Comments on: Why You Shouldn’t Run BitTorrent Over Tor

by: question

Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:32:06 +0000

“Transmission with built-in ip filter. And route tracker announces and scrapes through tor-network.”

i read this somewhere else, and i was wondering a couple of things.
1. does this strain the tor network?
2. is it actually any good to protect yourself from anti-piracy agencies?
3. how does one set the tracker to go through tor?

by: Big Daddy

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:57:45 +0000

There could be legitimate reasons (for whatever definition of that you chose) to want to run BitTorrent through tor. I wholeheartedly agree it’s a waste of tor’s resources to use it for things that don’t require it, but I’m not entirely convinced blocking it outright is a good solution.

by: j

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:24:30 +0000

Thanks for this! I had set up a Tor Relay to assist with the situation in Iran, but I got a DCMA takedown notice a few days after setting it up. I have entered your suggested ExitPolicy settings. How do I know if they are actually working and blocking BitTorrent?

by: Nobody

Sun, 10 May 2009 08:08:34 +0000

Anyone runnin bittorrent over tor should be taken out back and shot. There are hundreds of faster and more anonymous ways to get torrents than through tor. Die anyone downloading torrents over tor, die!!

by: frenchie

Sat, 09 May 2009 12:33:05 +0000

I agree, the future french law will allow a private organization (HADOPI) to cut Internet access to people downloading protected files. No judge, no proof of illegal sharing/downloading, only an IP found on a tracker.
If I use Tor only to change my IP on the tracker, what’s wrong? Do I overload the Tor network?

On my Linux OS, when I run Tork (KDE guy for Tor), and I start KTorrent (KDE Bitorrent client), my Tor IP appears on the tracker. It’s the way it’s works.

As long as HADOPI does’nt look for more than an IP on a tracker, I think I’m protected.

by: Zaf

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:43:23 +0000

My country is currently trying to pass a law that will basically allow some kind of higher authority to check everything you get from the internet.
Anyway, whil I’m not too worried yet, I keep myself aware of what my solutions maybe. This article enlightened me on some things however you link to another article that seems to have disappeared:

“Besides, if you want to download files from a torrent, there are much more efficient and much faster ways of doing it. See this article for example. Using Tor for your BitTorrent download will undoubtedly take much longer than any other method around.”

I would very much like to read this as well, can you put the article back online ?
Thanks

by: bob bob bob

Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:46:57 +0000

The problems with tor are:
(1) It is really slow
(2) Just running tor makes you a target
(3) there are not enough relays & exit nodes to make it truly anonymous.

So since I don’t seriously need strong anonymity I don’t run it. However I do support the aims of the project. It seems to me that more people want to pirate movies than are dissidents then since pirate downloads also want privacy then surely the pirates can be used to build a fast and truly anonymous network. Someone needs to build a bit torrent client which automatically acts as an exit node and where bit torrent trackers can be run as tor hidden services preventing people running trackers from being arrested.

The motivation to get free movies and music builds the network and people who really need privacy such as political dissidents get a faster and bigger load of traffic to hide in.

by: A passing stranger

Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:27:52 +0000

I disagree with your blog. Just because some people use torrent clients with TOR to download huge files it doesn’t mean you should block all torrent traffic. Why not encourage people to use TOR - AND run an exit node.
That way everyone’s a winner.
TOR get another exit, the torrent lover doesn’t get a nasty fine, and they might tell their friends to do the same.

Data is data - just because it’s a bit bigger it doesn’t make it wrong.
If you take bandwidth, give more back and help TOR grow.
Simple.

by: Anonymous coward

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:58:53 +0000

[…]It is, in theory, possible to slow down the abuse of Tor by configuring your BitTorrent client to block traffic that’s going to or from Tor exit nodes.[…]

—

I’d like you to consider dumping Tor Exitnode list https://check.torproject.org/cgi-bin/TorBulkExitList.py?ip=0.0.0.1

And transforming it into peerguardian etc readible form.
That way you can use it with your bittorrent client.

by: ExitNode

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:12:05 +0000

Provide a way to run Bittorrent through the blockers of countries that prevent legitimate usage. Also, the ISP’s in the USA that flag your use of bittorrent even if it is to download Linux. TOR is the answer.

by: Anonymous BitTorrent « Bolzano2910’s Weblog

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:11:24 +0000

[…] Mentioned previously, it is possible to configure BitTorrent traffic over the Tor network. It’s not a recommended alternative to anonymous BitTorrent, however, it does work. This causes a strain on the entire Tor network and all users that share it. Here’s an article that explains why it shouldn’t be practiced. […]

by: Meh.

Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:53:15 +0000

If you run a tor node and people share through it, could you successfully blame your own sharing on people who use your node?

by: Dave

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:49:36 +0000

Maybe I am overlooking something here, but if a person using torrents restricted their P2P client to a low bandwidth (I typically restrict my bandwidth to 50kb/s download and 50 kb/s upload), and set up their computer to run an exit node providing a greater total bandwidth for Tor (at least 100kb/s), wouldn’t they in theory be producing a neutral effect on the network? And if they set up their exit node to provide even more than that minimal bandwidth, wouldn’t they be contributing to increasing its efficiency?

by: Dreadnought

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:03:24 +0000

I’ve been reading about TCP/IP, ports, services, and etc for a couple of weeks now, obviously I am no expert when it comes to this but wouldn’t users of Tor be able to just block incoming requests for torrent client ports on their firewall. Maybe I am wrong but wouldnt the denial of those ports result in the traffic not even going through Tor?

Please reply back if I am wrong.
Thanks

by: Risacu

Tue, 27 May 2008 13:14:54 +0000

I liked the post and read SOME of the comments. Basically, I hate the idea of some kid using all my tor bandwidth (I run a relay) for P2P. I dont think that banning exit nodes will help, at least not fairly, from BitTorrent side, since that means that people like me, who run a relay (which could be an “exit-node” to someone) will be banned from using BT. In the same way, I don’t block certain ports since from MANY points of view its inneffective.
Instead, what I try to do is to tell friends (and everyone who will listen) WHY we shouldn’t use P2P prgrams over Tor. One thing that *might* help would be to add some short explanation with the “bigger” P2P clients as to WHY we don’t want it done. I think that most ppl are like myself, not really wanting to hurt/piss people, and that many use P2P+Tor due to IGNORANCE, not malice. The other is to give an alternative. I’m not really sure if USENET is such a functional/easy one, but I agree that we SHOULD promote file sharing as much as we promote Tor. Perhaps some sort of model where downloading files direct from media content producers/companies at a REASONABLE price. I think that open source models have shown that it can be done. And yes, it is basically the same thing, ideas/information; some produce sound/images other produce software. I develop software, 80% open source, and I think I make a decent living. I think that artist can follow this model as well, having a symbolic income from files, but living from the SERVICES they provide. Middle-man is killing us all….
Anyhow, great post!

by: Anony

Thu, 22 May 2008 08:41:24 +0000

Gareth Stack: You had me with “exception”!

by: Name

Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:05:56 +0000

Fuck p2p and fuck trying to use p2p with tor! There’s no need to do this! Just torrify wget and find good sites with software you want to download and do that! I avoid p2p at all costs!

When you use wget+tor+http:

1) you are not exchanging your IP with other people via p2p
2) you are remaining within tor during the download
3) you are not sharing this file (uploading) with anyone else other than the exit node’s cache of it should it not be an https link

Problem solved!

Who cares if the transfer is slow, it’s encrypted and you’re not swapping your real IP with a bunch of strangers who also have or want the same files as you.

by: an admin of a tor exit node

Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:48:10 +0000

J:
Your assumption is only true if those P2P-users are running tor _exit_-nodes and not just internal tor nodes (or even worse only entry-nodes/clients). At lot of internal tor bandwidth doesn’t help much, if the bandwidth of the exit-nodes is a bottleneck (as it is already).
A combined bandwidth of all internal tor nodes beyond approx. 3 times the combined bandwidth of the exit-nodes doesn’t really help anyone. If the data can’t enter/exit the tor-network fast enough through the exit-nodes, a fast internal bandwidth is useless and meaningless.
It’s alot like on a LAN. If your connection to the Internet is only 1Mbit/s, it doesn’t really help you that you have a gigabit-LAN, does it?

