Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile


Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??

Posted by Anonymous User 
Anonymous User
Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
May 26, 2011 12:23AM
Hey all, busy of late.

Been using PB for years as I did with PG before it, so Im quite versed with its querks from time to time, but as of a few weeks ago my display hasn't been showing so many blocked hits as it usually does. At first I thought it was me but I'm quite sensitive to these things as sometimes they can be a symptom of something amiss, but over time I'm convinced the blocked hits have dropped.

The HTML blocks are showing as normal but the IP blocks have most certainly dropped, like a few lists maybe were not quite working correctly. hmmm, I don't know - its a hunch, but one I think is worth raising here .

Has anyone else here noticed anything similar, or if its a recognised problem someone has seen. Unlikely, I'm sure I would have seen it before.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2011 02:00PM by MrScabby2.
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 26, 2011 01:01AM
You're most likely not doing anything that would cause the blocked hits.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2011 01:01AM by ineedalifetoday.
Anonymous User
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 26, 2011 04:01AM
hmmm possibly, I'm not visiting some sites as often as I used to.

Another point though, I have noticed Time Warner hits on the increase merely for watching stuff on the net recently (unusual in itself as watching stuff isn't illegal), ie I get a HTTP block right after pressing play on a lot of videos, now I'm not paranoid and think its just me they are interested in but I did notice I get a Comodo HTTP block right after a Time Warner hit, regularly (I use Comodo firewall at the moment)

I've had a strong suspicion of an under the table deal going on with the Commercial Firewalls and the Media since the Digital Millennium act was signed in and I have been looking out for anything in the press and software alterations and found enough to be concerned about within the software side of it. So you could say I'm keeping an eye on things from that viewpoint.

So I wanted to throw it open and see what anyone here might think, or perhaps run a few test of your own and feed back with your points.

Does anyone else get TW hits for watching video online? I could go into my reasons if you want to be bored titless but most of you will just think Im paranoid and run me off as some freak instead of the 45 yr old obsessive computer nut!

I see things coming, I read a lot, I understand all of it

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2011 01:54AM by MrScabby2.
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 26, 2011 06:36AM
care to elaborate on this "digital millennium act" you're speaking of?

i've only heard bits and pieces but not the whole thing, what changes exactly are taking place? you got me paranoid alittle now since i use PC tools for a firewall.

to answer your question, i haven't noticed any strange hits on PB just the norm bogon and google hits (i watch netflix videos online too).

Life is like a box of chocolates................................umm chocolate, yummy grinning smiley
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 26, 2011 08:22AM
@ brandonjm8

"digital millennium act" is actually the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act", aka "DMCA" signed into law on October 28, 1998 by former U.S. President Bill Clinton. - [secure.wikimedia.org] -

@ MrScabby2

I suspect the Time Warner hits to occur since Time Warner is a ISP, and you are most likely viewing content that is located on their servers.

I have some questions:
Who is your ISP?

What sites are these video's on that are being blocked? It could possible be the ad's inside the video, or maybe some ad's imbedded on the video site?

What makes you think that commercial firewalls and the "media" (I am assuming copyright owners of materials displayed on TV/video sites, are the media) are in some sort of "under the table deal"?

(Assuming you are referring to the copyright owners)
Personally, I don't see how this could possible be true, since the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is used to issue cease and desist orders to stop someone when they are committing piracy. And from my point of view, why would commercial firewalls be in some sort of "under the table deal", I find something like this would break a few privacy laws, or something, unless its inside the EULA (who reads those anyway? not me grinning smiley) described as "we may collect statistical data ...". The way I see it, if there was some "under the table deal" I think the amount of people getting sued for copyright infringement would be a LOT higher, if this "under the table deal" existed, as the firewall software, could collect a treasure trove of user info.

Do you have any links/articles to backup this suspicions?
Anonymous User
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 26, 2011 11:40PM
I think I have the Digital Millennium Copyright Act mixed up with Digital Copyright Treaty and this affects the U.S., European, Japan and Canadian areas, my apologies for that - it was late when I wrote.

