[HN Gopher] Z-Library Returns on the Clearnet in Full Hydra-Mode
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Z-Library Returns on the Clearnet in Full Hydra-Mode
        
       Author : bertman
       Score  : 283 points
       Date   : 2023-02-13 16:58 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (torrentfreak.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (torrentfreak.com)
        
       | gwbrooks wrote:
       | So where does one go to log in and be redirected to their
       | personal domain?
        
         | deedree wrote:
         | Per the Torrenfreak article: https://singlelogin.me/ to login
         | on Z-lib
        
         | dkjaudyeqooe wrote:
         | They give you your domains when you log in on Tor.
        
       | politician wrote:
       | This headline reads straight out of Cyberpunk. OK, now I will
       | click the article.
        
       | Lacerda69 wrote:
       | I wonder what they use to build this Hydra feature...
        
       | user3939382 wrote:
       | Let's keep iterating on the takedown evasion strategies until
       | they're impenetrable. It's the only hope the People have of
       | actually being in control of anything important.
        
         | unsupp0rted wrote:
         | > It's the only hope the People have of actually being in
         | control of anything important.
         | 
         | Well I wouldn't go that far. There are more $5 wrenches than
         | there are people.
         | 
         | https://xkcd.com/538/
        
           | xboxnolifes wrote:
           | You can make systems that even the creator cannot take down.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | user3939382 wrote:
           | Yep, aka rubber-hose cryptanalysis.
           | 
           | The real test here was Assange who embarrassed the U.S.
           | military by publishing drone footage of them killing
           | civilians not to mention everything else.
           | 
           | They got him on an individual level (IMHO by blatantly
           | discarding any remaining vestigial pretense of abiding by the
           | law) but-- the site is up.
        
           | DennisP wrote:
           | That only works if you can track down who the people are.
        
             | unsupp0rted wrote:
             | It works if you can track down and wrench a tiny % of them,
             | causing the rest to wonder if they're next.
             | 
             | See: Belarus, 2020 or Iran, 2022 for recent examples
        
       | Steltek wrote:
       | That title is straight out of a cyberpunk novel.
        
       | kristianp wrote:
       | Where do these books come from in the first place? Have
       | publishers systems been leaked/hacked?
        
         | labster wrote:
         | In the first place, the books come authors who write words
         | based on what a muse or ChatGPT tells them.
        
         | mardifoufs wrote:
         | > Where do these books come from in the first place? Have
         | publishers systems been leaked/hacked?
         | 
         | Most of zlib is libgen, and I think libgen relies on user
         | uploads and sourcing from their forums
        
       | in_vestor wrote:
       | ELI5 why the gov doesn't just seize the servers.
        
         | dkjaudyeqooe wrote:
         | Because you can buy an infinite number of globally located,
         | cheap, disposable front end VPSes starting at $1 a month or
         | less that hide your critical infrastructure.
        
         | fulafel wrote:
         | It seems the US Postal Inspection Service has some sort of
         | judical powers over domains especially, possibly related to DNS
         | root through ICANN being rooted in the US.
        
           | thedaly wrote:
           | Can you elaborate on this?
        
             | fulafel wrote:
             | I'm possibly wrong about the Postal, just searched for
             | seizure news involving them and there seemed to be many and
             | made more of a leap than seems warranted, I guess they just
             | do ops and the seizures are via DoJ/FBI... But in any case
             | ICANN is well known to control DNS and is a US org.
        
               | thedaly wrote:
               | Interesting. It does seem like they are involved, but I
               | do not think the USPIS has jurisdiction over cyber crime
               | unless it invoices mail, although they can participate in
               | inter-agency operations.
               | 
               | > Cybercrimes are crimes committed through the Internet
               | or using computer devices. These crimes almost always
               | intersect with the postal system. That's why the Postal
               | Inspection Service is committed to protecting the public
               | from criminals who steal digital information for
               | financial gain, revenge, or even political advantage.
               | 
               | > These crimes almost always intersect with the postal
               | system.
               | 
               | I don't understand this part at all.
               | 
               | https://www.uspis.gov/tips-prevention/cybercrime
        
         | sudosysgen wrote:
         | They're not in a country that wants that to happen.
        
         | irrational wrote:
         | Which government? Where are the servers located? Whose
         | jurisdiction? Are all the servers in the same place?
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > ELI5 why the gov doesn't just seize the servers.
         | 
         | Because "the government" is not a single unitary global
         | institution.
        
           | Infernal wrote:
           | ...yet
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | carlosjobim wrote:
         | The servers can easily be duplicated in infinite numbers.
        
         | gen3 wrote:
         | You have to know where something is to seize it. Operations
         | over international lines are hard to do. They likely have a
         | series of bouncers/reverse proxies before the "main" back
         | infrastructure. It is also likely that they rotate their
         | bouncers regularly, different datacenters, countries, etc
        
           | thedaly wrote:
           | Don't the proxies just point back to the main infrastructure?
           | How do the site operators deal with bandwidth usage and QOS
           | and all the edge vps/proxies?
        
             | gen3 wrote:
             | Generally, something like a nginx reverse proxy is pretty
             | performant. The opsec gains come by rotating the
             | infrastructure you run on. If you had something like a
             | ingress -> middle -> backend, and then regularly changed
             | hosts, by the time someone is able to get a court order to
             | seize the ingress, you've already moved on and they need to
             | start the process over.
             | 
             | In terms of system hardening, since the outer machines are
             | almost bare, they are hard to hack. Attempting to attack
             | the backend server isn't easy either (assuming the the
             | webadmin knows what they are doing. Things like blocking
             | outgoing traffic and configuring the system to not leak the
             | backend server's IP)
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | oseityphelysiol wrote:
       | How did they take it down the domain last time? Was it by picking
       | on the registrar?
       | 
       | In my country they so this by asking all the ISPs to block the
       | domain from their DNS servers. This works for 90% of the
       | population, but all you have to do is just change the DNS server
       | to something other than what the ISP gives you and you're good to
       | go.
       | 
       | Also, I just don't get how current approach is any better. As far
       | as I understand, there's still a single point of failure, i.e.
       | the site you get your "personal" domain from.
        
         | EarlKing wrote:
         | I'm honestly shocked no one has openly laughed themselves silly
         | at the idea of "personalized domains" for a site openly
         | engaging in piracy... because surely that wouldn't be a way to
         | build a stronger case against individual users engaged in
         | piracy, riiiiiight?
        
           | braingenious wrote:
           | I have heard of people using throwaway emails and VPNs for
           | this sort of stuff!
        
         | jocaal wrote:
         | you can get the personal domain from tor and then use the
         | domain on the regular net.
        
       | redtriumph wrote:
       | Anyone has any links or good intro videos about what is Hydra-
       | mode?
       | 
       | Reading through the article, it seems the domain name is not
       | publicly exposed and a new domain (?) is created on-the-fly? I am
       | not sure if I understand how it works. But every user who logs in
       | with a inter-mediator would get his own domain and that's their
       | strategy to keep shop open for now.
        
         | danaos wrote:
         | > Anyone has any links or good intro videos about what is
         | Hydra-mode?
         | 
         | Probably just a reference of Greek mythology. You chop one
         | head, two grow. An analogue of spawning multiple domains a site
         | is taken down.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lernaean_Hydra
        
       | jrochkind1 wrote:
       | Are people making money off of z-library, or is it being run
       | purely out of principle/generosity, or what?
        
         | musicale wrote:
         | I'd expect enterprising bad actors to upload malicious PDFs and
         | rent out compromised machines.
         | 
         | Site operators could potentially re-render uploads and inject
         | their own exploits.
        
       | super256 wrote:
       | What's the difference between Library Genesis and Z-Library?
       | Aren't they the same catalogue?
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | Z-Library is a superset of Libgen, if I remember correctly it
         | has lots of files that haven't been cleaned up enough to put
         | into Libgen.
        
         | IronWolve wrote:
         | z-library uses a freemium model, a for-profit model.
        
           | droopyEyelids wrote:
           | Do you have evidence they make a profit or are you smearing
           | the way they accept donations into "a for-profit model"
        
         | DoItToMe81 wrote:
         | Z-library began as a Libgen mirror, but stopped mirroring
         | uploads back. In some cases, it has documents that Libgen does
         | not.
        
       | grapesurgeon wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | heywhatupboys wrote:
       | wait, is this about zip compression or no?
        
         | bhaney wrote:
         | Z-Library the book/article piracy project, not zlib the
         | compression library
        
           | heywhatupboys wrote:
           | my comment was a joke :(
        
             | bhaney wrote:
             | Haha, sorry. It's very hard to tell, since that's a real
             | confusion a lot of people have.
        
             | DougN7 wrote:
             | I actually wondered the same thing since I've never heard
             | of z-library
        
               | helf wrote:
               | Wow really? I used it for damn near a decade.
        
         | loeg wrote:
         | No, Z-library is not related to zip or compression.
        
       | aborsy wrote:
       | I don't know what's the solution to this problem, but this
       | library is extremely useful. Most of the time, you don't want to
       | read the books entirely, but mostly to check something, read a
       | section or browse see if what you're looking for is there.
       | 
       | Eventually, you may buy a book that you know is worth it. Right
       | now even the table of contents may not be available before
       | buying.
        
       | pradn wrote:
       | Current shadow libraries (zlib, libgen, scihub) suffer from
       | centralized data hosting and opaque librarians/custodians (who
       | modify metadata and gate inclusion/exclusion of content). We
       | already have the tools to solve this.
       | 
       | 1. Files are stored in a distributed fashion and referred to via
       | their content hash. We already have IPFS for this.
       | 
       | 2. Library metadata can be packaged up into a SQLite DB file. The
       | DB would contain IPFS hashes, book names, authors, etc.
       | 
       | 3. Teams of volunteers assemble and publish the library metadata
       | DB files. There can be multiple teams, each with their own
       | policies. The latest library files can be published via RSS. Each
       | team can have their own upload portal.
       | 
       | 4. A desktop app can pull multiple RSS feeds for multiple
       | libraries. The libraries can be combined together and be searched
       | easily on the client side. Users can search for content via the
       | latest library metadata files, locally on their desktop. Content
       | can be downloaded via IPFS.
       | 
       | 5. The desktop app can also double as an IPFS host, allowing
       | users to choose specific files to pin or simply allocate an
       | amount of space for the purpose (100 GB, etc). There could also
       | be servers that aggregate pinning info to make sure no gaps are
       | there.
       | 
       | 5. For ease of access, people can run websites that preclude the
       | need to setup your own desktop app / download libraries.
       | 
       | 6. Library teams can publish metadata DBs and content via
       | torrents, too, for long-term/disaster-recovery/archival purposes.
       | 
       | This would be a true hydra. No one centralized team, no reliance
       | on DNS. If one team's library set up goes down, you can use
       | another's.
        
         | dark-star wrote:
         | 1. yes, ipfs could solve that, but it relies on people hoting
         | content. Previous examples of content-based addressing showed
         | that little-accessed content tends to disappear as nodes go
         | offline over the years. This would need to be solved, and I
         | think the only way to solve it is to have a battery of
         | centralized ipfs servers mirroring each other, which defeats
         | the "fully distributed" setup
         | 
         | 2. this would also need to be hosted and could be taken down.
         | You'd need to mirror this too, but that's a simpler problem to
         | solve (gigabytes instead of terabytes)
         | 
         | 3. the upload portals and the RSS feeds would, again, be
         | centralized or would have to change so regularly that they
         | become impractical
         | 
         | in the end you would end up with a dozen (a hundred? more?)
         | different z-libraries, which would make it actually worse from
         | a preservation standpoint, since only the most popular content
         | would be shared, libraries that focused on rare/exotic/fringe
         | material would be endangered of being lost since they have
         | fewer volunteers/mirrors/seeds/...
         | 
         | Also, freenet and other projects already showed that end-users
         | allocating some storage and using that to spread data around is
         | not an easy problem, the fluctuation in end-nodes is so big
         | that it slows down the entire network to a crawl. I'm not sure
         | this problem has been solved yet.
        
