh and there's an increasing number of truly anonymous content sharing sites in Tor network. It's pretty fascinating where we're going IMO.
> "Of course it would be ideal for me not to whack you on the head with a club and take your possessions, but it's just not realistic in a strict sense; at least not without sacrificing vital liberties and the creation of a police force with godlike authority."
Your comparison is completely flawed and you know it. Do you understand the implications of total surveillance of the Internet in regards of freedom of speech for example? Or do you not care, as long as you get paid for your job?
Anyway, in case you haven't noticed it yet, we're moving towards a world where the copyright laws have less and less implications in our actions. Not only will the laws be reformed to make more sense, content sharing and distribution will increase just as it has to this day. Some people will lose their jobs, some artists will get less compensation for their work(for other reasons than piracy though) and so on. It's only natural. If this scares you, then just maybe it would be better for you to work in a different field? Because as I've said, you can't stop technology from advancing, and it advances at an accelerating rate. Exponential growth is a bitch.
> "Comments such as these never cease to astonish me"
Oh the irony. :)
Re: Mega has launched
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
There'll be plenty of cases when the content is inherently infringing. Cam copies, for example. Additionally, if there's a jurisdiction where a DVD rip of Dora The Explorer is not considered a fair use, they may start pounding Mega to limit this jurisdiction's access to the file. This sort of thing.
>There'll be plenty of cases when the content is inherently infringing. True, and it seems that Mega's copyright infringement reporting page[1] has an option for that: Takedown Type: Remove all underlying file(s) of the supplied URL(s) - there is no user who is permitted to store this under any circumstance worldwide [1] https://mega.co.nz/#copyrightnotice
Oh, nice. This is so tongue-in-cheek. There's no way of knowing the state of any permission worldwide.
Re: Mega has launched
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As soon as a file goes public This is the important bit. Files can be shared between private groups, using Mega as an intermediary, without them ever becoming indexed on the public web. Previously, files shared in this manner could still be a target of a takedown, because Megaupload would know they had them, even if nobody else did. Now Mega can make a stronger guarantee about keeping this kind of sharing "safe", b…
I would think this type of sharing would not be as much of a concern for copyright holders since a private group is not really mass distribution. As soon as the sharing group got big enough to notice, then there could be agents in the group reporting infringement.
Tell that to the valid copyright holders hosting their content on MegaUpload. Regardless of whether the system is used for legal or infringing purposes, the reality is that distribution companies have the ability to take down both when they claim some are using it to infringe. The concern for copyright holders is not the encryption per say, but the ability for big business to NOT be able to take down their legal content under the guise of a moral cause.