Most of the P2P-users who download copyrighted material would rather use their bandwidth themselves to:
1) Leech the files as fast as possible.
2) Upload just enough to keep their ratio. (If they’re using trackers where ratio matters, that is. Otherwise they don’t care about ratio and just stops the BT-client ASAP.)
I don’t think it’s very likely that they would use a lot of their bandwidth as a tor (exit)-node.

Personally, I don’t care if people download copyrighted material through my exit-node, if they think that the files will somehow bring them (or others) freedom or democracy.
Actually, it could be an excuse if someone claims that I have downloaded something copyrigthed. “I run a tor exit-node. It must have been someone else.”

What I do care about is this: Let’s say I have configured my tor node to use at most 1Mbit/s total. That’s 512Kbit/s upstream and 512Kbit/s downstream. If someone uses my tor node to download a 1GB movie, he’s using my tor node _alone_ for roughly four and a half hours. During that time _no one else_ can use my tor node.

On the other hand, 4.5 hours is 270 minutes. During 1 minute, you can download 3.75MB on a 512Kbit/s connection.

What do you think I would prefer?
A) ONE user who uses all the bandwidth allocated to the tor node all by himself for four and a half hours for his own selfish needs.
B) 270 users who each uses one minute to download a 3.75MB website with information, that somehow will help those users to get a benefit of democracy, freedom or “some other silly, useless stuff like that”.

I think most admins of tor nodes would prefer option B.

Not because the download in option A is copyrighted, but simply because it made the tor-node useless for alot of other users. Actually not just _that_ tor-node. Remember that tor-connections goes through three nodes, all of which would be affected by the download.

Next time you download something big (copyrighted or not) through tor, please remember this: Your download just contributed to the hindering of freedom for alot of other legitimate users. Who the **** are you? China?!

J, you wrote that “the optimal use of TOR is indubitably subjective”.
If I say that “your freedom is NOT more important that the freedom of others, so don’t abuse the system” is the optimal use of TOR, do you really still think that’s indubitably subjective?
Of course the statement holds for every tor user. It isn’t designed to discriminate against the users who wants the latest movie without paying, but at the moment the total bandwidth of the tor-network simply isn’t big enough to accommodate that wish, so please don’t do it.

If the total combined bandwidth of the exit-nodes is B bits/s and there are U users currently using tor, each user should try to use a bandwidth of at most B/U bits/s. Otherwise other users will be affected.
Since tor-connections goes through three tor nodes, the total combined internal bandwidth of tor should be atleast 3*B bits/s for this to work.

by: J

Sat, 19 Jan 2008 04:50:29 +0000

The Tor Torrent situation is simply a tragedy of the commons.

I have a few comments that not everyone might not like, but are true.

First, we can whine and cry about the recent exploitation of TOR in the use of P2P, but that will not curb any P2P efforts. The simple fact of the matter is TOR can be used to anonymize the sharing of - lets say - “sensitive” files which thus decreases the risk and ramifications associated with downloading these files. And it is fair to say any rational individual who could obtain movies, music for free without any risk or threat is going to do so. This is why I - i am sure i’m not the first - predict an enormous entry of P2P bandwidth into TOR, once more people figure out this can be done.

Whether the use of P2P with TOR is right or wrong is irrelevant, one can be idealistic about the optimal use of TOR but that indubitably subjective. I think it is best to take a pragmatic view on TOR and P2P.

Instead of trying to control or restrain individuals behavior - which cannot be done. The increased TOR bandwidth associated with P2P, in time, will only create a more efficient TOR system with respect to speed and anonymity. I believe in the long-run, P2P efforts will prove a great addition to TOR.

by: Anonymous BitTorrent | THE source for P2P File Sharing Tips, Tricks and information. | FileShareFreak

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:01:09 +0000