16
JUN It has come to our attention that the domain adf.ly has been blocked in India, by the Department of Telecom (DoT). We are working on resolving this.
Although it is working for me, others are unable to open it. Why am I able to open it? "MTNL". They don't know how to.
Adf.ly Blocked By Department of Telecom(CHNN) India
ADF.LY Blocked by Department Of Telecom(CHNN) India | The Hray
I don't get it though. What's the point of doing this?! songs.pk was banned because it supported piracy, same with some file sharing websites but why adfly?
May be because generally adf.ly is used by people providing downloads etc and most the downloads are songs and movie links and files.. so Govt. saw adf.ly as source ..
May be because generally adf.ly is used by people providing downloads etc and most the downloads are songs and movie links and files.. so Govt. saw adf.ly as source ..
adf.ly is used by blackhat guys to install java drive-by shits and other type of viruses.
for $5 you get 10k visits to your site/trojans. and success rate of getting infected via this is around 90%
so for $5 you will get around 8k infected pc which will be used for dDos attacks or any other activities.
songs.pk had trojan i checked it by my self. could be wrong but i never downloaded or visited songs.pk after that.
doesnt mean iwas downloading before but you get the point lol.
what do you think about others apart from Mr. Kapil sibal? do they have the said "qualification" for their "job". Well i think you don't require an M tech in IT to Head the ministry of IT you are there to administer and manage the entire dept and not write codes. You can always get people with enough knowledge in such area as your assistants. To manage the IT dept or any dept (except finance and Law) the only requirement i can think of is administrative skills, and for that Mr. Kapil Sibal is More than good enough and your notion of qualification for that job, am sorry to say, is wrong.
We as Indians Have a tendency to accuse politicians for every good and bad cause.At Present we have loyalty to the family but are apathetic to the community where we live. We don't really acknowledge the accomplishments of other Indians. We respect intellectual endeavor but not dignity of labor. We want them to respect us than his commitment. Higher Indians rise, less he is getting accountable for his actions.
Why are we like this? Centuries of Foreign invasion and deprivation. It's incompatible for a citizen desiring to be like what we are before the Conquest began. Before the open Christian conversion, Islamic terrorism which is an off shoot of jihad which came out as a challenge against crusade thus foreign. We need to build up concept of national identity from a correct perception of our history and our cultural tradition embodied in Sanatana Dharma, which all Indians utter without knowing what that is!
ad.fly or songs.pk don't infect by themselves but rather through 3rd party popups/ads which are very easy to block using a combination of noscript(default whitelist mode) & adblockplus addons in firefox.simply allow only ad.fly in noscript & you are good to go.i have used many such sites & never got infected in all these years.this is also why i never use any other browser for surfing such sites simply because there is no noscript addon for other browsers(imitations don't count as they don't provide full functionality & chrome/noscript official devs have already stated that there will be no noscript addon for chrome because of unwillingness of google to implement full noscript support because it hurts their advertising business).
what do you think about others apart from Mr. Kapil sibal? do they have the said "qualification" for their "job". Well i think you don't require an M tech in IT to Head the ministry of IT you are there to administer and manage the entire dept and not write codes. You can always get people with enough knowledge in such area as your assistants. To manage the IT dept or any dept (except finance and Law) the only requirement i can think of is administrative skills, and for that Mr. Kapil Sibal is More than good enough and your notion of qualification for that job, am sorry to say, is wrong.
We as Indians Have a tendency to accuse politicians for every good and bad cause.At Present we have loyalty to the family but are apathetic to the community where we live. We don't really acknowledge the accomplishments of other Indians. We respect intellectual endeavor but not dignity of labor. We want them to respect us than his commitment. Higher Indians rise, less he is getting accountable for his actions.
Why are we like this? Centuries of Foreign invasion and deprivation. It's incompatible for a citizen desiring to be like what we are before the Conquest began. Before the open Christian conversion, Islamic terrorism which is an off shoot of jihad which came out as a challenge against crusade thus foreign. We need to build up concept of national identity from a correct perception of our history and our cultural tradition embodied in Sanatana Dharma, which all Indians utter without knowing what that is!
I do not think you need an MTech to head the IT ministry either. I think a degree in the field of electronics, communication, media, computer science etc. from a quality institution is plenty.
