Tracker's Name: PlayBits Genre: Games Sign-up Link: http://playbits.org/account.php

Tracker's Name: TorrentKings Genre: General Sign-up Link: http://torrentkings.org/signup.php

Tracker's Name: HDME Genre: HD Sign-up Link: http://hdme.eu/signup.php

Tracker's Name: AnimeTorrents Genre: Anime Sign-up Link: http://animetorrents.me/register.php Closing date: Soon! Additional information: AnimeTorrents (ANT) is a Private Torrent Tracker for Anime Releases. AnimeTorrents is the sister-site of PrivateHD, Avistaz, Cinemaz and YourExotic.

Tracker's Name: Mononoke-BT Genre: Anime Sign-up Link: http://mononoke-bt.org/signup.php Additional information: french tracker

Tracker's Name: Zone-Torrent Genre: General Sign-up Link: http://www.zone-torrent.net/ztv2/sbg_login_classic.php Additional information: french tracker

For the past several months, folks over at Google have been getting into the dark parts of the internet to see how the thieves work – specifically, how do they steal so many identities. According to Google, more than 15% of all internet users have experienced at least one account takeover – whether email or social media account – in their life. But, account hijacking isn’t possible without login credentials. How do then criminals get their hands on so many account credentials? No, it’s not always about the mega data breaches even though they continue to drive mass attacks. In its research that was conducted with the help of the University of California, Berkeley, Google said that hackers steal nearly 250,000 new logins every single week. How do they achieve such a big number? How hijackers steal passwords – phishing and keylogging Google wrote that on average, every week attackers steal 234,887 potentially valid login credentials using nothing but the phishing tools. Keylogging helps the criminal community collect another 14,879 logins every week. The research identified 788,000 potential victims of keylogging and 12.4 million potential victims of phishing. As for mega breaches, the number is at a staggering 3.3 billion probably thanks to the massive Yahoo, LinkedIn, MySpace, Equifax, and Tumblr leaks in the past few years. While the mega breaches may attract more heat, it shouldn’t be missed that hackers continue to steal new data every single week as is confirmed from Google’s latest research. This data was collected between March 2016 and March 2017 in an effort to analyze how the criminal community continues to hijack user accounts. Google also shared that it’s not just the login credentials that are stolen as hackers also look for IP and location details as a “password alone is rarely sufficient for gaining access” particularly to a Google account. Sophisticated campaigns try to also collect sensitive data that may be requested by the companies to verify the account holder’s identity. Mega breaches may not be the biggest threat While in no way should this take away from the companies’ responsibility to secure user data, every major breach is followed by proactive efforts that enforce password resets, among other similar security measures. Google says that phishing remains the number one threat when it comes to account hijacking since phishing campaigns attempt to steal more than just a password. If you head over to Wccftech’s security section and look at stories of just the past few days, you will notice a growing number of malware campaigns that start with phishing and end up gaining intrusive permissions. These permissions and other similar tactics enable attackers to steal not just the login credentials but also read SMS (to bypass 2FA checks), IP addresses, and device information that could be used for account verification. The company shared this data after looking into black markets and public forums where hackers trade this data along with blackhat tools. Using this analysis, Google says it has implemented additional layers of security to protect its 67 million Google accounts from being abused. Kurt Thomas, Anti-Abuse Research and Angelika Moscicki, Account Security at Google wrote that the company is now making this analysis available to help other tech companies evolve their defenses in order to stay ahead of bad actors and keep their users safe. “We talk a lot about how airlines don’t compete over which one crashes more frequently,” Mark Risher, director of product management at Google, said. “Likewise, we don’t think security is something to keep to ourselves.” source: wccftech

AC Origins has been put to the test on both the Xbox One X ( Amazon, $499.99) and PS4 Pro, but to what extent does Microsoft’s new console offer the best experience. Eurogamer’s Digital Foundry just uploaded their Origins Xbox One X vs PS4 Pro showdown, and while some might argue that there appears to be parity between both platforms, one shouldn’t forget that the Microsoft’s new console offers a 44% to 96% resolution increase over the PS4 Pro. Additionally, the Xbox One X offers better texture filtering. You can check out Digital Foundry’s analysis below: While the absolute minimum resolution on Sony’s console is 1350p, the absolute minimum on Microsoft’s console is 1656p and it scales between 1700p and 2160p. Shadow draw distance is somewhat longer on the Xbox One X but its resolution up close is basically the same on both consoles. The same can be said about the world’s draw distance. Performance and framerate appear to be similar during gameplay, while cut scenes are somewhat faster on the Xbox one X. Assassin’s Creed Origins is available now for PC, Xbox One (included Xbox One X), and PS4 (with PS4 Pro support). Ubisoft released the game’s latest update, the 1.04 patch, earlier this week.

Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group are reportedly suing US-based streaming audio provider TuneIn for copyright infringement in the UK. Industry sources say a claim covering at least 800 unlicensed music streams was filed at the High Court last week. TuneIn is yet to respond to what could be a weighty piece of legal action. When it comes to providing digital online audio content, TuneIn is one of the world’s giants. Whether music, news, sport or just chat, TuneIn provides more than 120,000 radio stations and five million podcasts to 75,000,000 global users, both for free and via a premium tier service. Accessible from devices including cellphones, tablets, smart TVs, digital receivers, games consoles and even cars, TuneIn reaches more than 230 countries and territories worldwide. One, however, is about to cause the company a headache. According to a report from Music Business Worldwide (MBW), Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group are suing TuneIn over unlicensed streams. MBW sources say that the record labels filed proceedings in the UK High Court last week, claiming that TuneIn committed copyright infringement on at least 800 music streams accessible in the UK. While TuneIn does offer premium streams to customers, the service primarily acts as an index for radio streams hosted by their respective third-party creators. It describes itself as “an audio guide service” which indicates it does not directly provide the content listened to by its users. However, previous EU rulings (such as one related to The Pirate Bay) have determined that providing an index to content is tantamount to a communication to the public, which for unlicensed content would amount to infringement in the UK. While it would be difficult to avoid responsibility, TuneIn states on its website that it makes no claim that its service is legal in any other country than the United States. “Those who choose to access or use the Service from locations outside the United States of America do so on their own initiative and are responsible for compliance with local laws, if and to the extent local laws are applicable,” the company writes. “Access to the Service from jurisdictions where the contents or practices of the Service are illegal, unauthorized or penalized is strictly prohibited.” All that being said, the specific details of the Sony/Warner complaint are not yet publicly available so the precise nature of the High Court action is yet to be determined. TorrentFreak contacted the BPI, the industry body that represents both Sony and Warner in the UK, for comment on the lawsuit. A spokesperson informed us that they are not directly involved in the action. We also contacted both the IFPI and San Francisco-based TuneIn for further comment but at the time of publication, we were yet to hear back from either. TuneIn reportedly has until the end of November to file a defense. source: torrentfreak

