So I use a VPN when torrenting as per usual but with Soulseek I wish to share my music with others and that requires me to open a port. I have no problem doing so I just do not pay for a VPN that can do this at the current price I am paying. Is it possible/what are the chances of me getting in trouble ISP wise from using soulseek with no VPN. With where I live I would get in trouble with no VPN and torrents for clarity.
I see posts from years ago saying no just wondering if things have changed.
Tailscale has the Funnel feature that doesn’t require an open port (well, it’s a UPnP port), and maintains an encrypted tunnel to your music server for anyone you decide to share it with.
Alternatively you could get as many of your friends to use Tailscale itself to minimize the need for the Funnel feature (so anyone you know get them using TS, for the general sharing let it happen via Funnel).
Definitely looking into tailscale thanks for this.
Edit: Did not solve original problem but was the solution to other things I have been doing. Unless I am mistaken I can not use the funnel feature to open ports the way that is needed.
Because you are doing something illegal. Your ISP might not care, but if someone complains, they HAVE to start the process. You’re not only protecting yourself, but your ISP from the music industry’s wrath.
It’s more about being visible to other users. If other users have your IP address, they can go to your ISP and complain about your IP address sharing copyrighted material. In certain jurisdictions they have to give out your info so that legal action can be taken against you.
If you use a VPN, they only know that somebody using this VPN is sharing copyrighted material. Since VPNs usually do not log who sends what, they can’t be made to give out users data, so you’re safe.
Wait then why does nicotine+ have a button when I right click on a peer, “users>Show IP Address,” which returns “IP address of user [REDACTED] is [REDACTED], port 40447 (CA/Canada)” (In case you’re wondering, I’m the one that redacted it. I’m looking at my most recent peer’s info).
Yeah idk why you spread misinformation like that. File up/downloads are done via a p2p connection (see a reverse-engineered documentation of the p2p connection process) and thus the IP addresses are obviously known. Maybe not directly visible in the SoulseekQt client itself, but definitely through third party network connection monitors like Wireshark. It’s pretty trivial for anyone using Soulseek to get IPs of the people they download from.
I would recommend using a VPN. Since it is p2p, theres a non zero chance that you might get in trouble. Some ISPs don’t care and will only act if DMCAed.
That’s more of a cautionary tale about running out-of-date software. A vpn wouldn’t have affected it at all, and it’s not especially relevant to OP’s question. It also doesn’t have anything to do with sharing content, not really relevant to your initial comment either.
Becoming a sharer means more responsibilities, like keeping things up to date constantly. Get stuck in the hospital? Guess what? That new patch you automatically downloaded and applied? Turns out it opened up a new avenue and your IP address got hit by a random scan from some server hosting in Germany and was exploited to do xyz.
I’m all for self hosting, but not without serious warnings to new sysadmins. It’s just not for everyone, for one reason or another.
I think trying to deny or downplay that is negligent and harmful to what Lemmy and other self-hosting enthusiasts would want for their community/friends.
Then you’re mistaken. I was commenting on the link you shared, which was the result of a version of PMS that was 2.5 years out of date and has absolutely nothing to do with sharing.
Though, after reading the rest of your vague, rambling nonsense, I suspect you’re either some sort of bot or a moron. Not going to bother engaging with you further.
Considering your rude name calling and the fact that you totally skirted the crux of the issue by downplaying and muddying my argument, I too think we can end this one sided conversation.
Good luck with your chronic inability to conduct yourself in any manner short of rude, disrespectful, and condensing towards others of your own species.
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures, it’s a system for cataloging security issues. For instance, the vulnerability in Plex that caused the leak in the link above was CVE-2020-5741.
When I called the version of Plex out-of-date, it’s because it had an unpatched security vulnerability. Because you called Soulseek out of date, I’m asking you which vulnerability makes you say that.
Haven’t used soulseek in about a decade, so things might have changed, but back then my workaround was this: I search for what I want, find a person who’s sharing it, and if their library was good I’d allow them to see my library before downloading from them.
So basically I’d share with folks I downloaded from, but not the general public. Not foolproof, but drastically reduced chance that somebody with a well-curated library was there just to prosecute.
True. Now I pay for VPN with port forwarding, so if I were to use soulseek again I’d just share. Back then I was in the same boat as OP and couldn’t afford a VPN.
