Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'sites'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Site Related
    • News & Updates
    • Site / Forum Feedback
    • Member Introduction
  • News
    • General News
    • FileSharing News
    • Mobile News
    • Software News
    • Security & Privacy News
    • Technology News
  • Downloads
    • nsane.down
  • General Discussions & Support
    • Filesharing Chat
    • Security & Privacy Center
    • Software Chat
    • Mobile Mania
    • Technology Talk
    • Entertainment Exchange
    • Guides & Tutorials
  • Off-Topic Chat
    • The Chat Bar
    • Jokes & Funny Stuff
    • Polling Station

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...

Found 18 results

  1. Here is a list of sites that allow you to upload and share files anonymously, without sign up and for free. The list is sorted according to the max size allowed for uploading a file, as well as the file expiration time. 1. https://drop.me/ - Max file size: unlimited - File expiration: without expiration 2. http://www.filehosting.org/ - Max file size: unlimited - File expiration: 20 days after their last download 3. https://files.fm/ - Max file size: 20 GB - File expiration: 60 days after their last download 4. https://gofile.io/ - Max file size: 10 GB - File expiration: as long as you like 5. https://nofile.io/ - Max file size: 10 GB - File expiration: as long as you like 6. https://uploadfiles.io/ - Max file size: 5 GB - File expiration: 30 days 7. https://anonfile.com/ - Max file size: 5 GB - File expiration: 30 days after their last download 8. https://www.file.io/ - Max file size: 5 GB - File expiration: 14 days 9. https://send-anywhere.com/ - Max file size: 4 GB - File expiration: unknown 10. https://www.sendgb.com/ - Max file size: 4 GB - File expiration: 7 days 11. http://upfile.mobi/ - Max file size: 2 GB - File expiration: 6 months after their last download 12. https://upload.run/ - Max file size: 1 GB - File expiration: as long as you like 13. https://dropfile.to/ - Max file size: 1 GB - File expiration: 1 day 14. http://www.datafilehost.com/ - Max file size: 512 MB - File expiration: 60 days after their last download 15. http://filenurse.com/ - Max file size: 350 MB - File expiration: 7 days 16. https://upload.cat/ - Max file size: 200 MB - File expiration: 30 days 17. http://www.zippyshare.com/ - Max file size: 200 MB - File expiration: 30 days after their last download 18. https://expirebox.com/ - Max file size: 200 MB - File expiration: 2 days 19. https://rokket.space/ - Max file size: 150 MB - File expiration: 2 days 20. https://www.upload.ee/ - Max file size: 100 MB - File expiration: 50 days after their last download 21. https://uguu.se/ - Max file size: 100 MB - File expiration: 1 day And here is a List of Peer-To-Peer (P2P) File Sharing Sites These sites are known for allowing peer-to-peer file sharing. You simply upload the file, share the download link and that's it, but you have to stay on the site so that the file can be downloaded by others. There are no size limits for files, but the expiration time is usually instantaneous after leaving the site. 1. https://reep.io/ 2. https://file.pizza/ 3. https://www.justbeamit.com/ 4. http://xkcd949.com/ 5. https://www.sharedrop.io/ 6. https://directsend.me/ 7. https://sharefest.me/ Do you know any other site that allows you to upload and share files anonymously, without sign up and for free? Then please don't forget to share it with us.
  2. This site is the the most perfect collection of the best file sharing, torrents, streaming, sports, music, ebooks, and porn sites. On top of that all sites are unblocked. This can be the best things for all the free loaders out there. Here is the address https://unblocked.vet/ Mirror site https://unblocked-pw.github.io/ ? Some more similar sites. https://bypassed.in/ https://proxyportal.eu/ https://unblocked.lol/ https://unblockall.org/ https://proxy.unblockall.org/ https://movies.unblockall.org/ https://unblocker.cc/ https://unblocker.win/ if you know more similar sites then let us know in comments.
  3. In conjunction with the Cybersecurity Awareness Month celebration in October last year, Google shared some statistical data about how HTTPS usage in Chrome increased across different platforms. Since its inception, Chrome traffic encryption efforts have made significant progress that Google now wants to remove the green “Secure” label on HTTPS websites beginning in September once the search giant launches Chrome 69. The goal of the upcoming change to the browser is to give users the idea that the internet is safe by default by eliminating Chrome’s positive security indicators. Here's how the address bar should look like after the new scheme kicks off in September: Emily Schechter, Product Manager for Chrome Security at Google, also announced in a blog post that starting in October the company will mark all HTTP pages with a red “not secure” warning in the event that a user enters data on an HTTP page. The new label will be part of Chrome 70, which is set for release that month. That's in line with the search giant's upcoming plan, announced last February, to show a grey "not secure" warning in the address bar for HTTP pages starting in July when Chrome 68 is set to roll out. Source details < Clic here >
  4. Plugin that blocks the scripts of the sites, the scripts are embedded inside the pages this makes the performance is maximum talking about the CPU and the whole computer will notice the difference, Blocks with the following plugins.