Video piracy – the copying and selling copyrighted content - has been around since the advent of the VHS tape and home video recording in 1979. Today, video piracy has shifted from pirated set-top boxes to content redistribution over broadband networks. The most common forms of piracy today include illegal fully-loaded Kodi boxes, social network live streams, torrents of exclusive series or movies, web-based redistribution via file lockers, and password sharing. Service providers lose US$6 to US$8 billion annually in revenue to piracy. “Content providers must shift their response to piracy from being device-oriented, such as traditional conditional access systems (CAS) and digital rights management (DRM) to comprehensive service-oriented approaches and modern tools against piracy,” says Sam Rosen, Vice President at ABI Research. The most important tools available today include session-based watermarking coupled with real-time piracy monitoring focused on locating and identifying pirated content consumption and disruption of pirated content via terminating the source or disrupting the web services. Other tools include managing password sharing and working with other content providers in a market to effectively drive law enforcement to respond to the threat of piracy. ABI Research, a leader in emerging technology intelligence, estimates that nearly $400 million, or about 33% of revenues in the DRM market will shift to service- or as-a-service (aaS) oriented revenues, by 2022, according to ABI Research. News and technology sites often take an ambiguous stance on piracy. For example, the New York Times reassured the public that “the government is unlikely to prosecute you” for sharing their passwords while TechRadar rated Kodi boxes similarly to how they would rate OTT boxes such as Roku and Apple TV. Piracy is a prevalent topic in the headlines, notably with HBO’s Game of Thrones released on pirate sites before the broadcast and on-demand release. According to Rosen, “HBO suffered piracy via multiple avenues, including cybersecurity problems and supply chain leaks. One reassuring sign is that in the HBO supply chain case, as well as recent British Premier League cases, content owners quickly brought charges and the courts responded, showing better cooperation and urgency than has historically been the case.” While protection of all Pay TV and OTT content is important, the video ecosystem today is showing significant investment in new types of content in which the dangers of piracy are greater than in the past. Investments in Exclusive content, Live Sports, early release VOD and UltraHD Content create incentives where only specific platform providers in a market have access to the content. This may drive consumers to pirate if the content is not on their preferred platform, or is perceived as too expensive. About 32% of Pay TV and OTT revenues will be associated with one of these types of high-value content by 2022. source: https://www.abiresearch.com/press/abi-research-finds-session-based-watermarking-can-/

Kim Dotcom has become somewhat of a cult figure in the world of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. He is a big fan of Bitcoin and aims to integrate it into his future services. However, it seems Dotcom also keeps tabs on Bitcoin Cash. His recent Twitter poll has gotten a lot of attention already. So far, belief in Bitcoin as the superior currency is still very strong Then again, scalability will remain a problem for quite some time to come. It is evident Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are two very different currencies. One effectively has a lot of value and the other is still struggling to make its mark. More specifically, the past week or so has been kind to BCH as a whole. That doesn’t make the currency a contender for the world’s leading cryptocurrency by any means, though. At the same time, one has to acknowledge Bitcoin itself is not without flaws by any means. Especially when it comes to scaling, there is still a lot of work to be done. Kim Dotcom has been keeping tabs on both currencies for some time now. We all know Bitcache will use BTC as a payment option. However, there is a chance he may integrate Bitcoin Cash as well. It all depends on which currency will have the largest volume of internet payments. Right now, Bitcoin has a clear lead over BCH. However, that threshold may look very different in a few years from now. A lot will depend on how fast Bitcoin can effective scale. So far, it seems rather problematic, to say the least. To put this into perspective, SegWit is live on the Bitcoin network. So far, not much has happened to it, though. A lot of service providers have yet to integrate this new solution moving forward. Kim Dotcom will keep a close eye on how this situation evolves. It is in his best interest to accept currencies which scale better. Right now, Bitcoin is more popular, but it is not the best by any means. Bitcoin Cash can natively process far more transactions right now. It will be interesting to see how this situation changes in the coming years. It seems Dotcom may integrate Bitcoin Cash into his future services if need be. Whether or not this will be the case by 2021, remains to be seen. There is still a lot of work to be done for both BTC and BCH. An interesting future lies ahead, that much is certain. It would be better if we saw more collaboration rather than Bitcoin hard forks. source: http://www.newsbtc.com/2017/11/09/kim-dotcom-shows-interest-bitcoin-cash-elicits-response-craig-wright/

BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has debuted his “solution” to Bitcoin which he says resolves “centralization problems” with the virtual currency. Speaking to TechCrunch Wednesday, Cohen explained his Chia Network would offer more reliable, eco-friendly mining and security measures. The developer has been famously critical of Bitcoin this year as the network suffers slow and expensive transaction processing. “The idea is to make a better Bitcoin, to fix the centralization problems,” Cohen told the publication. Employing a concept called proof-of-time, as opposed to proof-of-work, Chia relies on a two-step block authentication method. The three “weightiest histories” found by full nodes are relayed to “farmers,” not miners. These find “the best proof of space they have,” after which proof-of-time servers begin validation and publish a verified block to the network. This procedure should take away mining power from a select few miners, as occurs with Bitcoin, Cohen says. “It’s technically ambitious and there’s a big meaty chunk of work to do. I’ve done enough raising money and recruiting. Now for the real work,” he added. While Bitcoin continues to find stability after its latest hard fork was canceled by developers this week, Cohen maintains a late-2018 or later release for his altcoin will still be timely. He is not alone in his plans, with MegaUpload creator Kim Dotcom likely to beat him to issuing a cryptocurrency, this time for his own decentralized file sharing network. Dotcom’s Bitcache will be 100 percent Bitcoin-supportive, however, having an integrated wallet for users. source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bittorrent-creators-chia-could-fix-bitcoin-with-own-altcoin-by-late-2018

