5 ms·
Rejected announces from libtorrent clients proxying through SOCKS
- Mathnerd314 1y agoSounds 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.
- orliesaurus 1y agowhy ban VPN? what about seedboxes?
- charcircuit 1y ago>why ban VPN? It's harder to ban people if you allow using VPNs.
- xdfgh1112 1y agoPrivate trackers have no open registration. If they ban you at the account level then it's pretty hard to get back in.
- charcircuit 1y ago>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.
- xdfgh1112 1y agoDepends how private...
- dns_snek 1y agoThey usually ban VPNs for website use but allow them for seedboxes (sometimes requiring approval). The rationale is to stop account sharing and ban evasion.
- jamesnorden 1y agoI 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.
- seg_lol 1y agoIs it because of some game theoretic information exposure? Or is this more about that you can't trust any of the VPN providers.
- Frotag 1y agoStuff 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 that's usually a for-your-own-good type thing. Major names like QBT are usually fine regardless of version.
- tonytamps 1y agoThe 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.
- xdfgh1112 1y agoAlthough the identification is literally just a string you send when connecting, easy to spoof.
- dns_snek 1y agoThat part is just for your own protection - these are almost always private trackers with ratio requirements. If you spoof the client name and your client ends up misbehaving/misreporting you'll just get banned for cheating.
- papyrus9244 1y agoI'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.
- maeln 1y agoNot 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 possible lost stats messages, they still have to be pretty permissive of small discrepancies. Also, all use an ID in the tracker url for each client to discriminate them and associate them with their account on the website. And some are not very careful about the ID generation algorithm, leading to being easily able to find other account peer ID, and so you can use them to download to preserve your ratio. I even found at least one private tracker that did not care if you passed a non-existent peer ID.
- diftr 1y agoAll that and he didn't even test it with the tracker in the end? What an anticlimax.
- eptcyka 1y agoThe headline, whilst true to the author, makes no sense. Announces is a verb, announcements is a noun.
- debugnik 1y agoA quick search shows me that "annouce" is sometimes used as a noun in the context of bittorrent for some reason.
- papyrus9244 1y agoBecause it's a type of message, just like "GET" in the context of HTTP.
- dahrkael 1y agoi 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
- neko_lover 1y agoi 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.
- immibis 1y agoSince you're already using a proxy, you can have the proxy change the parameters, and then you are not modifying the client.
- neko_lover 1y agoid be interested to know how i might get started with implementing something like that
- immibis 1y agoBy writing your own proxy, and also making sure the URL doesn't say https (you can change it back to https in the proxy you write)
- JoshGlazebrook 1y agoTechnically you could theoretically accept incoming connections if the SOCKS5 server supports the BIND command and the client knows how to use it. It's rare though.
- ronsor 1y agoI've genuinely never seen a server that supports the BIND command.