5 ms·
You've never been a part of a trusted community before? rutracker isn't some fly-by-night random tracker, it's a well established site in Russia, and the admin
by csydas 6y ago
You've never been a part of a trusted community before?
rutracker isn't some fly-by-night random tracker, it's a well established site in Russia, and the admins have been extremely communicative with users throughout virtually every governmental upset.
To add some context, try to imagine if the classic western trackers had prominent links like this, for example, what.cd.
Looking at the thread, the early posts correctly identified it as malware before the malwarebytes report, and even noted that the link itself violated the application post rules.
It's good for malwarebytes to report that this exists, but they're focusing on the wrong parts, imho.
The hash files to identify the affected file should have been the first part, then the explanation. A bit of google translate would have shown that already, rutracker users are calling to delete the thread.
- userbinator 6y agobut they're focusing on the wrong parts, imho AV/anti-"malware" has always meant "pro-corporations/pro-copyright/pro-establishment", ever since they started detecting completely clean keygens and cracks as well as "hacking tools" and demoscene productions. There is sometimes truth, like this article, but there is also a lot of FUD --- IMHO to herd users into giving up personal discretion and instead adopting centralised trust.
- boomlinde 6y ago> they started detecting completely clean keygens and cracks as well as "hacking tools" and demoscene productions. AFAIK this is usually a side effect of self-unpacking compressed executables, as produced by EXE packers. They have a property that's been useful to malware authors: they obfuscate the code. To de-obfuscate, you have to unpack, which some anti-virus vendors actually do for executables produced by common compression tools like UPX. For certain types of demoscene productions, however, a popular tool like UPX won't do if you can shave another few bytes using a more obscure packer that AV software are unlikely to have unpackers for. Once malware authors start using those same packers you'll get false positives based on signatures that are likely common to all software using them.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y agoNo, because they're flagged as "hacking tools" explicitly -they're not being misidentified.
- AYBABTME 6y agoHow do AV software identify these "signatures"? Does it look for known strings, or does it do something smarter with some sort of behavior matching?
- saagarjha 6y agoUsually both. They check known malware signatures and also look for suspicious behavior.
- golergka 6y agoRutracker, or torrents.ru, has been full of malware-infected trash for the last 15 years. It's anything but a trusted community
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- arkh 6y ago> what.cd Little angel gone too soon.
- isatty 6y agoRed is pretty good.
- fredoliveira 6y agoThe best thing about redacted (and what, and oink before it) for me really is access to people with amazing musical taste. Most music these days is accessible for free in one way or another, but the curation in some of the collages is truly priceless.