Private torrent trackers have all the reasons to remain private, and I don’t blame them for that and I am glad private trackers exists. But the torrent files themselves have a setting that says “this torrent is private”, which makes the BitTorrent client to not distribute them via DHT, which makes magnetic links not work with them, so they are restricted to people who can obtain the torrent file from the private tracker.

What if clients had an option (on by default) to distribute the torrent via DHT and perform PEX, while still taking care to: a) not place the private tracker in the magnetic link the user might generate, and b) separate the upload/download statistics for the peers returned by the private tracker, so the ratio statistics in the private tracker are not skewed?

This way, private torrents could “escape” into the wild, still maintaining the privacy and social/closed community effects of the private tracker. Someone could download something for a friend or for a random person who asks for some content in a forum, send them the magnetic link, and don’t have the private tracker activities or anonymity affected in any way.

What do you think of this idea? How do you think it would be received by private trackers and BitTorrent client developers? What are the drawbacks you can think of?

  • ovovo@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Yes, it would. But do people rely on the privacy of the tracker to hide their IPs? I mean, even private trackers are somewhat big, and is not hard to have copyright lawyers infiltrated in them.

    • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Well, given how torrents work, yes, because you have to.

      When you’re downloading, you know the IP of everyone you’re downloading from, and they know yours because that’s how the internet works.

      If an anti-piracy corpo hops on the swarm, they’ll be able to see the IPs from all the peers as well.

      So, TLDR: yeah, public anything is stupid when simply knowing the swarm exists and being able to connect to it is sufficient to provide enough documentation for everyone involved to get screwed.

      • ovovo@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        I thought that it was so it could maintain a lower profile, thus attract less unwanted attention, and maintain the health of the torrents with the minimum ratio rules.

        But I am not dismissing this issue, I think it is important.

        • Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 minute ago

          What does “maintain a lower profile” mean specifically? I think the point of a private tracker is that you don’t need to enable DHT, which effectively broadcasts to the internet that your IP address is trying to download content identified by a specific hash.

    • ovovo@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      But if this is a concern, the swarm itself could be split into internal/external, and no PEX would be allowed to happen for peers that are received exclusively from the tracker. This way, peers who have the setting enable would act as bridge between the two swarms, and only their IP would be visible.