  5. For many years and for millions of people, file-sharing was seen as just that. Need a file? Take one. Have one I don't? Share one back. However, with the mainstream commercialization of the pirate scene, some believe that the golden era of sharing culture is being left behind. But really - does anyone care anymore? Growing up, I was one of the millions to enjoy Panini soccer stickers. Five to a pack, these collectibles would be placed in a book (at huge cost) until every page had been completed. Well, that was the theory. In reality, everyone ended up with dozens of duplicate stickers which were traded as quickly as possible with others in the same position. This schoolyard system worked pretty well and not once did anyone consider selling their spares for cash. By 2016 hustler standards that’s pretty naive, but looking back the swapping with friends was probably the best part of the hobby. The same kind of culture prevailed with digital files in the early 2000s, when file-sharing was still in its infancy. Whether traveling the Wild West of KaZaA or the cooler backwaters of Soulseek, content existed to be shared, not sold. Have some music tracks? Offer them. Need some software? Help yourself. The new magic with P2P over Panini was that people not only got to swap files but were able to keep the originals too. Of course, there were always people somewhere in the system edging to make money. Sharman Networks, the people behind KaZaA, definitely wanted to make bank. As did the folks behind the more famous LimeWire . At the time these people were largely faceless and no one really cared about their profitability or even their existence. As long as the files kept flowing, of course. Clearly, some of the mechanisms behind P2P sharing were partly commercialized even in the early days, so when Bram Cohen came along with BitTorrent and gave his creation away for free, that was a truly momentous event. Indeed, he sparked a revolution. While not even a genius like Cohen could have foreseen the events of the next decade, his technology alongside fledgling public indexes and early private tracker scripts reignited the fires of sharing. Fueled by free software tools, quite a bit of this took place without commercially-motivated overlords taking a cut or making business decisions. However, with the advent of ratio-based communities a new currency in the form of bandwidth was born. With these artificial restrictions in place, over the next several years sites could be observed moving in different directions, largely due to decisions made by their management. Some trackers used ratio to form the so-called ‘pay-to-leech’ model, with some continuing to do so now more than a decade later. Others utilized the ratio model in the way it was intended, to improve tracker content libraries, delivery systems, and retention. This delighted sharing-conscious members and the most successful are still around today, held in high regard by their communities. But whichever route those trackers took, none could escape the economics of running a site. They all cost money to run, simple, and someone had to pay for that. In some cases, staff kept sites alive. In others, users would donate to the cause. It didn’t really matter, as long as the site and the community held together. Somehow, many found a way. However, in common with some of their public counterparts today, a number (by accident or design) became fully-fledged commercial operations. It was no longer a case of people enthusiastically taking their own files to a digital swap meet. In the main, most of the content was already there. With content always available, more and more users were attracted to the party. And with the snowball gathering speed, size and momentum, the money-generating options for site operators began to mount up. In time, the fun hobbyist sites often became fairly lucrative roller-coasters that were both exciting and hard to get off. In the background, however, the sharing purists were furious. Just as they had done a decade earlier, many just wanted to share files, without any commercial overtones. But thanks to the enemies of file-sharers, that was proving increasingly difficult to achieve. With crackdowns everywhere, sites had become more complex to run. Punishments for doing so were increasing too, so the risks of running a site had to be weighed into the equation. Some siteops were happy with the quiet glory and satisfaction of serving a community. For many others, the risk was mitigated by financial reward. In the end, keen but non-commercial file-sharers who still wanted to share had to compromise and turn a bit of a blind eye to what was happening upstairs. In that respect, there aren’t many better current and public examples than the one provided by KickassTorrents. Like many public sites, KickassTorrents was a place where people could go to share their files, just like they had in the old days. They could take files too, even if they had none to give back, with no restrictions. No file provider would get paid and none would be subjected to the anti-sharing environment of a hardcore pay-to-leech ratio system. Furthermore, thanks to the many volunteers working on the site – the mods, uploaders and general staffers – KAT was a great community where members helped each other for no financial gain. At times it really did seem like the old days were back again and in many ways they were, but behind the scenes the inevitable reality was taking place. No site of such massive scale could possibly run on fresh air, so even if one dilutes KAT’s claimed advertising revenues ten-fold, large amounts of money were still being made. Indeed, more money than many people see in a lifetime. Whether completely by design or from a reluctance to reign in a runaway successful formula, KAT ultimately became a commercial success. But no matter what sums were allegedly generated, few people seem to be surprised, much less care, following the site’s demise. After more than a decade and a half of galloping capitalism and increased financial pressures, perhaps only the naive wouldn’t expect people to make a few bucks from the digital equivalent of 1980’s Panini stickers. For the majority of the site’s users, from those with rose-tinted spectacles to those fully aware of big site economics, the important thing was still the files. Just as they had done in the early 2000s with KaZaA, the files kept flowing on KickassTorrents to the end and no one ever paid a thing. That someone, somewhere, apparently made a few million from providing a top class service to the masses? Nothing but a footnote. TorrentFreak
