Content Filtering
How are we to know what files are prefered not to be shared without the possibility of connecting to a site that may log our address? (Well obviously it will log our address as is the way with the web ... point being this address is usually ignored. I doubt they will ignore it.)

Is there a list somewhere we can visit rather than have LW secretly connect somewhere we don't know to find out.

I doubt my shared files are on such a list but ... I'd like to find out.

So are we going postal yet. xxx going postal...


I also don't see any of the issues solved that I brought up here about LW 4.10.9 beta http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showth...626#post196626

Hi LOTR

I'm not sure how the filtering works, but I sure don't like the idea of a distributed network becoming dependent on central server(s).

Still, I WANT to know if a copyright holder objects to one of my shared files, and would like to see a flag for disputed files in the search results.

If this information can be openly shared on gnutella without killing the network, I'm in favour.

Right now, it's wait-and-see for me

I registered a file (my favourite sailing pic), and am trying to see how the system will work. PM me for the magnet to see how it shows at your end, if you want.

Centralized “secure results” = CENSORSHIP!!! This is not about security, this is about Limewire deciding what we share and what results we get. That’s is what happened to iMesh and it wasn’t good. what the hell??

Limewire is a great open source client on an open source network – do you really think that anyone will use it with trojans like this??

This is the end of Limewire.

Peerguardian is a good start

Er... the secure results are designed solely to help you. There's some features that LimeWire exposes that are kind of dangerous, such embedding a URL in a search result and sending the user to that URL when they click on it. That feature's very useful for sending old versions to an upgrade page when all other upgrade notifications aren't working, so we didn't want to remove it, but we wanted to make it hard-to-impossible for spammers/scammers to take advantage of people by sending them to sites that could compromise their computer. So LimeWire doesn't show results that have that embedded URL unless it's "secure".

As for the filtering, 4.11 has options for it.

The best way to help is by not introducing big-brother censorship or any other central controls!!!

Sure, you make it "hard-to-impossible for spammers/scammers...blah, blah, blah" - what you are doing is simple censorship. What happens if I want to send people to my site so that they can register to my fan club - do I have to ask for YOUR permission/authorization?

What is coming next - will Limewire charge me for that? What’s really going to happen is that LW or the RIAA or the government (see what they’re doing to google now) will decide what can be seen on the network. Next thing LW will start collecting our ip addresses for “our own protection”.

We have been there before - this is a slippery slope: we know where it starts and we have a pretty good idea where it will end.

PLEASE DO NOT put any CENTRAL controls/filtering - we are smart enough to protect ourselves. We are also smart enough to switch to a different application if you start censoring and controlling us.

Stief & I checked out the filter the other day. We see how it works. It's effective for the purpose. And who wants to end up on a marketing url (where they log you & then possibly spam/ddos you.)

Didn't notice any detrimental effect so far. Even searching for common & very popular videos & tunes. So it's a polite implementation. lol Unless it's my imagination, 4.11.0 seems to have some improved search abilities. I noticed this as soon as trying it & seems to remain the same. Perhaps it's a subtle improvement.

So the comments by others above don't mean much as it's obvious they haven't even tried it.

I'm still suffering the same issues as discussed earlier. I haven't as yet deleted my prefs or tried it in another account as I was busy on a mission so to speak on a personal quest of the grail. I will get around to it. As it's not a very happy bug on my system. Just annoying I guess. I'll report back after I've done this. (BTW there was improvement running in another virgin account whilst using 4.10.5 but I didn't seem to be suffering the issue I am now at that time. I had less shares & incompletes which made a difference. Increasing the shares did make a reasonable difference re: VM. But I'm aware lots of incompletes also causes Java issues.)

Or are posted by an actual spammer.

LotR - polite implementation is one that does not bring control. period.

Not only i tried 4.11, i even looked at the code and guess what: the private key signature file is not part of the installation BUT it is required in order to verify the content's signature. This is what i define as centralized control and i bet that Limewire plans to charge us to get access to it.

BTW, this is REALLY bad for them as it proves that they can selectively filter content on their network. The RIAA will be all over them in seconds and demand that they implement this for every non-DRM'd file.
Such central control and content censorship is EXACTLY what the RIAA is looking for - implementing it is the kiss of death to Limewire.



zab - i am not a spammer. I love this network and i love this client - just leave it open. Any type of big-brother censorship is BAD BAD BAD and will result in users leaving the network and the RIAA taking ownership of it.

@ p-2-p

d000d you are soooo lost maaaan... chill the frik out and understand the WHOLE situation. It seems as though you even misunderstood the URL launching block... man, all I see is optional censoring/blocking.. now whats wrong with that?

One thing I will say is that I applaud LimeWire for letting the user have the option of content filtering and for blocking those URL launches... Hats off to you!


/me lights up another joint... <red eyes>