Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54565 readers

504 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

What site should I trust? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Even the site that considered safe in the megathread, there's report of malware and trojan and I don't know what site to use

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

VPN providers don't protect you from malware.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

I was trying to give general advice, since it didn't sound like they had a trusted private tracker already it's a good idea to have a VPN to mask your IP. I agree, it probably won't help against malware.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Most come with DNS blocklists now that can prevent you from accessing it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

DNS blacklists also don't protect you from most malware.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's part of defense in depth. No single piece will protect you from everything, so you you use multiple layers of protection.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I can't call DNS blacklists part of defense in depth. DNS blacklists are a poor man's version of existing and pre-installed anti-malware software.

DNS blacklists block only older known malware, similar to existing anti-malware, but less effective.
DNS blacklists block hijacked, but legit websites that host malware, contrary to existing anti-malware.
DNS blacklists? What is that? I use DoH, get fucked. Contrary to existing anti-malware.

They're completely bypassable, they boast a high false positive rate due to how threat actors host malware, and they don't even block newer malware. Just use Windows Defender. It ain't perfect, but it's leagues better than any DNS blacklist.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Blocking older known malware still blocks them, so that's good (and saves bandwidth because the connection never happens, so this is really good).
If the site is hijacked, it needs blocked till it's unhijacked. So this is good as well.
This is not really a point?

Number one above, stopping the connection before it happens, is really the best benefit, in my opinion. And if they boast a high false positive, you need better lists. You keep saying "they don't block this or block that." They are (nothing is) a one stop shop. Simply because they don't block what you're cherry picking does not make them bad. Use multiple layers. You say "don't use a blocklist, use MS Defender instead." Why not use both the blocklist, MS Defender, and even more stuff? Multiple layers. Defense in depth.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

Because Defender already covers what DNS blacklists block and more with less false positives and a proper way to manage exceptions for non-technical people. Older malware is a solved problem for Defender since it's literally pre-installed everywhere. VPN providers don't have a way to manage DNS blacklist exceptions, so have fun disabling your VPN to do any research. You also don't get to choose the blacklists your VPN provider uses. Saying 3. is not a point is like saying malware that's always able to bypass your anti-malware solution is irrelevant.