  6. Hoping to limit the availability of pirated UEFA Euro 2016 matches, Sony Pictures Networks is sending pre-piracy notices to the owners of several websites. The broadcaster warns site owners that they face criminal liability if they make the matches available through their sites. In a few hours the 2016 UEFA Euro Cup kicks off in France, an event that will be seen by more than hundred million soccer fans from all over the world. While most people watch the matches through licensed broadcasters, there is also a large group of people who resort to shady sources. Most popular are the so-called “pirate” streaming sites where fans can watch the game live. These typically generate millions of views during popular sporting events. In addition, those looking for an archive copy of a match or higher quality video, can find pirated copies on numerous torrent sites, where HD copies are uploaded minutes after the final whistle. These unauthorized transmissions are a thorn in the side of various rightsholders and some are taking action to prevent it. Before the event kicks off, Sony Pictures Network (SPN) has already issued the first warnings. From a known source who prefers to remain anonymous, TorrentFreak obtained a copy of the letter SPN sent to torrent sites and possibly streaming sites as well. “Please be advised that our Client has exclusive Television Rights, Mobile Transmission Rights and Broadband Internet Transmission Rights for the upcoming 2016 UEFA Euro Cup,” the letter begins. The Indian branch of Sony Pictures goes on to explain that they have the exclusive rights to broadcast the event in various countries, through ESPN and other platforms. Logically, this means that torrent sites and pirate streaming portals are not allowed to offer the same content. “Any manner of communicating and/or making available for viewing the UEFA EURO CUP 2016 matches on any platform shall therefore amount to violation of our Client’s exclusive rights in which our client has invested significant amount of money,” SPN writes. Pre-piracy warning The “pre-piracy” warning alerts the site operators to possible legal consequences, including criminal prosecutions. The company explicitly states that it’s “compelled to initiate legal proceedings (civil and/or criminal) should you engage in violation of our Client’s rights despite the present notice.” Despite the startk language, the site owner who informed us about the notice says he has no plans to take action in response. Quite the contrary, the letter actually serves as a reminder to make sure that users have access to the latest UEFA Euro Cup matches. “I forgot that we need to upload UEFA. It’s good that they reminded us,” the torrent site operator told TorrentFreak. Article source
  7. As one of the most pirated TV-shows, The Walking Dead is downloaded by millions of people. However, finding a copy of the latest episode has become somewhat of an annoyance, as copyright holders are increasing their takedown efforts on popular torrent sites. Last week the The Walking Dead’s sixth season resumed. As the second most pirated TV-show of last year, only trailing behind Game of Thrones, there has been plenty of interest in the new episodes on torrent sites. However, there’s also been quite a bit of confusion and annoyance as many popular torrents have quickly disappeared. Before the weekend pretty much all torrents for the ninth episode of The Walking Dead were gone from KickassTorrents (KAT), which is currently the most used torrent site. The screenshot below shows that there’s currently just one torrent online for episode six through nine of the latest season. As far as DMCA takedown efforts go, that’s pretty effective. Gone? The same is true for the most used meta search engine Torrentz, where several recent episodes are no longer listed. A search for s0608 comes up empty, with a note that 80 results have been removed due to takedown notices. Walking Dead? The Walking Dead’s tenth episode of the season was just released a few hours ago and plenty of copies are still around, However, these torrents will soon follow their predecessors and disappear as well. Of course, there are also plenty of places that are less DMCA-friendly. Many torrent sites including The Pirate Bay are removing torrents sporadically, or not at all, so persistent pirates can find a copy eventually. That said, on KAT the aggressive takedown efforts are a cause of frustration. To counter this, users have come up with their own tricks to make the torrents available through backdoors, which are widely shared in the forums. TorrentFreak spoke with an operator of a smaller torrent site who processes many takedown requests automatically, and he was surprised to see how effective they can be. So effective, that he had trouble locating a recent Walking Dead episode. “It was quite surprising not to find the episode I was looking for. For the first time in my life I had to actually use a file locker, not by choice but by the effectiveness of DMCA,” the operator says. “It literally made my life more annoying for about two minutes,” he adds. While many links are indeed disappearing, and not just for The Walking Dead, the torrent site owner doesn’t believe that it will do much to stop piracy on a broader scale. “The only thing the DMCA does well is annoy people. Well done DMCA,” the torrent site operator notes. Perhaps copyright holders are banking on this annoyance to drive people to legal alternatives. Or, ironically enough, to other sites that simply ignore all DMCA and other takedown notices. Article source