First off I didn't arrive at this from the point of view of following the DCT, I had heard about it then heard it had been thrown out by Europe and a test case in Aus so there are holes in my knowledge regarding this area. My speciality is software as my background was programming and this enables me to read more into software changes and deliberate alterations within the design of the software. And I suppose for balance I should point out Im not a legal expert either but I do have a lot of experience with copyright law , contractual documents and t&c's and the like through working in the publishing field.

I first noticed changes in key security software, I thought it was a fad you know, link checkers, Bad URL shield and the rest of em. However these options were a major privacy risk in my opinion, because they all require the software have internet access to check requested page URL against a list of bad URL's and hence the scope for abuse is enormous.

I first made a possible link between the above and the DCT after Mr Murdoch said in a news item "Privacy is dead, get over it!" - Now if your interested in International power broking (I like to do it with a pint and the dog!) you will know of Mr Murdoch, he is a very rich and powerful media mogul with major shares in Sky, Time Warner and the Fox network amongst countless film companies. He is also one of the key backers of the DCT (amongst others) so when he says something like that its worth taking notice!

Shortly after that I noticed my ZoneAlarm free had downloaded a new update and now offered an 'Extra' in the form of Trusted Applications checker and called it something (I forget now),. Personally I don't like others having access to what and where and how long I go some where - not because I have something to hide, but because of what someone else can do with that information. So I decided to turn it off it had an option to do it, and found I couldn't. It remained on no matter what. I tried to raise it in the forums and was rubbished by the mods there, when I pursued it I had my account deleted. hmmmm

So I started to look around at what was on offer and lo and behold most of the commercial ones has something similar, even comodo, I use now installs in such a way that the default settings after install allows a back door access if your on the trusted list, but it doesn't kick in until you put it in GAME MODE. and to stop it requires rule changes, hmmmmmm ok.
(I have checked these things over a few hours, if you want to try comodo or ZoneAlarm be my guest! I can tell you how to do it )

Time rolls on,
Then we get a lunchtime News item on the BBC about ACS Law in the UK and the DDos attack made on its servers. The company had been firing off demands for payment to avoid legal action for piracy against its client, I laughed at how the head of the company Andrew Crossley passed off the attack as "typical rubbish from pirates" and at the time denied that any information had been leaked, Mr Crossley knows only too well why he was targeted and the proof was provided by a balls up by the BBC (or deliberate, opinion alert again). See they didn't know I was watching it, and as the camera swung round to show the office they wanted to include a shot of all the pirates they had caught,  - on the screen was a list showing the pirates and just how many there were. This is the 'Shock' factor deliberately employed by the Media to scare people. The BBC was told to blur out the details of the clients to comply with the 1998 Data Protection Act, they did this and did comply as names were blurred out but forgot (or someone in the BBC did it on purpose) to blur out the Plaintiff (accuser). They were all BSKYB!. I waited for the tea time news to come on to see if they would correct it, they didn't they withdrew the whole story, poooffff! gone - I would love to get a copy of it if anyone finds it. [20th September 2010 +/- 4 days Lunchtime News BBC one - I THINK! - that's one to put up] - I still have not read a single item about the pulling of the story? 

It's also worth noting BSkyB recently posted record profits of 1 billion pounds (BBC). Just thought I would throw that one in, facts - I love em!

So lets recap what I'm saying here. ACS Law was being supplied by BSkyB the details and account numbers and personal information of customers who had used it's own broadband to download its own media, they must have done this by snooping on their traffic and providing evidence to the solicitor. I believe the average demand the BBC stated was £2000 (later turned out to be £450+) and this was to avoid further action which means the alleged pirate avoids the costly court case and the accuser avoids the scrutiny from the legal profession (honourable stuff here eh!).

And the reason why the DDos attack and subsequent deliberate data theft was done was to provide the defendants with a counter claim so the action didn't sink them - I'll leave you to make your own mind up where you stand on that one!