The Russian government is considering introducing what could be dubbed web-blocking at speed. Or maybe web-blocking on speed. Under new proposals the country’s sometimes controversial internet watchdog Rozcomnadzor would have the power to block websites distributing copyright infringing material within 24 hours of being alerted to the infringing content’s presence. No court order would be required. Russia has ramped up its intellectual property laws considerably in recent years and while, from the perspective of Western copyright owners, there are still far too many loopholes, at the same time some of the country’s anti-piracy measures go far beyond those found in North America and Europe. And that includes web-blocking, with Rozcomnadzor already able to respond to requests that copyright infringing websites be blocked much quicker than most of the courts and agencies that have that power in other countries. According to Torrentfreak, under the current system Rozcomnadzor gives the owners of accused websites three days to remove copyright infringing content before any further action is taken. But, according to Russian business newspaper Vedomosti, Russia’s Ministry Of Culture is now proposing a new system where the regulator could block websites within 24 hours of an infringement claim being made. This new system would only seemingly benefit the movie industry though, and only films released by Russian companies at that. Ministers in favour of the 24 hour blocking process say that new movie releases popping up online is hitting cinema attendances which, in turn, is depriving the country’s film industry of key income. As much previously reported, web-blocking has become a preferred anti-piracy tactic for the music and movie industries in countries where such blockades are available. Usually a court must ultimately issue an injunction ordering the web-blocks, though there have been discussions elsewhere of having a government agency with the power to order internet service providers to block their users from accessing piracy sites. Digital rights campaigners argue that without judicial oversight web-blocking could be open to abuse, with legitimate websites the occasionally inadvertently publish infringing material caught in the cross-fire. It remains to be seen if Rozcomnadzor gets the new super powers it seeks to speed up its web-blocking activities. For more on web-blocking and other piracy matters, check out this new CMU Insights blog post or get yourself along to the upcoming CMU Insights masterclass on copyright enforcement on 20 Nov. source: http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/russian-government-proposing-super-speedy-web-blocks/

Businesses who use unlicensed or counterfeit software put themselves at risk of costly and time consuming legal action– FAST gives you tips on how to avoid this Due to continuing numbers of whistle blower reports, the Federation Against Software Theft (FAST) has launched an initiative against software piracy through a series of top tips designed to educate business end users of the best ways to spot non genuine software and to ensure that their business uses software lawfully. While software publishers have increasingly moved away from distributing programs on physical carriers such as CDs sold in boxes and now largely deploy cloud or server models, this change has still left avenues open for cyber criminals to target unsuspecting organisations and for IP infringement to remain a real business risk. Moreover, bad intent is not the only means by which people end up using software illegally. A lack of awareness on legal use issues can also result in business users taking unnecessary and expensive risks. Julian Heathcote Hobbins, General Counsel at FAST, expanded on the problem and the ways that business users can ensure compliance reducing legal and operational risk: “Many software products have strict licensing rules attached to them, and there are many unscrupulous people out there looking to make an easy dollar through distributing unlicensed or counterfeit software. It can therefore be easy for business people to slip up and find themselves using software that isn’t licensed correctly or isn’t genuine – especially when it is common for them to download software directly from a variety of internet sources. This makes it far easier for a business to buy in error even if well intentioned but this has a very tangible effect on the creators of the software programs, especially SMEs. “By using unlicensed software, for example, when it is notgenuine, business end users are depriving the publisher - large or small - of revenue they are due. Reduced revenues means reduced R&D budgets for software programs, which in the long run results in a marketplace with less innovation. However, for those who don’t have an understanding of the complexities of software pricing, it can be very difficult to tell when software is not genuine – and some might not even be conscious of unauthorised software as an issue. “It’s for this reason that we’ve put together a series of tips, designed to make it far easier for business end users to identify when they might be caught out. These tips help software users keep on the right side of software licensing rules,” he continued. FAST’s tips for spotting non-genuine software include: • Counterfeit software is distributed from websites that aren’t approved by the original creators of the software. Checking how the product is normally sold is therefore a good way to identify whether the software is legitimate. • A quick web search of the products stock keeping unit (SKU) code, often reveals how it is normally sold. • Check with the software publisher which channels they sell their products through. They will usually indicate who their resellers are: whether they have their own online store or sell via a mainstream online distributor, whether their products are available bundled via a PC manufacturer or via high street stores. • Check if the relevant product or product editions can only be purchased via a Corporate or Volume Agreements – this means that they have to be sold in certain quantities. If you are buying just one or two of a product that is normally procured via these sorts of agreements then it is likely you are buying an inappropriately licensed or indeed a counterfeit product. • A price that seems too good to be true can be a key indicator that software is being sold illegally, and is always worth investigating further. • Take great care when buying second-hand PCs to check the authenticity of any software it comes with. There is a high probability that any software pre-installed on that PC is not legally licensed unless you procure the PC from a licensed PC refurbishing organisation. • When in doubt contact a mainstream software company or reseller for advice, especially when you are buying larger quantities. source: https://bdaily.co.uk/articles/2017/11/09/fast-offers-advice-on-how-to-avoid-the-ramifications-of-using-unlicensed-software

Last week, the podcast Reply All investigated the persistent rumor that Facebook records users’ conversations and uses them to target ads. Facebook denied it, and co-host Alex Goldman was convinced. But for the second half of the episode, Goldman talked to people who have talked about a product, then seen it pop up in Facebook ads. He presented alternate explanations for their experience. He couldn’t change a single person’s mind. And even if you already agree with Goldman, his complicated explanations sound weak against the simple explanation that Facebook is always listening. The spying rumor doesn’t seem crazy. After all, Amazon and Google explicitly sell devices that listen to you 24/7. And Facebook’s app sometimes does listen to you. So why wouldn’t they secretly record your conversations to serve targeted ads? The answer, while complicated, boils down to “because it’s not worth it.” As we’ll explain, you should be scared of what Facebook knows about you. Just not because it’s recording your conversations. Why the Rumor Persists In 2016, a comms professor performed a similar trick on local TV, talking about cat food with her phone out, then loading Facebook and seeing cat food ads. News media ran hard with the story. This spring, the Outline surfaced it again. And Reply All’s episode fueled another round of coverage. If Facebook ads pop up with the same content as your conversations, it definitely feels like Facebook listened to your conversations. This theory feels true because it taps into the dominant narrative of our age: “Computers are taking over.” Just as people throughout history blamed everything on various gods or witches or the four humors, we blame everything on computers. In this case, we’re almost right. We’re just making a big mistake in how we think about computers. More on that later. How Facebook Could Record You Facebook’s mobile app theoretically could listen in on you, at least while you have it open. It even has a public feature that will try to recognize any audio in the background, like music or TV—but only while you’re entering a status update, and only if you’ve opted in. Facebook says this feature is never used for advertising. To pull this off, Facebook would need to automatically process your speech. The service has 1.15 billion mobile users every day, so no human team could process a meaningful amount of conversation (especially for less money than the ads make). To do this, they’d have to use computerized voice recognition. But would they do it? Facebook does have a history of disrespecting users’ privacy. In 2010 they changed everyone’s default privacy settings, and in 2007 they notified people about their friends’ purchases on other sites with a tool called Facebook Beacon, triggering public outcry and eventually paying a $9.5 million class action settlement. And Facebook is cagey about how much information it collects from people. For example, says Gizmodo’s Kasmir Hill, “Facebook does what it can to underplay how much data it gathers through contacts, and how widely it casts its net.” Why Facebook Isn’t Recording You No one’s leaked it Facebook has repeatedly denied that it targets ads based on overheard audio. They denied it after users worried about the status-update feature. They denied it after the comms director’s trick, they denied it to the Outline, they denied it to Reply All. Rob Goldman, Facebook’s VP of product for ads and pages, personally denied it on Twitter. Facebook is cagey, but they don’t tend to openly lie about huge data-collection schemes. It doesn’t make great business sense, given the inevitability of a leak and the ensuing PR and legal disaster. Ex-employees in tech blow the whistle all the time. Facebook’s many other privacy violations and mistakes tend to get leaked, discovered, and revealed long before this point. And this one would be—already is—a huge story. The absence of a leak so far, in the face of constant media coverage and public interest, is a bit of evidence that there’s nothing to leak. Of course, you can’t prove a negative—you can just push down its probability. It’s too much work Even without hiding it from the press, this spying project would take a massive effort. Technologically, as Gizmodo has pointed out, Facebook’s voice recognition probably isn’t good enough to effectively target ads. Open-ended voice recognition is hard. (Just think of how much Siri messes up requests.) If Facebook had cracked it, we’d probably see them using the technology elsewhere, too. To listen in, Facebook would also have to violate Apple and Google’s terms of service, and find a way to listen even when the app wasn’t open. They’d have to sneak this gigantic exploit past both companies’ App Store teams. It’s been done before. Uber, for example, was caught spying on users through its app. But Uber has always played more fast and loose than Facebook. With so much at stake, it would be uncharacteristically foolhardy for Facebook to run this program and publicly deny it for so long. How Facebook Knows All About You But if Facebook isn’t listening to us, how is it targeting us so well? Because it’s gathering way more about us than most people realize, both online, and by buying outside information. In building our narrative, humans forget one big thing about computer algorithms: They don’t work like human brains. What’s complicated to us is simple to them, and vice versa. In the Reply All episode, Alex Goldman tries to guess which of Facebook’s many data sources led to certain ads, but as he admits, it’s very hard to guess this. Facebook’s own developers often don’t know how their algorithm makes certain choices. Most people barely grasp the implications of this. They don’t understand how this is scarier than if Facebook simply listened to us. They don’t understand that Facebook doesn’t need to listen to us—because it already knows what we want and need, before we do. Open up your Facebook ad preferences. Go to “Your information” and click the “Your categories” tab. Here Facebook lists a tiny sample of what it knows about you: your politics, your line of work, when you last left town, what devices you use. Some of this information is wildly inaccurate—Facebook thinks I’m in “Farming, Fishing, and Forestry”—but most of it is right. And of course this is barely anything. You’ve very likely given Facebook location access, letting it track you at all times. Unless you run ad blockers on all your devices, Facebook knows where you go on the internet, and what products you buy or almost buy. (Sometimes it screws those up, which is why you get ads for things you just bought.) It knows where you take your pictures (for Facebook or for Instagram), and who’s in them. If you use Messenger or WhatsApp, it knows who you talk to all day. It knows your friends and family, and it can connect all their data with all of yours. So as Goldman explains on Reply All, if your aunt shops for perfume but doesn’t buy any, and then she visits you, Facebook knows you two might be shopping for perfume soon. So it shows you a perfume ad right after your aunt mentions wanting perfume—or before. Or if your brother flirts with white supremacy for a season, it gives you disturbing white-pride ads. For similar reasons, Facebook can probably predict when you’ll get pregnant—not necessarily by divining your behavior, but by noticing all your friends have kids. (For what it’s worth, Target is also notorious for figuring out that you’re pregnant even before you do, based on your purchases.) It can find long-lost family members, out you as gay, identify your religion and politics—and, most importantly to its bottom line, predict what you’ll want to watch, read, or buy next. The sad news is, you’re predictable. We all are. We hate to admit it, so much that we’d rather believe our phones are secretly listening to our conversations. The company even tracks internet users who don’t use Facebook, and sells that data to outside advertisers. It asks users for the phone numbers and email addresses of their friends (which, as Gizmodo explained this morning, is how your therapist, lawyer, long-lost relative or sperm donor could pop up in the People You May Know section). It buys more user info from data brokers, including ones that sell credit reports. Again, Facebook doesn’t deny all this data collection and analysis. It just really doesn’t want to talk about it. Maybe that’s just because the company doesn’t want to hand over its trade secrets to competitors like Google. But it’s also that they know that this stuff is creepy, and that users would revolt if they really understood how much of their privacy they’d sacrificed. Or would they? Most of the users Goldman talks to, who think Facebook is spying on them, selling ads based on the results, then lying about it, still use it. That’s terrifying! You might feel like you have no choice, like you’re stuck with Facebook, but you can at least stand up for yourself. How to Limit Facebook’s Access Reply All compiled some steps Facebook’s users can take to minimize its access. Here are the best, and easiest: Go to your Facebook ad preferences page. Toggle everything to “off” or “no” to limit how Facebook customizes ads. (If you go through the entire “Your interests” section, this might take several minutes.) Install an ad blocker. On your computer, try Adblock Plus or uBlock. On your phone, try 1Blocker or Purify on iOS and Adblock Browser on Android. These can’t block content on the Facebook app, but they can block Facebook’s trackers on your usual mobile browser. Install Facebook Disconnect (for Chrome or for Firefox), which stops Facebook from watching what you do on other websites. If you’re paranoid about Facebook’s app hijacking your microphone and camera in iOS or Android, revoke access. Don’t assume that you have to sacrifice your privacy in order to enjoy the advantages of technology. In the long run, tech is only sustainable if it can deliver both.