  8. The US Government has pinpointed some of the largest piracy websites and other copyright infringing venues. The USTR calls on foreign countries to take action against popular piracy sites such as KickassTorrents, as well as Canadian domain registrar Rebel and Swiss hosting service Private Layer. In its annual “Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets” the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has listed more than a dozen websites said to be involved in online piracy. The list draws heavily on input from industry groups and copyright holders including the RIAA and MPAA, who submitted their recommendations a few weeks ago. While the USTR admits that its overview is not meant to be proof of any actual violations, it encourages responsible authorities to take legal action where it’s appropriate. “The United States encourages all responsible authorities to intensify efforts to combat piracy and counterfeiting, and to use the information contained in the Notorious Markets List to pursue legal actions where appropriate,” they write. As in previous years several of the top torrent sites are targeted, including ExtraTorrent, Torrentz and Rutracker. KickassTorrents (KAT) is listed as well, with the authorities noting that the site’s operators go to extremes to hide their identities and evade law enforcement. “Reportedly based in Canada, over the past several years the site operators have changed the domain name numerous times, obscured or hidden their locations, and have used multiple servers in various countries to evade or otherwise frustrate enforcement actions,” USTR writes. Interestingly, the latest USTR overview no longer lists The Pirate Bay, which was prominently and persistently featured in recent years. In addition to torrent sites the list of notorious sites includes various streaming portals and cyberlockers such as 4Shared.com, Putlocker.is, Cuevana.tv, Watchseries.it, and Nowvideo.sx. Russia’s main social network VK.com is mentioned as well, despite the company’s increased anti-piracy measures. Continuing a trend that was started last year, the USTR also calls out a domain registrar as a rogue actor. According to the Government the Canadian registrar Rebel is servicing a disproportionate number of infringing sites. “This year’s submissions reflect that, while the role of domain name registrars remains an ongoing subject of important discussion, Rebel’s outlier status is evidence that it is not taking measures that other domain name registrars have found to be reasonable to address infringement,” the report reads. Several digital rights groups have pointed out that domain registrars are neutral services and shouldn’t be branded as piracy havens. However, according to the USTR companies such as Rebel should implement policies that allow it to act against clearly criminal activity. In addition to domain registries, the USTR notes that some hosting services have also become piracy havens. The report specifically calls out the Swiss company Private layer which hosts Putlocker.is, Cuevana.tv, Watchseries.it, and Nowvideo.sx. “This group of websites, all hosted by Private Layer based in Switzerland and Panama, are evidence of the rising popularity among pirate sites of certain Swiss hosting services,” the USTR writes. Switzerland is currently working on new legislation to address a loophole in its law that makes it hard to take action against pirate sites, but this plan has yet to be implemented. According to the Government the yearly overview has helped to spotlight several sites and services that were shut down over the past year. This includes the site of the popular release group YTS/YIFY and well as a leading Popcorn Time fork. Whether similar successes will be booked during the year to come has yet to be seen. The full list of the notorious online sites and services that are highlighted in the report (pdf) are included below. — -Rutracker.org (torrent site) -ExtraTorrent.cc (torrent site) -Kat.cr (torrent site) -Ebooktree.org (linking site) -Ex.ua (download/streaming) -4Shared.com (cyberlocker) -Rapidgator.org (cyberlocker) -bannedhost.net (cyberlocker) -Movshare group (which allegedly operates Nowvideo.sx, Watchseries.it, Torrenz.eu, Videoweed.es and Novamov.com) -Private Layer (hosting company of Putlocker.is, Cuevana.tv, Watchseries.it, and Nowvideo.sx ) -Rebel (domain registrar) -Segundamano.es (mod-chips) -Bukalapak.com (e-commerce) -Dhgate.com (e-commerce) -VK.com (social network) -Zippyshare.com (cyberlocker) News source
  9. Swinging like it was the sixties HEY, GUESS WHAT? The authorities are still trying to put the piracy problem back in its bottle, and have urged UK ISPs to block a range of proxy sites and piracy portals. TorrentFreak is first with the news on this, reporting that the big ISPs have been given a green light to put up stop signs in front of 85 websites after pressure from rights holders. ISPs typically capitulate when this happens and explain that when the local high court tells them to jump they jump. Some list the sites that they must block on their information pages, but users of the sites usually work it out for themselves pretty quickly when their attempts to access fail. We have contacted O2, Sky, TalkTalk, Virgin Media and BT and asked them to confirm whether they have been asked to block access to the sites. They have not yet responded. The hammer began banging in 2012, for Sky at least, which said that it put the Pirate Bay into the wilds following a request from members of the BPI and Phonographic Performance Ltd. The most recent whack on the Sky service apparently happened this June, and saw a number of booksellers thrown into the corner. We have checked a few of the sites on the published list on TorrentFreak and can confirm that this Virgin Media account is not having any of them. Virgin Media was the first big player to curtain off the Pirate Bay. "Sorry, this page is not available through Virgin Media," said the standard official notice. "Virgin Media has received an order from the High Court requiring us to prevent access to this site." TorrentFreak reported that access to Pirate Bay proxies has been downed through various means, including domain suspension. We checked one of the sites that it named, an option called piratebrowser.com, and were unable to connect. News source
