Re: "uTorrent Will Move to The Web Browser"

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 22/4/2017 9:55 PM, Yrrah wrote:
> "BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the popular
> client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision of the

uTorrent already has a WebUI. They only need to convert the core program
into an add-on.

> application will run in users' default browser, complete with a
> revamped interface and a significantly improved streaming experience.
> With around 150 million active users a month, uTorrent remains the
> leading torrent client, by far.(...)"
> Article:
> <https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser-170421/>
> Not the beginning of a new trend, I hope. I use qBittorrent (for
> Linux), which "aims to provide an open-source software alternative to
> µTorrent".

You could use WINE to run uTorrent in Linux.

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

[Shadow]

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 15:55:52 +0200, Yrrah <Yrra...@acf.invalid>

wrote:

>"BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the popular
>client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision of the

>application will run in users' default browser, complete with a
>revamped interface and a significantly improved streaming experience.
>With around 150 million active users a month, uTorrent remains the
>leading torrent client, by far.(...)"
>Article:
><https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser-170421/>

I wonder how much he got for that ? Probably enough to retire
comfortably.
uTorrent v2.*, qbittorrent, transmission etc are all viable
alternatives, without the inevitable profiling.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 22/4/2017 11:27 PM, Shadow wrote:
> I wonder how much he got for that ? Probably enough to retire
> comfortably.

I have yet to see TV/Radio broadcast using this kind of p2p protocol.
But then, who wanna upload? :)

[John Corliss]

Shadow wrote:

> Yrrah wrote:
>>
>> "BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the popular
>> client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision of the
>> application will run in users' default browser, complete with a
>> revamped interface and a significantly improved streaming experience.
>> With around 150 million active users a month, uTorrent remains the
>> leading torrent client, by far.(...)"
>> Article:
>> <https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser-170421/>
>
> I wonder how much he got for that ? Probably enough to retire
> comfortably.
> uTorrent v2.*, qbittorrent, transmission etc are all viable
> alternatives, without the inevitable profiling.

Just continue using an older version.

--
John Corliss BS206. No ad, CD, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, pirated,
share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares for me please. I filter out
posts originating from Google Groups and recommend you do likewise. I
also block (can't see & won't reply to) posts from the nym-shifting
troll calling itself "»Q«".

[Thip]

On 4/22/2017 5:02 PM, John Corliss wrote:
> Shadow wrote:
>> Yrrah wrote:
>>>
>>> "BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the popular
>>> client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision of the
>>> application will run in users' default browser, complete with a
>>> revamped interface and a significantly improved streaming experience.
>>> With around 150 million active users a month, uTorrent remains the
>>> leading torrent client, by far.(...)"
>>> Article:
>>> <https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser-170421/>
>>
>> I wonder how much he got for that ? Probably enough to retire
>> comfortably.
>> uTorrent v2.*, qbittorrent, transmission etc are all viable
>> alternatives, without the inevitable profiling.
>
> Just continue using an older version.
>

I'm still using 2.2. Works fine.

[John Corliss]

3.2 here, but I'm sure 2.2 works fine like you say.

[Diesel]

John Corliss <r9j...@yahoo.com> news:odhl0c$ehp$1...@dont-email.me Sun,

23 Apr 2017 07:30:00 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

> Thip wrote:
>> On 4/22/2017 5:02 PM, John Corliss wrote:
>>> Shadow wrote:
>>>> Yrrah wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the
>>>>> popular client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision
>>>>> of the application will run in users' default browser,
>>>>> complete with a revamped interface and a significantly
>>>>> improved streaming experience. With around 150 million active
>>>>> users a month, uTorrent remains the leading torrent client, by
>>>>> far.(...)" Article:
>>>>> <https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser
>>>>> -170421/>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder how much he got for that ? Probably enough to
>>>> retire
>>>> comfortably.
>>>> uTorrent v2.*, qbittorrent, transmission etc are all
>>>> viable
>>>> alternatives, without the inevitable profiling.
>>>
>>> Just continue using an older version.
>>>
>>
>> I'm still using 2.2. Works fine.
>
> 3.2 here, but I'm sure 2.2 works fine like you say.
>

2.0.4 here, with patch for 'privacy'; ie: it doesn't respect the
setting. :) it's worked great for years. For seeding as well as
leeching.