Looking back on 2015's Star Wars: Battlefront, it successfully achieved the fantasy of taking part in many of the iconic battles from the original trilogy, but still fell short when it came to offering a robust multiplayer experience. With Battlefront II, the scope has been largely expanded, making for a more varied and involved experience that incorporates a little bit of everything Star Wars--from the smaller conflicts on Jakku, to the massive, civilization-defining battles on Endor. During a hands-on event prior to the game's release on EA Access, we spent two days diving into Battlefront II's familiar online offerings, while getting a feel for the new systems and modes in place--which assuredly take some getting used to. One thing that's clear from the outset is the expanded scale of Battlefront II. Now featuring 14 maps, taking place across all three eras of the Star Wars saga, there's something for fans of all types. From taking part in the Battle of Naboo from the prequel trilogy, to the conflict on Endor from Return of the Jedi, to even the skirmish on Takodonna in The Force Awakens, each era of Star Wars is present and accounted for. While multiple maps from a particular era have a number of stylistic similarities, each setting has a particular tone to it that feels distinct--such the lush and pristine palaces of the prequel era, to the more rundown and lived-in areas of the original trilogy. Like its predecessor, Battlefront II brings you to the frontlines across a variety of different game modes--even allowing you to play as the Empire and change the course of Star Wars history. As you build your own career in multiplayer or in offline modes, you'll unlock weapons, Star Cards, and access to the more recognizable faces in Star Wars. While there's certainly a conscious effort to improve the size of the game, there's still plenty of smaller scale infantry battles that make for a decent break from the bombast of the 40-player Galactic Assault. With the Blast and Strike gametypes, smaller teams of up to 20 players focus on wiping out opposing players or capturing enemy territory, making for some bite-sized matches to dive into. But of course, Battlefront II also brings back the favorite Heroes vs. Villains mode, which pits two teams of classic and new Star Wars characters duking it out in-over-the-top fashion. These battles offer up some of the most bizarre, yet fun moments in the game with Jedi, Smugglers, and Bounty Hunters pulling out all the stops to take down the other team. While these modes are intense in their own right, the smaller multiplayer offerings are a solid respite from the time-consuming game-types like Galactic or Starfighter Assault. With the return of the Star Card system, there's also some notable changes that come with the increased scope of the sequel. In addition to modifying your classes and heroes--such as ditching the Heavy's energy shield for a grenade launcher--the Star Cards of Battlefront II can now be upgraded with crafting components or can be found in higher tier categories. This in turn requires you to invest more time in a particular class' growth, as upgrading certain cards requires a specific class rank--which then requires you to stay up to date with ongoing challenges and weapon unlocks to facilitate the advancement. There's a lot to keep up with when it comes to the system's newfound intricacies, especially when you're seldom given any useful Star Cards at the start, which can make learning the ins and outs feel like a chore. With the number of classes, cards, heroes, and challenges available in-game, there's certainly much to keep track of. This unfortunately makes apparent how cumbersome the menu system can be, which come off as needlessly complicated to navigate--even requiring you to exit multiplayer matches to collect rewards from the challenges you've unlocked, and even to open up the loot crates. Speaking of which, the loot boxes of Battlefront II have undergone some changes since the beta. While you can earn Star Cards from the single player campaign, loot boxes are the most reliable and efficient way to earn increase your decks for the many classes and acquire crafting components to upgrade said cards. Incorporating player feedback from the beta, epic level gear will no longer drop from loot boxes, resulting in a system that should feel more friendly for natural play. Though you can comfortably purchase boxes with in-game credits accumulated over the course of several games, this system can feel like a bottleneck, as long-term progression is dependant on the luck of the draw from loot crates--which sometimes results in minimal rewards. By far, the most exciting addition to Battlefront II is Starfighter Assault. Focusing entirely on space and aerial dogfights between opposing teams, you can pick three different classes of starships and take part in offensive or defensive missions. While similar to the Rush gametype--with the attacking force gaining momentum by completing key objectives--Starfighter Assault focuses on full 360 degree flying with the dodging of debris and enemy fighters, and offers some of the most intense and pulse-pounding moments in the game. Vehicle controls have been significantly improved compared to the previous game, with maneuverability and dodging enemy fire feeling like a breeze in comparison. While it initially can be overwhelming, especially on the incredibly dense Death Star II map with the wreckage of the space station leaving many obstacles to weave past, the gametype creates many different opportunities to pull off slick maneuvers and strafing runs that make you feel like you're taking part in movie. While there's some notable frustrations with the game, such as the looming presence of the loot boxes and complicated progression system, the first few hours spent with Battlefront II were incredibly fun where it mattered most. There's still much to dive into for the multiplayer, and it'll be interesting to see how it pans out once more players have gotten into the game.