  10. While malvertising activity on adult sites has been ‘relatively’ quiet for some time, we started picking up dozens of attacks on moderately popular XXX portals, where moderate still means millions of daily visitors. The modus operandi is quite straightforward and facilitated by a compromised Flash advert directly hosted and served by AdXpansion, an adult ad network, which triggers a hidden Flash exploit loaded from a seemingly innocent XML file. This technique has been used before in other self-sufficient Flash ad/exploit attacks. This malvertising campaign has been running since at least Nov 21 and is affecting hundreds of adults sites. As soon as the rogue Flash advert is displayed in the browser (no click on it is required) it will attempt to load the exploit code. Notable sites that were affected include: drtuber.com (55.3 M)nuvid.com (41.9 M)eroprofile.com (14M)iceporn.com (6.9M)xbabe.com (4.2M)Monthly traffic in millions, according to SimilarWeb. The malicious advert: Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit blocks the malicious advert when it attempts to load the remote exploit shell code. Technical details An attack on drtuber.com
  11. Thousands of websites have already been infected with the Linux file-encrypting ransomware dubbed Linux.Encoder1, security firms reported. When the existence of Linux.Encoder1 came to light earlier this month, Russian antivirus firm Doctor Web reported that the threat had infected tens of machines, but the number has since increased considerably. Researchers say the ransomware is designed to infect Linux machines set up to host websites by exploiting vulnerabilities in the Magento e-commerce platform and various content management systems (CMSs). The malware targets the root and home folders, and directories storing websites, web servers, backups and source code. The extent of the damage caused by the threat depends on the type of privileges it can obtain on the targeted system. Based on a Google search for the ransom note dropped by Linux.Encoder1, Dr. Web determined that approximately 2,000 websites had been affected as of November 12. A similar Google search conducted by SecurityWeek early on Monday showed that the file was present on roughly 2,600 websites. Bitdefender believes the number of Linux.Encoder1 infections will continue to rise. “With most web servers running some Linux OS distribution and shared hosting, it’s safe to assume that if one such website if affected, others sharing the same resources could be affected as well, if they not properly isolated from each other,” Liviu Arsene, Senior E-threat Analyst at Bitdefender, told SecurityWeek. “Since the infection method does not involve any form of social engineering – servers are usually compromised via unpatched vulnerabilities – hosting providers are strongly encouraged to update any outdated software (wordpress, plugins, etc.). More websites will be surely be affected in the immediate future.” This Linux encryption ransomware uses strong encryption to ensure that victims cannot recover their files without paying the one Bitcoin ($380) ransom. The files are encrypted using the AES-128 algorithm with a key generated locally on the infected device. This key is then encrypted with an RSA public key and since the private key needed for decryption is only stored on the attacker’s machine, it should be nearly impossible to recover files. However, researchers discovered that the AES key can be easily recovered since it’s generated based on a system timestamp obtained at the moment of encryption. This timestamp can be retrieved from the encrypted file, which has allowed antivirus firms to develop tools that can be used to automatically recover files. Both Bitdefender and Dr. Web have developed such tools, but Dr. Web’s service is only available to the company’s customers. While files encrypted by early versions of Linux.Encoder1 can be easily recovered, experts have warned that malware authors might fix the current bugs, making files more difficult to decrypt. securityweek.com
  12. If you're a Chrome user and have traveled to a potentially compromised site, you've most likely encountered a dramatic warning message. Google has offered these warnings since 2006, but making sense of them was introduced much later in 2008. In a small update, Google is adding a page to its 'Transparency Report' that will allow users to demystify the warnings, using an improved interface and simpler explanations. According to Google, the newly added page will offer a "clearer interface and simpler explanations of the issues, such as details for sites that host unwanted software." Much like the previous webpage, curious users will be able to navigate to the newly established support page to find out what the potential issues might be with the site they are trying to visit. Naturally, if you want to still travel to the potentially compromised page, you are welcome to do so, but there could be consequences. For those curious, be sure to hit the source link below as it will allow you to check to see if your favorite site has some anomalies. Source: Google Article source