I’ve been using slsk for about 20 years, and I’ve never gotten a warning about it. If I start torrenting, I’ll get a warning from my ISP tomorrow. I think that it’s considered too obscure to be worth monitoring.
Like I said, I’ve never ran into this, and I’ve been using it for about 20 years. Politics never comes up, because I’m almost never chatting with other users.
This would possibly be applicable if Soulseek users were having action taken against them, but has that ever happened? Action taken against individual pirates has pretty focused on bittorrent users. I know Soulseek itself has been sued, but have any users?
I wouldn’t set the platform as scope but instead peer to peer technology. Looking at that scale there are quite some people being sued. Also being sued in that regard is a case of over protection because you really don’t want to be sued, not even once.
I would set the platform as scope but instead peer to peer technology.
The post has a pretty specific question, and including actions taken against users outside that scope is closer to fearmongering than answering the question at hand. Lumping all p2p usage together isn’t useful as long as they’re specifically targeting BT sharers; they’re not going to accidentally gather IPs of Soulseek users with their torrent honeypots.
Bro, don’t crap on SoulSeek. Music collectors all over the world use it. You can find some rare gems on there you won’t find in Spotify, Tidal, YouTube or any other music platform.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
“Need” no, but I would. I don’t like exposing my real IP to peers, idk them, and my ISP doesn’t need to know a GODDAMN thing.
Tailscale has the Funnel feature that doesn’t require an open port (well, it’s a UPnP port), and maintains an encrypted tunnel to your music server for anyone you decide to share it with.
Alternatively you could get as many of your friends to use Tailscale itself to minimize the need for the Funnel feature (so anyone you know get them using TS, for the general sharing let it happen via Funnel).
Tailscale is free, and easy to setup.
This is awesome, do you happen to know a tutorial for this? I have tried google but only some youtube videos that are worst than nothing
Definitely looking into tailscale thanks for this.
Edit: Did not solve original problem but was the solution to other things I have been doing. Unless I am mistaken I can not use the funnel feature to open ports the way that is needed.
As far as I know you don’t need a VPN to use Soulseek, but it’s obviously always recommended to use one over not using one.
Why? Why does it matter whether your traffic is visible to your ISP or a VPN company?
Because you are doing something illegal. Your ISP might not care, but if someone complains, they HAVE to start the process. You’re not only protecting yourself, but your ISP from the music industry’s wrath.
It’s more about being visible to other users. If other users have your IP address, they can go to your ISP and complain about your IP address sharing copyrighted material. In certain jurisdictions they have to give out your info so that legal action can be taken against you.
If you use a VPN, they only know that somebody using this VPN is sharing copyrighted material. Since VPNs usually do not log who sends what, they can’t be made to give out users data, so you’re safe.
Other users do not have your IP address. It is not like torrenting.
Wait then why does nicotine+ have a button when I right click on a peer, “users>Show IP Address,” which returns “IP address of user [REDACTED] is [REDACTED], port 40447 (CA/Canada)” (In case you’re wondering, I’m the one that redacted it. I’m looking at my most recent peer’s info).
Thanks. It isn’t an option in the official SoulSeek client so I never knew.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Soulseek/comments/dmofyp/finding_an_ip_for_iligal_use_or_shared_content/
Oh yeah nic+ is way better. I didn’t know the official didn’t let you.
Yeah idk why you spread misinformation like that. File up/downloads are done via a p2p connection (see a reverse-engineered documentation of the p2p connection process) and thus the IP addresses are obviously known. Maybe not directly visible in the SoulseekQt client itself, but definitely through third party network connection monitors like Wireshark. It’s pretty trivial for anyone using Soulseek to get IPs of the people they download from.
You do know why. I said.
deleted by creator
removed by mod
I would recommend using a VPN. Since it is p2p, theres a non zero chance that you might get in trouble. Some ISPs don’t care and will only act if DMCAed.
Anytime you switch from consumer to sharer, you run some heavier risks.
Plex should be a cautionary tale
Please explain the plex comment?
Some sauce for the hungry!
https://www.securityweek.com/cisa-warns-of-plex-vulnerability-linked-to-lastpass-hack/amp/
That’s more of a cautionary tale about running out-of-date software. A vpn wouldn’t have affected it at all, and it’s not especially relevant to OP’s question. It also doesn’t have anything to do with sharing content, not really relevant to your initial comment either.
