Editor’s Note: We often get asked by college administrators how the NetEqualizer can block p2p with our behavior-based rules. Since the NetEqualizer is containment based, it is effective in stopping approximately 80 to 90 percent of all p2p (see comparison with layer 7 shapers). Yet, questions and fears still remain about RIAA requests. Since the NetEqualizer is not a complete block, not that anything is, customers wonder how they can be safe from those intimidating lawyers.
In short, here’s the answer. The RIAA finds copyright violators by downloading files from your network. Since these downloads must be initiated from the outside, you simply need to block all outside initiated requests for data. Obviously you would still allow requests to your Web servers and other legitimate well known content servers on your network. Understanding this, administrators can configure their routers to work in conjunction with their NetEqualizers to largely curb RIAA requests.
Below, NetEqualizer user Ted Fines, the network administrator at Macalester College, shares his methods for preventing RIAA requests on his university network.
A few years ago, we implemented a rule on our firewall to improve our overall security. However, it has also had the added effect of stopping RIAA notices almost entirely.
The rule simply blocks all inbound connections to all ports on all residence hall computers. Here are some sample config lines from our firewall (aCisco PIX) that show how the rule works:
name 111.112.113.0 Kirk description Kirk Res Hall
object-group network Res_Halls
description All Residence Halls
network-object Kirk 255.255.255.0
network-object Bigelow 255.255.255.0
network-object Wallace 255.255.255.0
access-list 101 extended deny ip any object-group Res_Halls
Even though it may appear this rule would interfere with normal user Web browsing, etc., this rule actually has no effect at all on what systems the student computers in our residence halls may access. This is because the firewall tracks what computer initiates the connection.
For instance, when a student tries to access “http://www.cnn.com”, they are initiating the connection to CNN’s server. So when CNN’s server replies and send back news content, etc., the firewall knows that the student computer requested it and the incoming connection is allowed.
However, if a student is running a server, such as a Web server or a file sharing server, outside computers are not able to connect to it. The firewall knows that the outside computer is trying to initiate a connection, so it is blocked.
Our student body makes great use of our resources and we have a very open and unrestricted campus life, so I was pleasantly surprised that making this change did not ruffle any feathers. We do make exceptions when students request that a port be unblocked for a particular need. I have found that the ones who are savvy enough to know that they need a particular port opened are not typically the ones we have to be worried about, so we’re usually happy to accommodate them.
–Ted Fines, Macalester College, St. Paul, MN
Editor’s Note cont’d: This recent tip was given on the ResNet mailing list by Sidney Eaton of Ferris State University…
If you want to minimize your notices, just block these address ranges on your firewalls (in and out):
64.34.160.0/20
64.124.145.0/25
These are MediaSentry IP addresses (the company scanning your network to determine if your users are sharing copyprotected materials). They are not the only company hired by the RIAA and MPAA but they are the largest one. So you may still get some but hopefully not as many.
Sidney Eaton, Ferris State University, Big Rapids, MI
Like this:
Like Loading...
NetEqualizer News Blog 
Four Reasons Why Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Is Declining in 2009
February 3, 2009 — netequalizerBy Art Reisman
CTO of APconnections, makers of the plug-and-play bandwidth control and traffic shaping appliance NetEqualizer
I recently returned from a regional NetEqualizer tech seminar with attendees from Western Michigan University, Eastern Michigan University and a few regional ISPs. While having a live look at Eastern Michigan’s p2p footprint, I remarked that it was way down from what we had been seeing in 2007 and 2008. The consensus from everybody in the room was that p2p usage is waning. Obviously this is not a wide data base to draw a conclusion from, but we have seen the same trend at many of our customer installs (3 or 4 a week), so I don’t think it is a fluke. It is kind of ironic, with all the controversy around Net Neutrality and Bit-torrent blocking, that the problem seems to be taking care of itself.
So, what are the reasons behind the decline? In our opinion, there are several reasons:
1) Legal Itunes and other Mp3 downloads are the norm now. They are reasonably priced and well marketed. These downloads still take up bandwidth on the network, but do not clog access points with connections like torrents do.
2) Most music aficionados are well stocked with the classics (bootleg or not) by now and are only grabbing new tracks legally as they come out. The days of downloading an entire collection of music at once seem to be over. Fans have their foundation of digital music and are simply adding to it rather than building it up from nothing as they were several years ago.
3) The RIAA enforcement got its message out there. This, coupled with reason #1 above, pushed users to go legal.
4) Legal, free and unlimited. YouTube videos are more fun than slow music downloads and they’re free and legal. Plus, with the popularity of YouTube, more and more television networks have caught on and are putting their programs online.
Despite the decrease in p2p file sharing, ISPs are still experiencing more pressure on their networks than ever from Internet congestion. YouTube and NetFlix are more than capable of filling in the void left by waning Bit-torrents. So, don’t expect the controversy over traffic shaping and the use of bandwidth controllers to go away just yet.
Share this:
Like this: