Good God. How many people use sharescan?

[RichZ]

I don't know - I don't but would like to know how?

[amac]

I don't know, but after installing a new firewall last month i've had over 2000 blocked 'intrusions'. But a lot of that will be the same people searching again.

[dur]

[s]dunqn wrote on 01:25, 19th May 2004:
IMAGE:turtle.meatinthecloset.ws/abuse.PNG

And I downloaded over 20gb of data today. Eek!


Ooh ITS will love that evidence that you have broken your contract....well done.

[can't remember]

Did I say picture? I meant the statement below it which is what I actually quoted buy hey....*grumble grumle*.

[Wong]

If you ever have to download 20gb of lecture notes, you're in trouble anyway!

[hr]You would not feel sadness if you never tasted joy
That's the curse of humans - born in passion, you destroy

[munchingfoo]

Totally, even in word thats a lot of notes. Take you a million years to read those.

[hr]Management: The art of writing like you know what you're talking about and making others believe it.

(munchingfoo comprehensive dictionary)

My website:
http://aa.domaindlx.com/munchingfoo/

[Nickel]

large bitmaps perhaps

[C.]

I always thought that distributing the freeware, 700mb Linux ISOs was the most plausable excuse

But like he said, ITS dont care :p

[Guest]

[s]C. wrote on 18:11, 19th May 2004:
I always thought that distributing the freeware, 700mb Linux ISOs was the most plausable excuse

But like he said, ITS dont care :p


You'd be surprised. They don't like it being advertised because then they have to act on it. Plus it's just incredibly stupid to post something like that on the Sinner anyway. Is there really any point? Nope. Just advertising how much you have cost the university in terms of bandwidth which ain't cheap.

Also it is breaking your contract so it probably is not supposed to be discussed on this board.

[Nickel]

just to be picky, it costs the uni to transfer data over the transatlantic link. Sharescan only uses the local network.

--
nickel

[C.]

just to second that the bandwidth he used probably cost less than 5p. And I'll stick by my opinion that ITS don't care until someone gets busted

[97hills]

what ip range does everyone use?

[Guest]

[s]C. wrote on 08:50, 20th May 2004:
just to second that the bandwidth he used probably cost less than 5p. And I'll stick by my opinion that ITS don't care until someone gets busted


Well you should remember they're rather bored at the moment.

[teh cow]

let's not have any delusions here.

Traffic crossing the UK-US link (which means any non-europe traffic) used to incur a charge of 2p/MB (as recently as 2000).

I can't imagine that will have dropped below say 0.5p/MB by now.

So basically, 20GB of US traffic equates to a bill of 100-400 quid for ITS from Janet.

Nice one, dumbass.

[C.]

I've heard similar prices for transatlantic traffic but I can't find anything to back-up the claims. Closest I can find is JANET's pricing list which shows no bandwidth charges:

http://www.ja.net/connect/general-tariff.doc

So maybe its all inclusive now?

[Rennie]

People get their knickers in a major twist over this 'bandwidth' shite. One, there is no way IT services pay that amount, whether it be 0.5p or 2p per MB - and I'll say that until someone shows me the invoice from JANET (who is not some secretary for the ill informed). My theory is that this is some shite that IT services spread in order to make people think twice. If this was the case, then I know people who must have ran up bills of about £25,000 - £50,000 in a year (downloaded about 1000 - 2000GB of films, games,software etc.. - he did have 500GB of hdd space however and one of the first DVD writers...) (based on 2p/MB) - I'm sure IT services would just let this go by without doing anything to the person.

And, I think the case is that they don't really give a shit either way - because they aren't getting billed for it. They act on something when they get an e-mail telling then that some kind of film download is being committed but other than that, they just get on with it.

teh cow, read the thread BEFORE posting on it next time - and stop being such a jumped up bastard about something trivially shite - you say it as though you're personally footing the bill. And don't give me some shite about paying £50 a year - fact is that everyone in halls does, no matter what, and downloading high amounts of data must have rocketed in the last 2-4 years, but the charge hasn't risen from £50 - so they obviously don't factor in this mystical 2p/MB charge you think exists.

[Neferet]

[s]Rennie wrote on 23:38, 21st May 2004:
One, there is no way IT services pay that amount, whether it be 0.5p or 2p per MB - and I'll say that until someone shows me the invoice from JANET (who is not some secretary for the ill informed).

If you care to e-mail ITS then they will no doubt confirm how much each Mb over the trans-atlantic link costs them. I would recommend Luke Moodley for that or you could e-mail JANET and ask them - after all all universities using JANET pay the same per Mb. It certainly used to be 2p and from what I can see it hasn't changed. The universities using JANET had to start paying these costs themselves as of 1998.

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/ITS/faq/cha ... etter.html

That's the staff newsletter of the time with some relevant info. St Andrews is apparently a very heavy user and has to pay a large amount every year. The predicted cost back then, £25,000, is probably laughable compared to what they have to pay now. Cost was perhaps the main reason behind the blocking of ports to stop such heavy downloading. Sharing over the network doesn't bother them in that repsect though it is probably not wise to flaunt it in public as it is still breaking your contract.

ITS could of course monitor bandwidth uses but it would probably be too much paperwork or be too ineffective to be worth the costs, and it is possible to download a lot of legal stuff for academic purposes. And after all they do make a profit in other areas anyway.

However it is true that this university does pay tens of thousands per year for bandwidth use over that link, if not more. This is true for most universities but perhaps the reason it is so high here is because there is comparatively less to do!

[Rennie]

Ok, read the newsletter, and it seems as though the 2p/MB charge is true. However, i'm still not totally convinced, but lackj of arsedness means I won't be e-mailing IT services.

In the case of the person I know (and i'm sure they're not an isolated case), I can't believe that IT services don't stop people doing this - it's well worth the paperwork if it stops £25,000 worth of downloads happening off one user alone. And, the blocking of ports doesn't completely stop large downloads happening - it just seems to make them slower.

[Nickel]

the bill for 2001/2002 was £43,490


http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/lis/newslet ... harge.html

[surfingsimon]

what with kazaa being virtually impossible to use now that they have blocked everything (would be interesting to know if any of you still have it working?) i presume that the average user can only really use sharescan or actually get sent individual files over msnmsgr. both of these are of course internal.

those who download from external sources (such as subscriptions to irc channels and port 80 ftp servers) will therefore be relatively rare and even some on this board probably wouldn’t know how to go about doing it.

as such, external bandwidth use must be limited to a VERY small number of users and if IT services wanted to do anything about it they easily could. they dont however, because relatively not a big problem.