I think its safe to say that the DCT is an operation in flux. The ACTA meetings are private and produce no reports, following meetings we may get some new legislation, so if you see this on the news or in the papers then read it. But don't always believe it, that's only the bait! but it is a "Heads Up! for a possible change coming" - this is our privacy they are tinkering with and they are doing it behind closed doors. My personal politics on this are not on the table for debate. My motivation here is our privacy. Did BskyB cherry pick those people from their demographics?

I mean I'm not stating that that took place but if no one checks then is it only me or is there a conflict of interest here???

And the next angle? again I see changes that concern me, this time when I zip over to say, VeeHd or StageVu to watch something that I later find out is owned by TW say Stargate SG.When I press play I get a hit on TW on HTML (from me to them), this is NEW and only started to take my notice last 6-8 weeks, then I noticed I was getting a hit from comodo right after, not every time but say 7/10 again from me to them (both were blocked by PB on my setup). I would like a few folks to test this and see if they get the same results or input if you know on this. I mean there could be a chance its the software but I doubt it. perhaps lists or even a FF add on but I am careful who I allow in these days so possible but unlikely.

Is this a change of tact from TW and if so why?

Will we see some more legislation soon? Keep your eyes open and report it here

I was looking for a motivation for this and I'm struggling. I thought watching something someone else had posted wasn't illegal, well here in the UK it isn't else how would youtube exist?  the only one I can come up with is if future plans included sharing this information, who knows but if TW change their actions then for me thats the heads up for a forthcoming change.

I hope I have wrote enough here to give you an idea of what I have been up to, and my motivation for doing it. All of the important parts where I have deliberately stated events and names, are as I say, that is what happened and I was watching the News item luckily so there is no libel to answer. ACS Law was made bankrupt, Mr Crossley is facing a law suit for £200,000.

The point here is we should be talking and keeping our eyes open about this as this is important. These are your Privacy Rights they are playing with and from what I can see we should be screaming at our politicians for allowing this sort of behaviour to go on. As for ACS then they got what they deserve, but what BskyB was up to AND the subsiquent pulling of a story that was most certainly in the public interest, now that worries me like @#$%& hell!

I don't need to be your Nanny and tell you what you should do with your online life and your privacy within it. No one here at Peer Block is going to endorse you stealing anything from someone else, its clearly wrong, but what is under threat here is our privacy and one of the leading companies in the push behind the DCT is TW.

So I'm trying here to kick off some debate on it, if the admins here feel this should be in private then fine, if you read this and do not know in advance enough on the subject you could get the wrong idea and think your privacy is totally open, its not - this is the debate thats going on now between Media Giants and our Governments and we should be watching them like a Hawk with a microscope !!!!!.

laters, I welcome opinions and please if you see any errors in my post let me know, I will change them and comply with the facts wherever and whatever it is. Possible errors in this maybe versions of the software have since changed, this is over a 12 month period and I aint goin back and doing it all again just to check. Policies may have moved on, they may not be doing something now as it didn't work. I have marked where I can what is my personal opinion, I do not expect everyone to agree with me, but I do have an uncanny knack of getting things spot on where Computers and IT are concerned.


more reading
Private Report exposed

and no I do not belong to any organisation or offer any politics or agenda except Privacy Rights which should concern all users of the internet, one of the greatest empowering technologies man has ever invented, and under threat!

Edited 46 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2011 02:04AM by MrScabby2.
Anonymous User
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 28, 2011 09:17PM
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 29, 2011 05:20AM
The big media companies will do what they want too, there's nothing ATM that we can do about it really. What's gonna happen more than likely is: 1) They (Media Moguls) get their bills/laws passed which they can use to steal (legally) and/or track information on a personal (invasion of privacy) basis, 2) There will be a small drop off of people putting personal information on the internet for fear of no privacy, 3) One of two things will then happen after some time and more drop off and possible rioting, a new form of "Internet" will be created free of the media moguls laws or new politicians will be elected to abolish their laws and we will eventually go back to having most of our privacy back online, my two cents.