  13. The RIAA and MPAA have submitted their lists of most "notorious" pirate sites to the U.S. Government. The groups target torrent sites including The Pirate Bay and KickassTorrents, as well as various linking and streaming portals. Uncooperative domain registrars and other third-party service providers are called out as well. Responding to a request from the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), the RIAA and MPAA have sent in their annual list of rogue websites. TorrentFreak obtained a copy of the submissions in which the entertainment industry groups target a wide variety of websites they say are promoting the illegal distribution of music, movies and TV-shows. The lists include torrent sites, linking sites, cyberlockers and unauthorized streaming services, which are primarily hosted outside the United States. According to the industry groups these sites are costing U.S. companies millions of dollars in revenue. The MPAA points out that many sites directly compete with legal services and are “stealing” revenue from the people who created the content. “Content thieves take advantage of a wide constellation of easy-to-use online technologies, such as direct download and streaming, to create sites and applications with the look and feel of legitimate content distributors,” MPAA’s Joanna McIntosh writes (pdf). The pirates sites are often able to offer their services in relative anonymity hosted outside of the United States. As targeting them directly is problematic, MPAA says other service providers, such as search engines and hosting companies, should help out. “All stakeholders in the Internet ecosystem – including hosting providers, advertising networks, payment processors, and search engines – should be actively seeking to reduce support for notoriously infringing sites such as those we have nominated in these comments,” McIntosh notes. Among the sites listed by the MPAA (attached to this article) are familiar names such as The Pirate Bay, KickassTorrents and Torrentz. YTS.to is called out as well, and the Hollywood group mentions its connection to the release group formerly know as YIFY, as well as the popular Popcorn Time application. The MPAA further highlights streaming sites including Primewire and Nowvideo, the popular Russian social network VK.com, and cyberlockers such as Putlocker and Uploaded. Stressing the important of third-party services MPAA notes that domain name registrars can also be seen as possible “notorious markets.” It specifically calls out the Indian Public Domain Registry (PDR) which repeatedly refused to take action against pirate sites. The responsibility of third party service providers is also highlighted in RIAA’s submission (odt). The group lists a total of 57 pirate websites, which in part overlaps with the MPAA. The Pirate Bay and other popular torrent sites and cyberlockers are called out, as well as specialized music streaming and download sites such as MP3Skull, Stafaband and Albumkings. In addition, the RIAA counters the argument of “apologists” who oppose stricter anti-piracy enforcement on the basis it could endanger freedom of expression. “Many of those who profit from the status quo like to disguise their self-interest in rhetoric about free expression. It is long past time to end this dangerous charade. Defending the piracy of creative works in the name of freedom of expression is tantamount to foxes campaigning for open-range chickens,” RIAA’s Neil Turkewitz writes. “Online enforcement efforts are complicated when intermediaries do not take adequate steps to ensure their services are not being used to facilitate copyright infringement, a problem compounded by the fact that some website operators and intermediaries operate anonymously and outside the boundaries of the law,” he adds. One of the groups RIAA indirectly refers to as “apologists” is the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). The civil rights group actively protests the MPAA and RIAA efforts and in their own submission to the USTR they warn that the obligations of third-party services such as domain name registrars is overstated. According to the EFF, free speech is at risk when these companies respond to requests and complaints without a judicial order. The USTR already listed the Canadian domain registrar Tucows in its overview of notorious markets last year, a decision to which the EFF objects. “We find it highly rash for the USTR to be calling for foreign domain name registrars to honor extra-judicial demands for the removal of domains, because it is obvious how such demands could backfire spectacularly against U.S. Internet companies, at the behest of foreign governments and special interests seeking to censor U.S. speech,” the EFF writes (pdf). Below are the full lists as reported to the USTR by the MPAA and RIAA. These, and the other submissions will form the basis of the U.S. Government’s Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, which is expected to come out later this year. MPAA’s list of notorious pirate sites (23) RIAA’s list of notorious pirate sites (57) Source
  14. Campaign affected more than 84 million users A recent malvertising campaign has been seen on six of Spain's biggest torrent sites, exposing around 84.2 million users to the CryptoWall ransomware. The campaign was possible and was more efficient than similar ones because the attackers managed to compromise Publited's servers, the ad network that delivered the advertisements on those sites. A rare occurrence of a compromised ad network An ad network having their servers hacked is a rare occurrence, but this resulted in a much more dangerous situations for users, allowing the attackers to better control the way the malicious ads are displayed to users. While in most cases malvertisers can only show ads by bidding and winning ad spots, and then corrupting its delivery method via malicious JavaScript files and countless redirects, by controlling the ad platform, attackers were able to inject malicious iframes along with legitimate ads, and make them look like they would be coming from the ad server itself. Furthermore, attackers were also able to set complicated traffic filters in place, and control to whom, where, and when the malicious ads were being shown to. Attackers had complete control over the flow of malicious ads So if malvertisers would have liked to show malicious ads on pages where users downloaded the latest Hollywood movie releases, between 7 PM and 11 PM, and only to users from southern Spain, they would have been able to do this with no difficulty at all. The malicious iframes inserted into legitimate ads led users to pages where the Neutrino exploit kit was served, which then infected users with the CryptoWall ransomware. This went on for most of the campaign, but as Malwarebytes reports, the Angler exploit kit was also used in the later stages. Malwarebytes informed Publited of the campaign, and worked with the ad network to remove the attackers' backdoors from their infrastructure. Source