You don't necessarily have to be an engineer. To manage the IT department you need to understand IT (among other requirements) to qualify.
I do accuse that scumbag. Why else is Article 66A in force?
That idiot does not believe in fair debates (neither do most other politicians). He thinks of forcing his views for whatever discussion is there with the opposition.
And if you think I'm saying other politicians are qualified for their posts, then you're gravely mistaken. Just because I singled out Kapil Sibal here (because only that is relevant to this topic), doesn't mean the other politicians are OK.
I do not think you need an MTech to head the IT ministry either. I think a degree in the field of electronics, communication, media, computer science etc. from a quality institution is plenty.
You don't necessarily have to be an engineer. To manage the IT department you need to understand IT (among other requirements) to qualify.
I do accuse that scumbag. Why else is Article 66A in force?
That idiot does not believe in fair debates (neither do most other politicians). He thinks of forcing his views for whatever discussion is there with the opposit.
First of all its not article but section. Section 66A is there for a purpose. Its to safeguard one's privacy, right to live with dignity and also to prevent mental harassment.I too admit that its a section that can easily be misused by authorities but you can't say that every police officer is going to misuse it.Even if they do so there are courts that you can approach for a just remedy. Lets think about that why the law makers were forced to bring such an amendment, many started to take unlawful advantage of Facebook and like sites, you may not understand the issues it creates with teenagers, young men and woman, if you wish just ask any clinical psychologist/ counselor, they can make you understand what is the importance of section 66A.
First of all its not article but section. Section 66A is there for a purpose. Its to safeguard one's privacy, right live with dignity and also prevent mental harassment.I too admit that its a section that can easily be misused by authorities but you can't say that every police officer is going to misuse it.Even if they do so there are courts that you can approach for a just remedy. Lets think about that why the law makers were forced to bring such an amendment, many started to take unlawful advantage of Facebook and like sites, you may not understand the issues it creates with teenagers, young men and woman, if you wish just ask any clinical psychologist/ counselor, they can make you understand what is the importance of section 66A.
Erm no. If the intent was indeed what you said it was, why the hell is the section so vaguely worded?
Also, in most free countries, people have the right to express their opinion. Section 66A takes away that right if it is critical of something or someone.
We already have laws against libel, so they can be used. We do not need Section 66A and its draconian implementation for people's dignity to remain intact.
This act basically gives you the right to sue anyone if you don't like what they say. That goes against our Fundamental Rights, as stated in the constitution.
People have the Fundamental Rights of Freedoms of Thought and Expression. What we do not have is the right to libel. What Section 66A does is go against our fundamental rights by classifying our thoughts and expressions as libel. It does not define what constitutes as grossly menacing communication.
they pay $5 for 10000 page visits.There are better sites than adf.ly that pay $5 for 1000 visits.what about these sites?
Blocking adf.ly alone wont serve any purpose.
Erm no. If the intent was indeed what you said it was, why the hell is the section so vaguely worded?
Also, in most free countries, people have the right to express their opinion. Section 66A takes away that right if it is critical of something or someone.
We already have laws against libel, so they can be used. We do not need Section 66A and its draconian implementation for people's dignity to remain intact.
This act basically gives you the right to sue anyone if you don't like what they say. That goes against our Fundamental Rights, as stated in the constitution.
People have the Fundamental Rights of Freedoms of Thought and Expression. What we do not have is the right to libel. What Section 66A does is go against our fundamental rights by classifying our thoughts and expressions as libel. It does not define what constitutes as grossly menacing communication.
i said "I too admit that its a section that can easily be misused by authorities". I have/had no intention to justify IT minister wrt Section 66A or 66A(a). As a lawyer I know the consequences of such a provision and i have defended a case Under 66A(a) of the said Act. In the present form it is ambiguous and i doubt its constitutionality. Lets all hope SC is going to make it unconstitutional in future. I think even the GOI is thinking like that since they have issued Advisory on Implementation of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act 2000 to the Chief Secretaries and the Director General of Police of all States/UTs. The advisory asks State governments not to allow the police to make arrests under Section 66A of the IT Act without prior approval from an officer not below the rank of Inspector General of Police in the metropolitan cities or Deputy Commissioner of Police or Superintendent of Police at the district level. Actually section 66 A is taken from Section 127 of the U.K. Communications Act, 2003 ( But in England House of Lords held that Parliament could not have intended to criminalise statements that one person may reasonably find to be polite and acceptable and another may decide to be ‘grossly offensive... we also expect the same from SC).
In the U.K., Section 127(1)(a) makes the sending of ‘matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character’ an offence. The drafters of the 2009 amendments to the IT Act in India presumably omitted the words ‘indecent, obscene’ as Section 67 of the IT Act makes the publishing or transmittal of obscene material in electrical form an offence. The drafters should have also defined the word “grossly offensive” but they chose not to and this is the main issue with the Section.
in Director of Public Prosecutions v. Collins, arising out of racist references in messages left by a constituent on the answering machine of a British MP, the House of Lords laid down a seminal test for determining whether a message is ‘grossly offensive.’ It agreed with the formulation by the Queen's Bench Divisional Court that, in determining whether a message is ‘grossly offensive’ the “Justices must apply the standards of an open and just multi-racial society, and that the words must be judged taking account of their context and all relevant circumstances.” The House of Lords added that “there can be no yardstick of gross offensiveness otherwise than by the application of reasonably enlightened, but not perfectionist, contemporary standards to the particular message sent in its particular context.” Most importantly, the House of Lords held that whether a message was grossly offensive did not depend merely on the degree of offence taken by the complainant but on whether it violates the basic standards of an open and just multi-racial society. This is considered a ‘reading down’ by the House of Lords of Section 127(1) of the U.K. Communications Act 2003, a hugely controversial legislation in the U.K. for its chilling effect on speech
I don't think even for a second that Mr. Kapil Sibal had drafted this section, I don't know who had done it but i seriously doubt he had drafted this after 2/3 shots of vodka martini.But IT/Law minister could have cured the defect, re drafted it, its crime to humanity not to do it. But let me tell you i personally feel that there is a requirement of a provision "like" Section 66 A and it should contain proper wordings with clear definitions and proviso adding safeguards like a prior approval from a judicial Magistrate/ District judge before taking cognizance under the section.
NB: @Extreme Gamer : Beware you can now be prosecuted U/S 66A for your usage
i said "I too admit that its a section that can easily be misused by authorities". I have/had no intention to justify IT minister wrt Section 66A or 66A(a). As a lawyer I know the consequences of such a provision and i have defended a case Under 66A(a) of the said Act. In the present form it is ambiguous and i doubt its constitutionality. Lets all hope SC is going to make it unconstitutional in future. I think even the GOI is thinking like that since they have issued Advisory on Implementation of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act 2000 to the Chief Secretaries and the Director General of Police of all States/UTs. The advisory asks State governments not to allow the police to make arrests under Section 66A of the IT Act without prior approval from an officer not below the rank of Inspector General of Police in the metropolitan cities or Deputy Commissioner of Police or Superintendent of Police at the district level. Actually section 66 A is taken from Section 127 of the U.K. Communications Act, 2003 ( But in England House of Lords held that Parliament could not have intended to criminalise statements that one person may reasonably find to be polite and acceptable and another may decide to be ‘grossly offensive... we also expect the same from SC).
In the U.K., Section 127(1)(a) makes the sending of ‘matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character’ an offence. The drafters of the 2009 amendments to the IT Act in India presumably omitted the words ‘indecent, obscene’ as Section 67 of the IT Act makes the publishing or transmittal of obscene material in electrical form an offence. The drafters should have also defined the word “grossly offensive” but they chose not to and this is the main issue with the Section.
I don't think even for a second that Mr. Kapil Sibal had drafted this section, I don't know who had done it but i seriously doubt he had drafted this after 2/3 shots of vodka martini.But IT/Law minister could have cured the defect, re drafted it, its crime to humanity not to do it. But let me tell you i personally feel that there is a requirement of a provision "like" Section 66 A and it should contain proper wordings with clear definitions and proviso adding safeguards like a prior approval from a judicial Magistrate/ District judge before taking cognizance under the section.
NB: @Extreme Gamer : Beware you can now be prosecuted U/S 66A for your usage against kapil sibal
Let him prosecute me. As if the Digit admins would disclose my identity. If they did, Team Digit would lose my money for their magazines Or are you going to get him informed through any of you colleagues/ acquaintances? lol jk
I'm not against a section like 66A, but like I said, the wording is vague (and you agree). And we already have laws protecting individuals against libel and defamatory comments, so section 66A, as it stands now, is not only redundant, but also a means of misuse of authority. The act was passed without discussion in parliament, so it stands to reason that malicious intent was present under a veil of genuine concern, given how the errors were not corrected.