--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

[s|b]

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 18:13:16 -0400, Thip wrote:

> I'm still using 2.2. Works fine.

Still on 猥orrent 2.0.4.22450.

--
s|b

[Shadow]

On Sun, 23 Apr 2017 10:24:35 -0000 (UTC), Diesel <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:

+1
;)

[David B.]

It will make it easier to catch you! ;-)

--
The only people who make a difference are the people who believe they can.

[JJ]

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 15:55:52 +0200, Yrrah wrote:
> "BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the popular
> client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision of the
> application will run in users' default browser, complete with a
> revamped interface and a significantly improved streaming experience.
> With around 150 million active users a month, uTorrent remains the
> leading torrent client, by far.(...)"
> Article:

> <https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser-170421/>
>
> Not the beginning of a new trend, I hope. I use qBittorrent (for
> Linux), which "aims to provide an open-source software alternative to

> 猥orrent".
> https://www.qbittorrent.org/
>
> Yrrah

I already don't like non web browser softwares which uses a web browser
engine as its GUI, or softwares which are infested with social crap.

So, no. Moving uTorrent to a browser addon or browser "app" would be worse,
because that'll only create more opportunities for phoning home, phoning
third parties, or something else unwanted.

However, there's a possibility of a bright side. Depending on how that
uTorrent broser addon or "app" would be implemented, I might actually see
some source code exposed.

That being said, uTorrent is by far, strictly proprietary. Its browser addon
or "app" might end up implemented like Tor Browser where most of the code
reside in a compiled binary library such as DLL. The difference between Tor
Browser is that, the source code for the DLL is not available to the public.

[JJ]

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 18:13:16 -0400, Thip wrote:
>

> I'm still using 2.2. Works fine.

I'm using v2.2.1. The last bearable version.

[burfordTjustice]

Not by you david "no balls" brooks (Devon)

[Flasherly]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 02:06:25 +0700, JJ <jj4p...@vfemail.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 15:55:52 +0200, Yrrah wrote:
>> "BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen has unveiled plans to move the popular
>> client uTorrent to the web browser. The next revision of the
>> application will run in users' default browser, complete with a
>> revamped interface and a significantly improved streaming experience.
>> With around 150 million active users a month, uTorrent remains the
>> leading torrent client, by far.(...)"
>> Article:
>> <https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-will-move-to-the-web-browser-170421/>
>>
>> Not the beginning of a new trend, I hope. I use qBittorrent (for
>> Linux), which "aims to provide an open-source software alternative to

>> µTorrent".

>> https://www.qbittorrent.org/
>>
>> Yrrah
>
>I already don't like non web browser softwares which uses a web browser
>engine as its GUI, or softwares which are infested with social crap.
>
>So, no. Moving uTorrent to a browser addon or browser "app" would be worse,
>because that'll only create more opportunities for phoning home, phoning
>third parties, or something else unwanted.
>
>However, there's a possibility of a bright side. Depending on how that
>uTorrent broser addon or "app" would be implemented, I might actually see
>some source code exposed.
>
>That being said, uTorrent is by far, strictly proprietary. Its browser addon
>or "app" might end up implemented like Tor Browser where most of the code
>reside in a compiled binary library such as DLL. The difference between Tor
>Browser is that, the source code for the DLL is not available to the public.

Serge Paquet released the original opensource, Swedish utorrent's
implementation of Bram Cohen's distribution source. An ongoing trend
of consequence, although approximately a seventh down from the topical
perspective of an accelerated heyday of quick opportunities once
placed in a technological timeframe.* There may yet be residuals in
Serge's work on SourceForge, although that most certainly would not
include collected pornographic material Cohen first distributed for an
incentive and lure to generate interest in his Python protocol. (All
nicely settled and since down pat, as utorrent is later acquired by
exclusive Silicon Valley interests, (sic) in compliance and as acceded
naturally to MPAA and DMCA bylaws.)

. . .