Piracy has plagued the anime industry for years, but Monkey D. Luffy’s gang cannot be blamed for its rise. According to a study by The Hollywood Reporter, Japan is being hit hard by pirates, and One Piece is a victim if anything. Not long ago, Japan hosted its annual Tokyo Film Festival, and film industry veterans gathered to talk all things theater. It was there Chris Dobb, the chairman of the Motion Picture Association of America, held a seminar and gave comment on Japan’s piracy. He noted online piracy is a “serious problem” in the country, and the sentiment was echoed by Takeo Hisamatsu, the festival’s director. According to THR, the seminar laid out how damaging piracy is to Japan’s industry with some rather shocking numbers. In the first-half of 2017, an average of 15.2 million unique users from Japan used online piracy services. 24% of Internet users in Japan accessed those sites via desktop with the overwhelming majority using streaming services. Japan’s piracy does seem to be mostly limited to online consumption. The latest studies do show that the Japanese are “low consumers of pirated copies of DVDs and other hard goods.” However, the same cannot be said what happens on the Internet. The piracy number is lower than other developed countries, but for Japan’s size, the reports call the figures “shockingly high.” Marc Fuoti, a member of the MPA advisory board, confirmed piracy is “increasing” in the country as of right now. As you might have guessed, Japan’s greatest source of pirated content is anime. Fuoti stressed manga and anime are the most pirated pieces of content. The report estimates 7.7 billion visitors went to unlicensed anime sites globally in 2015 - and that is excluding anyone from China or Japan. Anime fans are well-aware of how piracy as infiltrated the fandom and become a normal way of life for many. The trend began decades ago when anime series were simply not exported out of Japan, and it worsened as the Internet became a more widely available tool. Anime has an easier time getting shared abroad in a timely manner, but the fandom’s culture has become one that views piracy as an alternative when shows do not get added to licensed streaming services. source: http://comicbook.com/anime/2017/11/09/japan-anime-piracy-manga-worsening-data/

The Pirate Bay has been hard to reach over the past day, causing concern among some BitTorrent users. The outage is likely caused by technical issues, so the site is expected to rebounce soon. Meanwhile, the site's proxies and its Tor domain are still working fine. The Pirate Bay has been hard to reach for roughly a day now. For many people, the site currently displays a CloudFlare error message across the entire site, with the CDN provider referring to an “unknown error.” No further details are available to us and there is no known ETA for the site’s full return. However, judging from past experience, it’s likely a small technical issue that needs fixing (update below). Pirate Bay downtime Pirate Bay downtim The Pirate Bay has had quite a few stints of downtime in recent months. The popular torrent site usually returns after several hours, but an outage of more than 24 hours has happened before as well. TorrentFreak reached out to the TPB team but we have yet to hear more about the issue. Amid the downtime, there’s still some good news for those who desperately need to access the notorious torrent site. TPB is still available via its .onion address on the Tor network, accessible using the popular Tor Browser, for example. The Tor traffic goes through a separate server and works just fine. The same is true for The Pirate Bay’s proxy sites, most of which are still working just fine. The main .org domain will probably be back in action soon enough, but seasoned TPB users will probably know the drill by now… The Pirate Bay is not the only torrent site facing problems at the moment. 1337x.to is also suffering downtime. A week ago the site’s operator said that the site was under attack, which may still be ongoing. Meanwhile, 1337x’s official proxy is still online. Update: It appears that for some people the site slowly started to come back soon after this article was published. Others still report downtime. Update: The TPB team says the downtime is caused by a network issue. This should be cleared up soon. source: torrentfreak

Those worried about the future of the Hitman franchise can breathe easy, as IO Interactive have just revealed they’re “making great progress” on a new entry. Here’s what IO CEO Hakan Abrak had to say in a blog post celebrating the release of Hitman Game of the Year Edition: Five months ago, [we] let you know that Io-Interactive had become an independent studio once again. We’ve kept quiet since then, because we needed to focus on what we want IOI to stand for, in terms of our employees, our culture and our ambitions and dreams for the future. It’s been hard and challenging work, but also incredibly exciting as we lay the foundations for a new start for this special studio. Thank you, in advance, to everyone who supports us by purchasing the [Hitman] GOTY Edition or the Upgrade. Your support will directly help us to continue on our independent journey towards the next Hitman game and beyond. One last thing about our next Hitman game — I want to let you know that we’re making great progress and we have exciting new features and some franchise firsts, which we can’t wait to tell you all about. You’ll have to wait a little longer as we don’t plan to start talking about that until some point in 2018.” “Earlier this year, Square Enix sent shockwaves through the industry by announcing plans to offload developer IO Interactive and the Hitman franchise. Ultimately, a buyer wasn’t found, with IO instead retaining rights to the Hitman series as an independent developer. Understandably, fans have been concerned about the Hitman franchise, but it seems Agent 47 will be returning! It will be interesting to see what the new features and “franchise firsts” Abrak mentions are. Hitman Game of the Year Edition, which includes the first season of the 2016 game, as well as a new four-mission campaign and other additional content, is available right now on PC, Xbox One, and PS4.

DDoS attacks are on the rise again as criminals turn to brute force attacks once more, new research has claimed. The latest DDoS Intelligence report from Kaspersky Lab, covering the third quarter of 2017, says there has been an increase in the number of countries where resources have been targeted. The number of attacks against gaming and new financial services has also grown. Kaspersky Lab says resources in 98 countries were DDoSed this quarter, up from 86 the quarter before. Looking at the top ten countries in terms of number of targets, Russia is up from seventh to fourth place, while France and Germany pushed Australia and Italy out of the list. The top 10 most popular host countries for botnet command servers include Italy and the UK, moving Canada and Germany out of the picture. The share of Linux botnets is growing, and they are now accounting for 70 per cent of all attacks in Q3, up from 51 per cent in Q2. The report also says cybercriminals are moving to more sophisticated attacks. It gives an example of the WireX botnet that spread via legitimate Android apps, or the Pulse Wave tech that increases the power of DDoS attacks through vulnearibilities in hybrid and cloud tech. Kaspersky has also observed an increase in variety of targets. "Entertainment and financial services – businesses that are critically dependent on their continuous availability to users – have always been a favourite target for DDoS attacks. For them, the downtime caused by an attack can result not only in significant financial losses but also reputational risks that could result in an exodus of customers to competitors,” says Kirill Ilganaev, Head of Kaspersky DDoS Protection at Kaspersky Lab. “It’s not surprising that gaming services with multi-million turnovers attract the attention of criminals and that new types of financial sites have come under attack. What is surprising, however, is that many companies still don’t pay enough attention to professional protection against DDoS attacks. The recommended approach for these companies is to delegate protection from DDoS attacks to a reliable supplier with deep knowledge of cyberthreats and the methods of combating them, and to reassign the IT resources that are freed up to the development of the business.”