And like you said, it is criminal of Kapil Sibal to have not cured the defects before accepting the draft, given how senior a lawyer he is. So you're only proving my point that he's not qualified for the IT ministry- if he had any understanding of what he was passing, he would not have let it pass in the manner that it did. Someone with an understanding of IT would be at least vaguely familiar with how people communicate via the internet.
I'm not against Section 66A in principle, because it protects people's sentiments. I'm against it with the way it has been worded. All they needed to do was amend existing laws against defamation, harassment, libel etc to include electronic transmissions. At least there the laws are mostly well-defined and clear.
Directives that make cops require permission from IG,s SPs or DCPs means nought, because these people can easily be coerced by political pressure from the top echelons. It is the law that needs to be fixed first.
Although I must say that anarchy is the best form of freedom
I tested a few sites on that list and they opened on my BSNL connection. Some ISPs are blocking some sites and others are blocking different sites. WTF?
I urge everyone with unlimited internet connections to please run I2P on their computers and share as much bandwidth as they can.
I tested a few sites on that list and they opened on my BSNL connection. Some ISPs are blocking some sites and others are blocking different sites. WTF?
I think the Government is acting stupidly in some cases.....If we need to use it then we'll find a get through at any cost....Why don't they understand this simple thing?? Any idea??
I think the Government is acting stupidly in some cases.....If we need to use it then we'll find a get through at any cost....Why don't they understand this simple thing?? Any idea??
Check out their site. It is a form of hidden internet that resides on the clearnet. It is more suited for accessing within I2P services. If you want to browse normal internet anonymously and circumvent censorship tor is better. However if you have to host something you can't host in the clearnet, you should use I2P. Nobody will be able to tell where your server is located if you run a site inside I2P and so it is harder to take down. It even resists DDoS attacks I think.
P
paroh#46
Jun 23, 2013 at 8:42 PM
I think same function as tor. set up relay is really very easy.
*www.torproject.org.in/dist/torbrowser/tor-browser-2.2.37-1_en-US.exe
I am not sure about legal stuff here but if govt tell ISPs to block a site, isn't your accessing it illegal? If it is, then you should use something that won't be traced back to you. Proxies and things like Ultrasurf are hardly safe.
I am not sure about legal stuff here but if govt tell ISPs to block a site, isn't your accessing it illegal? If it is, then you should use something that won't be traced back to you. Proxies and things like Ultrasurf are hardly safe.
How the hell can a government block stuff without explaining why they are doing so. Correct me if i am wrong but I don't think the government has announced anything about blocking adf.ly
Also, guys remove the ways to bypass blocking we don't want them to patch their systems
How the hell can a government block stuff without explaining why they are doing so. Correct me if i am wrong but I don't think the government has announced anything about blocking adf.ly Also, guys remove the ways to bypass blocking we don't want them to patch their systems
Well, lets say you are browsing something today using hidemyass and it is legal but a week from now a high court order makes it illegal. For some reasons the govt has to check your internet usage and they see you went to hidemyass and then you connected to an IP. They can then just get hidemyass to give them logs of what you did. Same with ultrasurf. They now know you visited an illegal site.
When you use tor or I2P, the govt will see what IP you connected to. If possible, they can even force the said person/company using that IP to give them logs but they can't give anything. They don't even know what you were browsing. None of the participating servers in tor or I2P knows what you are browsing except you.
Disclamer: I haven't read the source code of either tor or I2P myself so I have to trust other people to check and see if there are any backdoors or other nasty stuff in it.
^Accessing the sites is not the problem, but why they were blocked is the question.
P
paroh#67
Jun 26, 2013 at 9:27 PM
[source]*timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/internet/Govt-goes-after-porn-makes-ISPs-ban-sites/articleshow/20769326.cms[/source]
NEW DELHI: The government has decided to put a blanket ban on several websites that allow users to share pornographic content.
In an order dated June 13, department of telecom (DoT) has directed internet service providers (ISPs) to block 39 websites. Most of them are web forums, where internet users share images and URLs to download pornographic files. But some of these websites are also image hosts and file hosts, mostly used to store and share files that are non-pornographic.