Life is like a box of chocolates................................umm chocolate, yummy grinning smiley
Anonymous User
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 29, 2011 01:31PM
I agree brendon to a point, the arguments are going on now and I feel (if your interested in fighting back) then you should be highlighting when they go to far (as in the ACS case) and pointing it out to them as I did with the BBC news item (which they are fully aware happened, I made an official complaint and never got any response, don't matter, they know I (and others) was watching and will continue to watch! Thats the point of writing.

When our privacy is gone then we are stuck with companies such as TW or BSB who as in my post have already proved beyond reasonable doubt - cannot be trusted where privacy and profits are concerned. This is the call to get of your arses and start looking for things. I am not paranoid this is most certainly happening and you will NOT get the truth through the Media about what is happening because they are all in on it!

I would love to get hold of that news item, I would personally post it all over the place!!!!!

Opinions please, one response all be it a good one does not justify my efforts and again only serves as proof people aint bothered.

I struggle to understand why people would purchase their broadband from someone making the stuff they then steal!

later, more replies please . . .

P.S. another fact, BSkyB recently applied to the new tory government to purchase controlling shares in BSkyB. They allowed them and they purchased four FreeView channels and subsequently closed them down on the grounds, "They currently supply channels like those on their paidfor service so felt they were no longer needed", they replaced it with a gambling channel which they own! - again I will let you make your own mind up.

my opp - Total Disgrace, to close down channels aimed at the less well off and to replace them with a Quizz(gambling) channel! - smacks me as a contemptuous move.

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2011 02:17PM by MrScabby2.
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 29, 2011 09:53PM
MrScabby2 Wrote:
> I struggle to understand why people would purchase
> their broadband from someone making the stuff they
> then steal!

With the right know how and programs you can't be tracked or probed by anyone especially your ISP, here in the states especially in Minnesota we don't have many choices in ISP's, it's either Comcast or Qwest really (at least in the Twin Cities), TW and Comcast bought out all the little guys years ago. Both practice tracking their customers to then sell to 3rd parties and you wake up to find dozens of spam emails everyday 'cept me lol.

I do what i can to mask myself whenever possible, i will say this i need a better firewall to as to have true full stealth port capabilities. PB helps out alot with the appropriate lists in place, if they can't contact your computer it's hard for them or anyone for that matter to do anything to you, my two cents.

Life is like a box of chocolates................................umm chocolate, yummy grinning smiley
Anonymous User
Re: Unusual behaviour - too few Blocked showing.??
May 30, 2011 01:42PM
Yes, thank god for PB - in some ways its the last line of defence,

Everything about TW and its spin off's stinks, they close competition where ever they spread their interests.

Television is DEAD! at the moment they are trying their hardest to keep things as they are because we are easily controlled when we only have their version of events to brainwash us with, you should know that more than anyone living where you do Brendon. The US Media is totally controlled, you would never see documentaries like The Trap or Century of Self or even the latest coming up Love and Power by Adam Curtis produced by the U.S. Media because it tells us, 'The Sheep' too much about how the 'Farm' works.

My politics is creeping out, lol!

I'll keep my eye on things this side of the pond because I see changes I don't like. They threaten the whole of the Internet if powers who disagree with you can silence you on-line, thank god for the folks behind Wi ki leaks. For they offer everyone a platform from which we can oppose these power mongers who clearly behind the scenes do not stick to any rules, the same rules they accuse pirates of breaking. Hypocrisy!

anyway thats my two cents, or should I say two pence.

post up here anything you think is suspicious, do not rely on your previous conceptions of what is right or wrong because the state of the game is in flux.

Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2011 05:27PM by MrScabby2.
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
June 20, 2011 01:15AM
UPDATE: TW - HTML hits registering

TW seem to be monitoring (mostly illegal) video sites. If you forget to switch on the Block HTML option then the bandwidth becomes so slow you cannot watch the video. Somehow they are interfering with the streaming speed.

Return an hour later with HTML block engaged, video loads no problem.

Motive obtained!
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
June 20, 2011 08:06AM
MrScabby2 Wrote:
> Somehow they are
> interfering with the streaming speed.