*In the United States, more than 200,000 people have been sued for
filesharing on BitTorrent since 2010. In 2011, 18.8% of North American
internet traffic was used by peer-to-peer networks ... Peer-to-peer
networks have been estimated to collectively account for approximately
43% to 70% of all Internet traffic (depending on location) as of
February 2009. In November 2004, BitTorrent was responsible for 25% of
all Internet traffic. As of February 2013, BitTorrent was responsible
for 3.35% of all worldwide bandwidth -- more than half of the 6% of
total bandwidth dedicated to file sharing. -wiki

[John Corliss]

Shadow wrote:
> Diesel wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:

Get whichever version you prefer:

http://www.oldversion.com/windows/utorrent

Shadow, is the patch available as a separate download or what?

[John Corliss]

Whoops. Sorry for asking Shadow about the patch. So is the patch
something you coded or what?

[Diesel]

John Corliss <r9j...@yahoo.com> news:UviLA.822094$0k4.7...@fx37.am4

Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:16:33 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

> Whoops. Sorry for asking Shadow about the patch. So is the patch
> something you coded or what?

Yes, but, I'm not the only one to have done it...and mine isn't
original work either. It's based off of someone elses work.
It just lets me join so called 'private' swarms. It relies on the
client 'respecting' the setting. Mine no longer does. Otherwise, it's
the same old utorrent.exe. Imo, it was very stupid to even bother doing
the privacy toggle since it relies on what you might call an 'honor'
system on the part of the client. Good enough to keep script kiddies
away, but, not good enough to keep people like myself and Shadow away.
I don't think it was actually designed to stop people like us, anyhow.

The patch is version specific, as it has to alter bytes in a very
specific place inside the executable. Mine expects that you haven't
fucked with your utorrent.exe in any way, and, it's rather dumb. In the
sense, if you have, or you're using the wrong version, it'll fuck your
exe up instead of patching it. Since I wrote it for in house use only,
I didn't concern myself with checking routines before applying.

[burfordTjustice]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:11:50 -0000 (UTC)
Diesel <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

> Yes, but, I'm not the only one to have done it...and mine isn't
> original work either. It's based off of someone elses work.

So no, then is the correct answer.

[Shadow]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 01:16:33 -0700, John Corliss <r9j...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

I coded it. I'm not sure if v3 has checksums, or if it checks
in multiple locations(I've never bothered to debug it since I found v3
too intrusive), so my patch might work or not. It works for all v2.x,
but is version specific. IOW, the hex values you have to patch might
vary.
The advantage is you can download very old torrents that were
only available from paid torrent sites that set the "private" flag.
These sites are no longer available, so their torrents no longer work.
It's annoying if you "have" to download that old version of
Linux that was a "must" 10 years ago.
;)
I can send you the recipe if you want to use a v2.x portable
version of utorrent.

[John Corliss]

Please do! Thanks!

[John Corliss]

Diesel wrote:

> John Corliss wrote:
>>
>> Whoops. Sorry for asking Shadow about the patch. So is the patch
>> something you coded or what?
>
> Yes, but, I'm not the only one to have done it...and mine isn't
> original work either. It's based off of someone elses work.
> It just lets me join so called 'private' swarms. It relies on the
> client 'respecting' the setting. Mine no longer does. Otherwise, it's
> the same old utorrent.exe. Imo, it was very stupid to even bother doing
> the privacy toggle since it relies on what you might call an 'honor'
> system on the part of the client. Good enough to keep script kiddies
> away, but, not good enough to keep people like myself and Shadow away.
> I don't think it was actually designed to stop people like us, anyhow.
>
> The patch is version specific, as it has to alter bytes in a very
> specific place inside the executable. Mine expects that you haven't
> fucked with your utorrent.exe in any way, and, it's rather dumb. In the
> sense, if you have, or you're using the wrong version, it'll fuck your
> exe up instead of patching it. Since I wrote it for in house use only,
> I didn't concern myself with checking routines before applying.

Oh well then, I might not need it. Shadow's going to email me a "recipe"
for it though.

[Diesel]

John Corliss <r9j...@yahoo.com>
news:fKrLA.1215238$Pm3.1...@fx42.am4 Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:46:16

GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

> Oh well then, I might not need it. Shadow's going to email me a
> "recipe" for it though.

