Live data from Hacker News

Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

catgirl.online

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#21
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never looked at the source code of a PT, but my understanding is that they also implement heuristics to detect strange behaviors, i.e. clients trying to fake their ratio.

Not all of them do, but yes. Since it is the client who send all the info (bytes sent/received, version, etc), anything can be spoofed. The tracker, having access to the stats of all the client on a specific torrent can find "unusual" client (for example, a client that report a lot of bytes sent while no other client report downloading/receiving anything, or the opposite). But due do quirks of the networks, delay and…

For example there's also something called "ghost leeching" (side channel entirely bypassing tracker reporting) which can lead to other peers reporting upload for which there's no opposite account of download on the tracker. Making it look like peers over-reported upload and cheated when they are in fact entirely innocent. There's no way for a private tracker to be really sure about stats. The most the moderators can do is to check for repeating suspicious usage patterns across many torrents of a particular peer under scrutiny.

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private trackers have no open registration. If they ban you at the account level then it's pretty hard to get back in.

>then it's pretty hard to get back in. It's really not. Even if they aren't recruiting new members you can buy an account or invites. You could also prepare alternate accounts ahead of time.

Depends how private...

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#23

Sounds like a very restrictive tracker... but I guess the more restrictive, the more likely it has good stuff. Seems kind of strange though because most trackers I have seen just completely ban any sort of proxy or VPN.

why ban VPN? what about seedboxes?

I don't know but it's pretty suspicious to ban VPNs to use something that is illegal in many countries. Hope they don't keep records that can be leaked.

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#24
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never looked at the source code of a PT, but my understanding is that they also implement heuristics to detect strange behaviors, i.e. clients trying to fake their ratio.

Not all of them do, but yes. Since it is the client who send all the info (bytes sent/received, version, etc), anything can be spoofed. The tracker, having access to the stats of all the client on a specific torrent can find "unusual" client (for example, a client that report a lot of bytes sent while no other client report downloading/receiving anything, or the opposite). But due do quirks of the networks, delay and…

I have used patched version of muTorrent. Binary exe contains string private, and I changed it to crivate with hex editor, so that torrent client stops reacting to private flag and starts whistleblowing peers to DHT. I don't think that my client looks unusual.

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#25
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all of them do, but yes. Since it is the client who send all the info (bytes sent/received, version, etc), anything can be spoofed. The tracker, having access to the stats of all the client on a specific torrent can find "unusual" client (for example, a client that report a lot of bytes sent while no other client report downloading/receiving anything, or the opposite). But due do quirks of the networks, delay and…

I have used patched version of muTorrent. Binary exe contains string private, and I changed it to crivate with hex editor, so that torrent client stops reacting to private flag and starts whistleblowing peers to DHT. I don't think that my client looks unusual.

It does. If the tracker is monitoring DHT. Or, more likely, if your client finds a similar "no respect for private flags" DHT peer, sends data to it, and reports that to the tracker.

Does that weird DHT peer report to the tracker? It may not even have an account there. From the tracker's end, that peer is a ghost, and it looks like your client has reported sending data no one ever received.

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#26

i was expecting a more hands on explanation of what the client sends and what the tracker responds but this post is quite abstract for a technical issue. from what i read in the PR the qBT fix is to just ignore the proxy on the listening side of things but that doesnt explain the issue

i thought about including packet captures and some analysis on that, but ran out of steam. you're right that it would have made a more interesting post. maybe ill amend it at some point :)

there were other peculiarities i noticed in testing, like udp trackers not working through the socks proxy even after fixing the listening port problem. id like to revisit the topic at some point to see if that can be fixed as well.

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#28
post #3

Stuff like this is why I usually go for network namespaces + (wireguard / socks / iptables) when I need to isolate traffic. > The tracker in question that I wanted to get this working for explicitly forbids running development builds of approved BitTorrent clients. Also didn't realize trackers were that strict about clients. I've seen some ban buggy versions / sketchy clients (usually cloud-based or for mobile), but…

You can turn a socks5 into an interface and then move it to a different namespace: https://github.com/xjasonlyu/tun2socks

Re: Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS

#29
post #3

Stuff like this is why I usually go for network namespaces + (wireguard / socks / iptables) when I need to isolate traffic. > The tracker in question that I wanted to get this working for explicitly forbids running development builds of approved BitTorrent clients. Also didn't realize trackers were that strict about clients. I've seen some ban buggy versions / sketchy clients (usually cloud-based or for mobile), but…

The private torrent site crowd are very restrictive on which clients are allowed and even big names like qBit aren't safe enough to assume the version is allowed.

I remember using a ratio-fake tool that would basically proxy your reporting to the tracker with the signature of the client you were actually using. It was awesome.
Post reply on HN