Bastards, lol.

without the help of the masses what really can we do about it? i just avoid most of their BS whenever possible (sad i know)

Life is like a box of chocolates................................umm chocolate, yummy grinning smiley
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
June 22, 2011 02:20PM
Julian Assange: 'Facebook is the most scaring spy machine ever". Who knows? May be Google is also not too bad and everybody else.

To be anonym browsing the internet is nearly an illusion. May be some nerds can. There are so many ways to track people, VPN isn't a guarantee, because DNS tracking is so easy. What's the benefit of VPN, if the browser requests the nameservers with his own IP and than use the tunnel to the specific site?

So, a good idea should be during internet session, suppose that you are trackable and act that way.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/01/2012 12:43PM by PBChecker.
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
June 22, 2011 09:30PM

without the help of the masses what really can we do about it?

When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. -  or "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." ---  Edmund Burke

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2011 09:34PM by MrScabby2.
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
June 22, 2011 09:34PM

Julian Assange: 'Facebook is the most scaring spy machine ever"

I agree,

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2011 09:35PM by MrScabby2.
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
June 23, 2011 08:40AM
MrScabby2 Wrote:
> When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible > struggle. -  or "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good > men to do nothing." ---  Edmund Burke

I agree at all.

Mark Zuckerbergs answer of: 'Why do people give all of their personally informations to you?' -- 'They trust me these stupid fools.'
What will be Zuckerbergs next idea following 'face detection'.

People, who make everything public don't understand, that they reveal themselves to big orgs, govs, corps, but aren't powerful as these.

So, what is to do?
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
July 08, 2011 06:06AM
Because of the DMCA and the Patriot Act in combination with the coming Protect IP Act (PIPA) We as a nation have become once again a policed state along with the Internet. When in Germany we learned that Hitler created a task of secret police made up of every person on your block, people became scared and others revelled at the fact that they had such power. What happened was a policing of every phone call and and switchboard. This new set of law made by a Government (established initially by the people for the people) has become corrupted by the lust and want of money. This is where Corporations get the rights to uniformly to take control of end user equipment.. (For example I have a $699 iPad that I Jailbroke legally, Steve BlowJobs Thinks and believes My purchased product to be his. So he breaks my custom settings every time I need update in order to continue paying for songs, movies, and books from his abhorred store) Why does he have the legal right to mess with my customizations. The Government has issued a new type of copyright protocol. So he does own that iPad, its called hardware licencing. The EULA inside of iTunes and the EULA on the device its self gives me the right to do what I want with it except for customize it in that fashion, because it allows for unsupported third party software to be installed.

If we were to follow the Constitution to the letter we would have a hanging every week till every Politician was dead. If we were to follow the amendments no one would need pay tax.. (To this day Not one tax Law exists except it be predicated on a federal law book. No such law exists) But we have the IRS Claiming in their ignorance to the constitution, that they have a right to enforce tax with Guns if necessary.

If we follows the Constitution (Base Law) No one act of Congress would be passed to this day, because everyone of them violate it. Every bill that is in the running to become law would need be shredded. Every Police officer would be jailed for communist treason. Traffic Citations would become a thing of Not, and safety rules would be followed by people who can drive with out killing themselves. Everyone else well they will die or be maimed and who am I to care.

Now to address the initial topic. Privacy vs Corporate interests. (Bit more catchy)
Do you have money? Maybe... Do Corporations have money? Most likely.
Who has more... You or the Corporations?

THEY WIN... Game Over...

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/2011 06:09AM by DarC.
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
July 08, 2011 09:55AM
Track Any Computer on the Internet Using its Clock Skew Fingerprint: [www.theinternetpatrol.com]



[www.speedguide.net] --- then click 'TCP/IP Analyzer'

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2011 07:32PM by PBChecker.
Anonymous User
Re: Debate - Privacy vs Media Profits ??
December 01, 2011 10:53AM
PBChecker Wrote:
What will be Zuckerbergs next idea following 'face detection'.

Next is IPO in 2012. Stock market value 100 billions dollar. Where does the value comes from? - User datas.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2011 12:47PM by PBChecker.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login