While I appreciate your view, I have to disagree.
Becoming a sharer means more responsibilities, like keeping things up to date constantly. Get stuck in the hospital? Guess what? That new patch you automatically downloaded and applied? Turns out it opened up a new avenue and your IP address got hit by a random scan from some server hosting in Germany and was exploited to do xyz.
I’m all for self hosting, but not without serious warnings to new sysadmins. It’s just not for everyone, for one reason or another.
I think trying to deny or downplay that is negligent and harmful to what Lemmy and other self-hosting enthusiasts would want for their community/friends.
Then you’re mistaken. I was commenting on the link you shared, which was the result of a version of PMS that was 2.5 years out of date and has absolutely nothing to do with sharing.
Though, after reading the rest of your vague, rambling nonsense, I suspect you’re either some sort of bot or a moron. Not going to bother engaging with you further.
Considering your rude name calling and the fact that you totally skirted the crux of the issue by downplaying and muddying my argument, I too think we can end this one sided conversation.
Good luck with your chronic inability to conduct yourself in any manner short of rude, disrespectful, and condensing towards others of your own species.
Slsk is out of date
Your face is out of date!
Got a link to the CVE?
what’s CVE?
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures, it’s a system for cataloging security issues. For instance, the vulnerability in Plex that caused the leak in the link above was CVE-2020-5741.
When I called the version of Plex out-of-date, it’s because it had an unpatched security vulnerability. Because you called Soulseek out of date, I’m asking you which vulnerability makes you say that.
Soulseek is Peer To Peer like a torrent. You will likely run into legal trouble, if that program is monitored more heavily.
Haven’t used soulseek in about a decade, so things might have changed, but back then my workaround was this: I search for what I want, find a person who’s sharing it, and if their library was good I’d allow them to see my library before downloading from them.
So basically I’d share with folks I downloaded from, but not the general public. Not foolproof, but drastically reduced chance that somebody with a well-curated library was there just to prosecute.
If all users do the same soulseek would be dead.
True. Now I pay for VPN with port forwarding, so if I were to use soulseek again I’d just share. Back then I was in the same boat as OP and couldn’t afford a VPN.
Wouldn’t a well curated library be the ultimate honeypot?
Could somebody complain to your ISP? Yes.
Is this likely to happen? No.
I’ve been using slsk for about 20 years, and I’ve never gotten a warning about it. If I start torrenting, I’ll get a warning from my ISP tomorrow. I think that it’s considered too obscure to be worth monitoring.
What is your secret to stand the literal neonazis there?
I’m not aware of any neo-Nazis (literal or otherwise). I don’t spend any time in the chat rooms, though.
like half of the network is 4channers nazis. Sometimes you might stumble in neonazi material depending on the search terms.
Like I said, I’ve never ran into this, and I’ve been using it for about 20 years. Politics never comes up, because I’m almost never chatting with other users.
Survivorship bias
This would possibly be applicable if Soulseek users were having action taken against them, but has that ever happened? Action taken against individual pirates has pretty focused on bittorrent users. I know Soulseek itself has been sued, but have any users?
I wouldn’t set the platform as scope but instead peer to peer technology. Looking at that scale there are quite some people being sued. Also being sued in that regard is a case of over protection because you really don’t want to be sued, not even once.
The post has a pretty specific question, and including actions taken against users outside that scope is closer to fearmongering than answering the question at hand. Lumping all p2p usage together isn’t useful as long as they’re specifically targeting BT sharers; they’re not going to accidentally gather IPs of Soulseek users with their torrent honeypots.
You can’t guarantee that there won’t be a lawyer logging in, writing down your IP
Survivorship bias is about surviving/passing a filter or selection process that’s actually happened, not one that could theoretically happen one day.
It happened, that P2P users have been sued because lawyers were getting into the share and wrote down the IPs of the other user.
using it in Germany without VPN since ages and never got a letter from anyone :)
jeez, soul seek? how about limewire or napster or telegram lol
Bro, don’t crap on SoulSeek. Music collectors all over the world use it. You can find some rare gems on there you won’t find in Spotify, Tidal, YouTube or any other music platform.
And comparing it to limewire is kind of unfair.
Who is crapping on anything? I just haven’t heard of SoulSeek since the days of Limewire. longer even
Honestly I was sleeping on soulseek for a while it is a great source of music.