While watching or distributing child pornography is illegal in India, watching adult pornography is not banned. The blocked websites are hosted outside India and claim to operate under the 18 USC 2257 rule enforced by the US. The rule specifies that producers of pornographic material are required to retain records showing performers were over 18 years of age at the time of video or image shoot.
The DoT order doesn't specify any reason or law under which the websites have been blocked. It says, "It has been decided to immediately block the access to the following URLs... you are accordingly directed to immediately block the access to above URLs."
If a user visits the blocked website, he/she is either shown a blank page or a message telling "this website has been blocked until further notice either pursuant to court orders or on the directions issued by the Department of Telecommunications".
A senior DoT official, who pleaded anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media, said the department was just following the orders issued by cyber security coordination committee and hence could not talk about the specific reasons behind the block.
Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a Bangalore-based organization, says blocking of pornographic website is overreach on the part of the government.
"In the case of file hosts and image hosts, which people use for various purposes including for storing personal files, the DoT order is a clear overreach," said Sunil Abraham, director of CIS. "Even in the case of pornography, there is nothing in the IT Act that can be used to block websites hosted outside in India."
He added, "There is a possibility that government is interpreting some sections of the IT Act to suit its purpose but I feel that is wrong and should be challenged in the court by ISPs if they care about the rights of their users."
Rajesh Chharia, president of Internet Service Providers Association of India, said that it was not possible for ISPs to pushback orders from DoT. "We are the licensee and we have to operate under the laws... we can't pushback," he said.
"But I feel ideally the government should ask the people who have produced objectionable content to remove it from the web if these people are in India... If they are outside, the websites should be blocked at the international cable landing stations. Involving 150-odd ISPs to implement an order is not the right way to do it," added Chharia.
Though IT Act doesn't criminalize watching porn, the new rules notified in 2011 have certain provisions that show the government wants to dictate what people watch or do not watch on the web. For example, the rules ask an intermediary like an ISP to "inform users of computer resources not to host, display, upload, modify, publish, and transmit any information that is obscene and pornographic".
The rules meant for cyber cafe owners specify that they "shall display a board, clearly visible to the users, prohibiting them from viewing pornographic sites as well as copying or downloading information which is prohibited under the law".
Abraham says that going after pornographic websites, and that too in a non-transparent manner, serves no purpose.
"I have travelled to China and Middle East and have seen that people access pornographic websites using various web tools. In fact, by banning websites the governments have made it more alluring for users to watch and access pornography," he said. None of the western democracies have explicit ban on pornography.
Abraham added that Indian government should also be more transparent about blocking websites because the current method was prone to abuse. "They should notify owner of the blocked website, clearly tell web users why a website is getting blocked and tell public how many websites they have blocked."
All VPNs keep logs. Even the ones that say thy don't. They need a way to cover their own asses. The govt might not do anything for viewing adf.ly but for they might when you view something else.
1. go to vinaget.us/check and paste the depositefiles link in the box and click check.
2. click on BBcode and copy it.
3. go to cbox.vinaleech.com, put up any name in name field, click login.
4. if the name is available, then it will require a password from you. submit the password.
5. then paste the copied BBcode into message field and click go.
6. wait for some time and you will get a direct download link to the file (it may be through adf.ly,etc link)
lol.. which retards block sites but leaves the secure domain? uploaded.net, adf.ly are blocked but https is accessible and why the hell imgbox.com is blocked f*** this government
1. go to vinaget.us/check and paste the depositefiles link in the box and click check.
2. click on BBcode and copy it.
3. go to cbox.vinaleech.com, put up any name in name field, click login.
4. if the name is available, then it will require a password from you. submit the password.
5. then paste the copied BBcode into message field and click go.
6. wait for some time and you will get a direct download link to the file (it may be through adf.ly,etc link)
1. go to vinaget.us/check and paste the depositefiles link in the box and click check.
2. click on BBcode and copy it.
3. go to cbox.vinaleech.com, put up any name in name field, click login.
4. if the name is available, then it will require a password from you. submit the password.
5. then paste the copied BBcode into message field and click go.
6. wait for some time and you will get a direct download link to the file (it may be through adf.ly,etc link)
u DOT morons...