VPNs have been around almost as long as the internet itself. From the earliest of days, the desire for security within the enterprise market created a market within enterprise solutions for end-to-end connections on the internet that went through their own encrypted tunnel; rather than the open internet. This “Virtual Private Network” system, as it became known, not only provided secure end-to-end connections, it also had two features which gave rise to its popularity. The first is the ability to shield your browsing behaviour from outside eyes (for example your ISP, who may go on and sell it to the highest bidder to help tailor ads, etc). The second is being able to “spoof” geo-filtering systems by having an end -point within a region that gives you access to content not available in your home territory. Where is the harm in that you might ask? Certainly, in the case of the former, the desire for privacy would suggest it made sense to use a VPN if you can’t trust your ISP (assuming of course you can trust the VPN!). In the case of the latter, the issue is much more debatable. There is sympathy in many quarters for browsers in more repressive territories to be able to beat the censor by accessing more objective news about what is happening in their home or even around the world. However, this noble cause is also often used as a smoke screen for probably the most common reason that anyone signs up for a VPN: the desire to watch content from a foreign online streaming service more conveniently / cheaper than is available at home. Data from GlobalWebIndex back in 2015 (yes 2015) indicated that Netflix has 100 million users from China, without their even having a Chinese service! (ed: Netflix has just under 104 million active users as of Q2 2017). Although that number may well have been inflated as a result of Chinese users signing up multiple times for the free two week trial (theoretically for US-based viewers!) there can be no question that VPN usage to beat geo-filtering systems and thus access content from abroad, has become very common. As bandwidth has increased, the quality and popularity of online streaming sites has grown and for the same reason (better bandwidth) so has the popularity of VPNs to enable viewers to sign into their digital global passports to browse the world’s OTT content. Due to the importance to the monetization of content of “windowing” or selling of content exclusively on a territory-by-territory basis, the harm that is being done to the creative industries from this abuse cannot be just brushed under the carpet. The Sony Hack back in 2014 made it clear just how damaging the studios found this “Geo-piracy” and the eventual clamp down that Netflix made in early 2016 shows just what is possible to ensure that content can be made more resistant to VPN based “leakage” across borders. However, apart from a handful of the best operators, nearly all OTT sites remain very vulnerable to being spoofed by a VPN and, as such, very popular to many VPN users! However, as the damage to content producers becomes better understood, and awareness that solutions exist to stop it grows, our prediction is that the days of this use case for VPNs at least, are numbered. source: https://www.itproportal.com/features/vpn-is-harming-the-future-of-content-producers-and-this-will-end/

The Coalition Against Piracy (CAP) united at the annual CASBAA conference in Macau yesterday to begin work to address the increasingly complex issues surrounding illegal downloading and streaming. Among the 18 partner companies involved are Viacom International Media Networks, NBCU, Sony, Disney, HBO Asia, A+E Networks, Fox Networks Group, Turner, BBC Worldwide, TV5Monde, BeIN Asia, PCCW Media and True Visions. Industry body CASBAA recently established CAP after identifying piracy’s effects on the traditional pay TV and OTT markets in the Asia, with one survey recently suggesting as many as 14% of consumers in Sinapore admitting to regularly using an ‘illicit streaming device’ ISD). “Two immediate priorities will be the disruption of the ISD ecosystem at its source and enhanced intermediary engagement with both e-commerce platforms and financial processors to disrupt transactions at the point of sale,” said Neil Gane, CAP’s general manager. “Disrupting illicit commercial transactions is a key component of any anti-piracy strategy.” “The driving force behind establishment of CAP is the need for united, collective action by all branches of the video industry”, said CASBAA’s chief policy officer, John Medeiros. “Sports, films, TV series, international as well as local content – everyone trying to deliver quality content to the public is threatened by the inundation of ISD boxes and apps from commercial piracy syndicates.” Last week, a Digital TV Research report suggested illegal piracy of films and TV cost companies US$31.8 billion, with the figure expected to rise to nearly US$52 billion in 2016. In June, the likes of Netflix, Amazon, BBCWW, CBS Corp., NBCU, Paramount Pictures, Sony, Fox, Disney and Warner Bros. Entertainment came together to form the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, a US-based body aiming at similar goals to CAP. http://tbivision.com/news/2017/11/anti-piracy-group-unites-combat-threat/814772/