  15. This week users of popular torrent sites found that they could no longer access them using their VPN. Speaking with TorrentFreak the operator of one of the affected sites revealed that the IP ranges of a popular VPN provider had been banned after they were used for massive anti-piracy activities. Using a VPN for copyright enforcement is apparently quite common. For the privacy-conscious Internet user, VPNs and similar services are now considered must-have tools. In addition to providing much needed security, VPNs also allow users to side-step geo-blocking technology, a useful ability for today’s global web-trotter. While VPNs are often associated with file-sharing activity, it may be of interest to learn that they are also used by groups looking to crack down on the practice. Just like file-sharers it appears that anti-piracy groups prefer to work undetected, as events during the past few days have shown. Earlier this week while doing our usual sweep of the world’s leading torrent sites, it became evident that at least two popular portals were refusing to load. Finding no complaints that the sites were down, we were able to access them via publicly accessible proxies and as a result thought no more of it. A day later, however, comments began to surface on Twitter that some VPN users were having problems accessing certain torrent sites. Sure enough, after we disabled our VPN the affected sites sprang into action. Shortly after, reader emails to TF revealed that other users were experiencing similar problems. Eager to learn more, TF opened up a dialog with one of the affected sites and in return for granting complete anonymity, its operator agreed to tell us what had been happening. “The IP range you mentioned was used for massive DMCA crawling and thus it’s been blocked,” the admin told us. Intrigued, we asked the operator more questions. How do DMCA crawlers manifest themselves? Are they easy to spot and deal with? “If you see 15,000 requests from the same IP address after integrity checks on the IP’s browsers for the day, you can safely assume its a [DMCA] bot,” the admin said. From the above we now know that anti-piracy bots use commercial VPN services, but do they also access the sites by other means? “They mostly use rented dedicated servers. But sometimes I’ve even caught them using Hola VPN,” our source adds. Interestingly, it appears that the anti-piracy activities were directed through the IP addresses of Hola users without them knowing. Once spotted the IP addresses used by the aggressive bots are banned. The site admin wouldn’t tell TF how his system works. However, he did disclose that sizable computing resources are deployed to deal with the issue and that the intelligence gathered proves extremely useful. Of course, just because an IP address is banned at a torrent site it doesn’t necessarily follow that a similar anti-DMCA system is being deployed. IP addresses are often excluded after being linked to users uploading spam, fakes and malware. Additionally, users can share IP addresses, particularly in the case of VPNs. Nevertheless, the banning of DMCA notice-senders is a documented phenomenon. Earlier this month Jonathan Bailey at Plagiarism Today revealed his frustrations when attempting to get so-called “revenge porn” removed from various sites. “Once you file your copyright or other notice of abuse, the host, rather than remove the material at question, simply blocks you, the submitter, from accessing the site,” Bailey explains. “This is most commonly done by blocking your IP address. This means, when you come back to check and see if the site’s content is down, it appears that the content, and maybe the entire site, is offline. However, in reality, the rest of the world can view the content, it’s just you that can’t see it,” he notes. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Bailey advises a simple way of regaining access to a site using these methods. “I keep subscriptions with multiple VPN providers that give access to over a hundred potential IP addresses that I can use to get around such tactics,” he reveals. The good news for both file-sharers and anti-piracy groups alike is that IP address blocks like these don’t last forever. The site we spoke with said that blocks on the VPN range we inquired about had already been removed. Still, the cat and mouse game is likely to continue. Source
  16. This week copyright holders applauded a 'groundbreaking' anti-piracy commitment from GroupM, the world's largest advertising media company. The announcement is the result of increasing efforts to ban advertisements on pirate sites. However, don't expect to see ads to disappear from The Pirate Bay and co. anytime soon. In recent years various copyright holder groups have adopted a “follow-the-money” approach in the hope of cutting off funding to so-called pirate sites. Thus far this has resulted in some notable developments. In the UK hundreds of advertising agencies are actively banning pirate sites and similar initiatives are popping up elsewhere. This week came another breakthrough when GroupM, the world’s largest advertising media company, adopted a set of anti-piracy guidelines. As a result it now requires media partners to agree to strict standards and ban pirate sites. The MPAA applauded the initiative and expressed hope that other stakeholders in the ad industry will follow suit. “The issues of ad-supported piracy is an important one for creative industries everywhere, and it is an important one for businesses whose brands are being hurt by having their advertisements associated with these illegal activities,” the MPAA’s