5 ms·
It did indeed share local files. That was part of how they were able to handle the network load. If it found a file with a matching hash of something it had lic
by mcculley 6y ago
It did indeed share local files. That was part of how they were able to handle the network load. If it found a file with a matching hash of something it had licensed, it shared it. Check out https://launch.co/blog/did-you-know-spotify-uses-peer-to-peer-networking.html https://launch.co/blog/did-you-know-spotify-uses-peer-to-pee...
It was well known at the time. How do you know it was not sharing other files it found?
- tpmx 6y agoThat blog post does not back up your incorrect statement.
- mcculley 6y agoI was running fs_usage against the Spotify process in 2013. It was reading local files and sending data out to untrusted peers. It's okay that you think that is okay. I don't allow that on my machine.
- tpmx 6y agoExtraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- mcculley 6y agoThat is not an extraordinary claim. Everybody knew that Spotify was scanning the filesystem. Some trusted that it was careful about what it uploaded. People with security concerns did not.
- tpmx 6y agoI'm out. Good luck.
- NavinF 6y agoThen strace spotify and post the log to HN. It would get a lot more votes than the silly petition that this thread is about.
- mcculley 6y agoSpotify stopped doing P2P once it got big enough. I don't care what it is doing now. I already banished it from my devices and networks. Nobody needs pop music that badly.
- NavinF 6y agoSo they only do this for files that are already present on Spotify's server with a matching hash? That's not particularly interesting