Sky's head of litigation made a rather surprising statement at an industry convention in Macau this week. Matthew Hibbert told those in attendance that thanks to site-blocking, it's no longer possible to watch pirated live soccer in the UK anymore. Meanwhile, the UK Intellectual Property Office has revealed that when questioned a while back, rightsholders told them that pirate boxes weren't a problem. How things change. The commotion over the set-top box streaming phenomenon is showing no signs of dying down and if day one at the Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia (CASBAA) Conference 2017 was anything to go by, things are only heating up. Held at Studio City in Macau, the conference has a strong anti-piracy element and was opened by Joe Welch, CASBAA Board Chairman and SVP Public Affairs Asia, 21st Century Fox. He began Tuesday by noting the important recent launch of a brand new anti-piracy initiative. “CASBAA recently launched the Coalition Against Piracy, funded by 18 of the region’s content players and distribution partners,” he said. TF reported on the formation of the coalition mid-October. It includes heavyweights such as Disney, Fox, HBO, NBCUniversal and BBC Worldwide, and will have a strong focus on the illicit set-top box market. Illegal streaming devices (or ISDs, as the industry calls them), were directly addressed in a segment yesterday afternoon titled Face To Face. Led by Dr. Ros Lynch, Director of Copyright & IP Enforcement at the UK Intellectual Property Office, the session detailed the “onslaught of online piracy” and the rise of ISDs that is apparently “shaking the market”. Given the apparent gravity of those statements, the following will probably come as a surprise. According to Lynch, the UK IPO sought the opinion of UK-based rightsholders about the pirate box phenomenon a while back after being informed of their popularity in the East. The response was that pirate boxes weren’t an issue. It didn’t take long, however, for things to blow up. “The UKIPO provides intelligence and evidence to industry and the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) in London who then take enforcement actions,” Lynch explained. “We first heard about the issues with ISDs from [broadcaster] TVB in Hong Kong and we then consulted the UK rights holders who responded that it wasn’t a problem. Two years later the issue just exploded.” The evidence of that in the UK isn’t difficult to find. In addition to millions of devices with both free Kodi addon and subscription-based systems deployed, the app market has bloomed too, offering free or near to free content to all. This caught the eye of the Premier League who this year obtained two pioneering injunctions (1,2) to tackle live streams of football games. Streams are blocked by local ISPs in real-time, making illicit online viewing a more painful experience than it ever has been. No doubt progress has been made on this front, with thousands of streams blocked, but according to broadcaster Sky, the results are unprecedented. “Site-blocking has moved the goalposts significantly,” said Matthew Hibbert, head of litigation at Sky UK. “In the UK you cannot watch pirated live Premier League content anymore,” he said. While progress has been good, the statement is overly enthusiastic. TF sources have been monitoring the availability of pirate streams on around dozen illicit sites and services every Saturday (when it is actually illegal to broadcast matches in the UK) and service has been steady on around half of them and intermittent at worst on the rest. There are hundreds of other platforms available so while many are definitely affected by Premier League blocking, it’s safe to assume that live football piracy hasn’t been wiped out. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to suggest that no progress has been made, in this and other related areas. Kevin Plumb, Director of Legal Services at The Premier League, said that pubs showing football from illegal streams had also massively dwindled in numbers. “In the past 18 months the illegal broadcasting of live Premier League matches in pubs in the UK has been decimated,” he said. This result is almost certainly down to prosecutions taken in tandem with the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), that have seen several landlords landed with large fines. Indeed, both sides of the market have been tackled, with both licensed premises and IPTV device sellers being targeted. “The most successful thing we’ve done to combat piracy has been to undertake criminal prosecutions against ISD piracy,” said FACT chief Kieron Sharp yesterday. “Everyone is pleading guilty to these offenses.” Most if not all of FACT-led prosecutions target device and subscription sellers under fraud legislation but that could change in the future, Lynch of the Intellectual Property Office said. “While the UK works to update its legislation, we can’t wait for the new legislation to take enforcement actions and we rely heavily on ‘conspiracy to defraud’ charges, and have successfully prosecuted a number of ISD retailers,” she said. Finally, information provided yesterday by network company CISCO shine light on what it costs to run a subscription-based pirate IPTV operation. Director of Intelligence & Security Operations Avigail Gutman said a pirate IPTV server offering 1,000 channels to around 1,000 subscribers can cost as little as 2,000 euros per month to run but can generate 12,000 euros in revenue during the same period. “In April of 2017, ten major paid TV and content providers had relinquished 3.09 million euros per month to 285 ISD-based streaming pirate syndicates,” she said. There’s little doubt that IPTV piracy, both paid and free, is here to stay. The big question is how it will be tackled short and long-term and whether any changes in legislation will have any unintended knock-on effects. source: torrentfreak

Tracker's Name: Retroflix Genre: classic movies/tv/documentary Sign-up Link: http://retroflix.net/signup.php Closing date: N/A Additional information: is a private tracker about movies/documentary

The MPAA has submitted its 2018 list of foreign trade barriers to the U.S. Government. The document reveals that Hollywood is concerned that Australia is considering implementing fair use exceptions, allowing circumvention of geo-blocking, and expanding safe harbor provisions for online services. In addition, the MPAA notes that stiffer penalties are required to deter piracy. Last year, the Australian Government’s Productivity Commission published a Draft Report on Intellectual Property Arrangements, recommending various amendments to local copyright law. The Commission suggested allowing the use of VPNs and similar technologies to enable consumers to bypass restrictive geo-blocking. It also tabled proposals to introduce fair use exceptions and to expand safe harbors for online services. Two months ago the Government responded to these proposals. It promised to expand the safe harbor protections and announced a consultation on fair use, describing the current fair dealing exceptions as restrictive. The Government also noted that circumvention of geo-blocks may be warranted, in some cases. While the copyright reform plans have been welcomed with wide support from the public and companies such as Google and Wikipedia, there’s also plenty of opposition. From Hollywood, for example, which fears that the changes will set back Australia’s progress to combat piracy. A few days ago, the MPAA submitted its 2018 list of foreign trade barriers to the U.S. Government. The document in question highlights key copyright challenges in the most crucial markets, Australia included. According to the movie industry group, the tabled proposals are problematic. “If the Commission’s recommendations were adopted, they could result in legislative changes that undermine the current balance of protection in Australia. These changes could create significant market uncertainty and effectively weaken Australia’s infrastructure for intellectual property protection,” the MPAA writes. “Of concern is a proposal to introduce a vague and undefined ‘fair use’ exception unmoored from decades of precedent in the United States. Another proposal would expand Australia’s safe harbor regime in piecemeal fashion,” the group adds. The fair use opposition is noteworthy since the Australian proposal is largely modeled after US law. The MPAA’s comment suggests, however, that this can’t be easily applied to another country, as that would lack the legal finetuning that’s been established in dozens of court cases. That the MPAA isn’t happy with the expansion of safe harbor protections for online service providers is no surprise. In recent years, copyright holders have often complained that these protections hinder progress on the anti-piracy front, as companies such as Google and Facebook have no incentive to proactively police copyright infringement. Moving on, the movie industry group highlights that circumvention of geo-blocking for copyrighted content and other protection measures are also controversial topics for Hollywood. “Still another would allow circumvention of geo-blocking and other technological protection measures. Australia has one of the most vibrant creative economies in the world and its current legal regime has helped the country become the site of major production investments. “Local policymakers should take care to ensure that Australia’s vibrant market is not inadvertently impaired and that any proposed relaxation of copyright and related rights protection does not violate Australia’s international obligations,” the MPAA adds. Finally, while it was not included in the commission’s recommendations, the MPAA stresses once again that Australia’s anti-camcording laws are not up to par. Although several camming pirates have been caught in recent years, the punishments don’t meet Hollywood’s standards. For example, in 2012 a man connected to a notorious release group was convicted for illicitly recording 14 audio captures, for which he received an AUS$2,000 fine. “Australia should adopt anticamcording legislation. While illegal copying is a violation of the Copyright Act, more meaningful deterrent penalties are required,” the MPAA writes. “Such low penalties fail to reflect the devastating impact that this crime has on the film industry.” The last suggestion has been in the MPAA’s recommendations for several years already, but the group is persistent. In closing, the MPAA asks the US Government to keep these and other issues in focus during future trade negotiations and policy discussions with Australia and other countries, while thanking it for the critical assistance Hollywood has received over the years. source: torrentfreak