Howard Gantman wrote. GroupM’s announcement will definitely have an impact on the higher echelons of the ad industry. However, at the bottom and outside the public gaze, several companies are fighting for the grace of pirate sites. Most regular visitors of pirate sites are probably familiar with the adult advertisements, gambling promotions and other dubious offers that are sometimes bordering on fraud. These brands have a hard time finding banner space on legitimate sites but not on file-sharing services. The added benefit is that the cost per 1000 impressions is much lower on pirate sites, not to mention the opportunities for intrusive ad formats such as popunders and interstitials. There are several ad companies that specialize in this area. They act as the middlemen between pirate sites and advertisers in return for a significant stake of the proceeds. At TorrentFreak we have seen several emails from ad networks advertising their services. Instead of being wary of pirate partnerships, these companies proudly promote their cooperation with these sites hoping to convince others to join. Below is an example of a company that offers “amazing results” with its popups, mentioning KickassTorrents as one of its top clients. Email sent by ad company A Another advertising outfit already assigned an account manager, boasting streaming sites Watchseries, Movshare and Videoweed as partners. Email sent by ad company B The above shows that the anti-piracy efforts are not going to stop money from flowing to these sites. What it will do is limit the already minimal presence of mainstream brands, trading them in for more dubious ones. Whether that will have a significant impact on revenues is unclear, but it does make visits to pirate sites without an ad-blocker more risky. That leads to a rather grim conclusion that the anti-piracy measures are helping the vendors and advertisers who peddle shady and malicious ads, instead of really hurting pirate sites. Source
  17. Multiple Serious vulnerabilities have been discovered in the most famous ‘All In One SEO Pack’ plugin for WordPress, that put millions of Wordpress websites at risk. WordPress is easy to setup and use, that’s why large number of people like it. But if you or your company is using ‘All in One SEO Pack’ Wordpress plugin to optimize the website ranking in search engines, then you should update your SEO plugin immediately to the latest version of All in One SEO Pack 2.1.6. Today, All in One SEO Pack plugin team has released an emergency security update that patches two critical privilege escalation vulnerabilities and one cross site scripting (XSS) flaw, discovered by security researchers at Sucuri, a web monitoring and malware clean up service. More than 73 million websites on the Internet run their websites on the WordPress publishing platform and more than 15 million websites are currently using All in One SEO Pack plugin for search engine optimization. According to Sucuri, the reported privilege escalation vulnerabilities allow an attacker to add and modify the WordPress website’s meta information, that could harm its search engine ranking negatively. "In the first case, a logged-in user, without possessing any kind of administrative privileges (like an author of subscriber), could add or modify certain parameters used by the plugin. It includes the post’s SEO title, description and keyword meta tags." Sucuri said. Also the reported cross-site scripting vulnerability can be exploited by malicious hackers to execute malicious JavaScript code on an administrator’s control panel. "This means that an attacker could potentially inject any JavaScript code and do things like changing the admin’s account password to leaving some backdoor in your website’s files in order to conduct even more “evil” activities later." Sucuri blog post said. Vulnerability in WordPress plugins is the root cause for the majority of WordPress exploitation and this is one of the main tools in the web hackers' arsenal. The plugin vulnerabilities can be exploited to access sensitive information or to allow for the sites to be easily defaced, can web used to redirect visitors to any malicious site, or to DDoS other websites. Website owners are recommended to update their All in One SEO Pack Wordpress plugin to the latest version immediately. Source
  18. By John Callaham 8 hours ago Over 5,000 websites have now signed up to join in a previously announced online protest against mass spying operations such as the ones that have been conducted by the National Security Agency. The effort is called "The Day We Fight Back" and will begin on Tuesday, February 11th. DuckDuckGo, Imgur and the Yahoo-owned Tumblr are among the major sites that have joined this effort, working with previously announced sites like Mozilla and Reddit and groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union. All of these companies will post banners on their pages Tuesday, urging people to call or email their members of the U.S. Congress and ask them to support laws that curtail online surveillance by government agencies. This new protest is being made in the spirit of the ones that were launched in January 2012, when many websites, including Wikipedia, went "dark" for one day. The effort was designed to convince U.S. lawmakers to not pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) into law. The web site blackouts were successful and both SOPA and PIPA died without coming to a vote in the U.S. Congress. Tuesday's protest against mass online spying won't have quite the same effect as the ones held over two years ago. One of the reasons is that some sites that joined in the SOPA blackout, like Wikipedia and Google, are apparently sitting out in this new effort. However, new leaks about how groups like the NSA conduct their operations continue to come out in the open and the debate over their use of phone, data and other records will continue for a long time to come. http://www.neowin.net/news/over-5000-websites-signed-up-for-the-day-we-fight-back-protest-against-mass-spying