RE: server .mets - links ono Slyck

From: Ben Grodsky <>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:35:52 -0700

The default user is who MediaDefender targets, not an expert who delves into researching how-to pirating forums, such as With that said, many threads on refer to our eMule spoofing and decoying as an annoyance -- veritable testimonials of our effectiveness, but not quantified to be particularly meaningful to our clients. As the article says, "In the eMule client, there's already a list of servers in the server window." The article goes on to say, "The servers featured are not verified safe servers. Unsafe servers usually return purposely faulty results in searches or cause other difficulties with the eMule client." Sure there are ways to minimize and essentially avoid most of our protection techniques, given enough stubbornness and perseverance, but that isn't what we target.
We target general masses of people that use p2p networks. This is one of the reasons that it's important to come up with a testing methodology with our customers that we can reliably replicate in-house with our QA team. Amongst the data that we have access to is what typical p2p user behavior is, the problem we have with these user behavior data is we've never come up with any way to present it to our clients -- we can see it with database queries, but charts and graphs don't work well to express these notions and we end up resorting to anecdotal-sounding remarks. One common statement is "the average user clicks on the file with the most sources." This is absolutely true, but the % of users clicking on the file with the most sources is different from network to network and fluctuates a bit depending on how well the top-sourced file is named, or the file format (compare user searching for video but top result is audio, or vice versa).
Let me know if that makes sense.


From: Neil Saxby
Sent: Fri 15-Jun-07 05:28
To: qa
Subject: server .mets - links ono Slyck

Hi guys,


I got these 2 .met files today (links from this article on slyck: I guess you've seen them already, but I was wondering if anyone could let me know if we have any presence on these lists and if we do, how strong it is.


Many thanks,


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.16/849 - Release Date: 6/14/2007 12:44 PM
Received on Fri Sep 14 2007 - 10:56:04 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Sep 16 2007 - 22:19:48 BST