My patch is the end result of Shadows recipe. I performed the patch,
and then compared the virgin utorrent.exe to the modded one. The
'patch' I wrote writes the difference to the virgin utorrent which
turns it into the modded one.

The patch I wrote as well as Shadows recipe will leave you with a
copy of utorrent that's several kilobytes larger than what you
started with. This is normal. Nothing shady is going on here. UPX
modified the original file the authors of utorrent used, and, they
may have used non default settings as well as did a bit of post
production work on the final exe for release to reduce it's filesize
further. Hence the difference in final size between the unpatched
copy and the resulting patched one.

I think you'll find the recipe is straight forward for people with a
coding background. Script kiddies (like pooh) may be able to follow
it too, without having to understand all of the details he provided.

Learning to use ollydbg will be the most difficult aspect to the
entire thing for you. It's not hard to use mind you, it's just not
what you're probably expecting to see. Welcome to our world, So glad
you could stop in for a visit. :)

[John Corliss]

Diesel wrote:

> John Corliss wrote:
>
>> Oh well then, I might not need it. Shadow's going to email me a
>> "recipe" for it though.
>
> My patch is the end result of Shadows recipe. I performed the patch,
> and then compared the virgin utorrent.exe to the modded one. The
> 'patch' I wrote writes the difference to the virgin utorrent which
> turns it into the modded one.
>
> The patch I wrote as well as Shadows recipe will leave you with a
> copy of utorrent that's several kilobytes larger than what you
> started with. This is normal. Nothing shady is going on here. UPX
> modified the original file the authors of utorrent used, and, they
> may have used non default settings as well as did a bit of post
> production work on the final exe for release to reduce it's filesize
> further. Hence the difference in final size between the unpatched
> copy and the resulting patched one.
>
> I think you'll find the recipe is straight forward for people with a
> coding background. Script kiddies (like pooh) may be able to follow
> it too, without having to understand all of the details he provided.
>
> Learning to use ollydbg will be the most difficult aspect to the
> entire thing for you. It's not hard to use mind you, it's just not
> what you're probably expecting to see. Welcome to our world, So glad
> you could stop in for a visit. :)

Well, I guess I'll have to pass on the recipe then. I'm not a programmer.

[Diesel]

John Corliss <r9j...@yahoo.com>
news:TwELA.1121701$w46.5...@fx39.am4 Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:19:28 GMT
in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

[snip]

> Well, I guess I'll have to pass on the recipe then. I'm not a
> programmer.

You may be selling yourself short...I'd recommend you atleast look at
it before making your decision.

[John Corliss]

Diesel wrote:

> John Corliss wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Well, I guess I'll have to pass on the recipe then. I'm not a
>> programmer.
>
> You may be selling yourself short...I'd recommend you atleast look at
> it before making your decision.

I looked at it just a while ago before I came back and you're right, I'm
pretty sure it's something I can do. I'll give it a try when I have time
in between killing rats.

[Diesel]

John Corliss <r9j...@yahoo.com> news:raPLA.458730$y83....@fx30.am4

Tue, 25 Apr 2017 21:26:28 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

> Diesel wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Well, I guess I'll have to pass on the recipe then. I'm not a
>>> programmer.
>>
>> You may be selling yourself short...I'd recommend you atleast
>> look at it before making your decision.
>
> I looked at it just a while ago before I came back and you're
> right, I'm pretty sure it's something I can do. I'll give it a try
> when I have time in between killing rats.
>

When you decompress your copy of utorrent, back up the decompressed
executable and practice with ollydebug using the backup.

[John Corliss]

Diesel wrote:
> John Corliss wrote:
>> Diesel wrote:
>>> John Corliss wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> Well, I guess I'll have to pass on the recipe then. I'm not a
>>>> programmer.
>>>
>>> You may be selling yourself short...I'd recommend you atleast
>>> look at it before making your decision.
>>
>> I looked at it just a while ago before I came back and you're
>> right, I'm pretty sure it's something I can do. I'll give it a try
>> when I have time in between killing rats.
>>
>
> When you decompress your copy of utorrent, back up the decompressed
> executable and practice with ollydebug using the backup.

Thanks, I'll do that. And I'll save your suggestion so I don't forget.