       | mike_mg wrote:
       | wait, aren't "they" going to gather evidence on user of "my
       | account" and associate the downloads from this domain to "me" and
       | come after me and ask hard questions?
        
       | irrational wrote:
       | I tried it. The url I got looked like guid.domain.net. At first I
       | was thinking that the guid part must be unique for every user,
       | but then the domain.net part is still susceptible to being
       | seized. So... without being able to compare the url I got with
       | other people, I'm left wondering how this actually works.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | BHSPitMonkey wrote:
         | FTA:
         | 
         | "The domain names in question are subdomains of newly
         | registered TLDs that rely on different domain name registries."
         | 
         | There are multiple TLDs/SLDs involved (and the pool will likely
         | grow over time)
        
         | dkjaudyeqooe wrote:
         | > domain.net part is still susceptible to being seized
         | 
         | Yes it is, but how do you discover the domains? There could be
         | just a few hundred users per domain. Then you have to expend
         | substantial effort to seize each domain.
         | 
         | Meanwhile any affected user just moves to their second domain.
         | Even if the authorities got much better at taking down domains
         | the only issue would be increasing the number of extra domains
         | per user.
         | 
         | I can't see how the authorities can beat this.
        
           | stevenhuang wrote:
           | I had to use https://singlelogin.me/ for it to generate the
           | special domain, so can't the central https://singlelogin.me/
           | domain be seized at some point?
        
             | esposm03 wrote:
             | From the article:
             | 
             | > If users can't access the universal login page, Z-Library
             | says they can log in through TOR or I2P and get their
             | personal clearnet domains there.
        
             | bogwog wrote:
             | Yeah but that's only used for creating the unique domain,
             | and it wouldn't affect user domains. So if that one goes
             | down, they'll just have throw the registration page up on a
             | new domain.
        
       | ilaksh wrote:
       | Dumb question.. how do I find the URL?
        
       | braingenious wrote:
       | I'm so happy to see this available to everybody! Z-lib is
       | definitely in my top 5 favorite websites of all time.
        
       | ChewFarceSkunk wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | Domain names turned out to be a weak point susceptible to attack
       | by the statists. To route around this weakness, an array of names
       | is used.
       | 
       | However, there is still the matter of having an account to get to
       | these names. Which was the original reason the statists went
       | after them in the first place. The users themselves will thus
       | become the next target, just like in the days of Napster.
        
         | fudgefactorfive wrote:
         | To me that was the real strength in IPv6. (I know I know
         | innefficient protocol with complex upgrade path lead to near
         | negligible adoption)
         | 
         | NAT "fixed" the problem of address exhaustion, but it killed
         | the old internet. You _cannot_ run your own network anymore. In
         | the  "old" times, I gave you a phone number or IP address and
         | that's it, direct connection. All anyone could do was show up
         | and take the computer to stop that. Sure there's a phone
         | company or ISP involved, but they just powered the pump, you
         | completely controlled what went through it.
         | 
         | Now I can't do that. They ran out of addresses and I share an
         | address with X unknown others. So I can't give you a home
         | address, just to a bank of doors. I could give you an apartment
         | number, but that's also shifting transparently, so num X to you
         | is num Y to someone else.
         | 
         | IPv6 would have solved the problem of exhaustion while
         | preserving the right to an address. I could be some number
         | permanently and you could reliably find a connection to my
         | system using it. In that world I could set up a private DNS
         | service in my house no one can alter without physically
         | plugging in. Then have that store records to other addresses.
         | Every part of that chain requires someone finding you and
         | showing up at your door to disrupt.
         | 
         | Instead now I have to pay digital ocean 5 bucks to keep an
         | address for me so anything can find me via them. A bunch of
         | servers in my home effectively an island without a coordinate
         | until DO points me out on request. Like having all mail
         | addresses be to the local town hall for them to forward to me.
         | Sure maybe you trust your local town hall, but they are
         | fundamentally beholden to someone else.
         | 
         | With IPv6 support and adoption a whole network could be set up
         | independent of any other authority besides BGP. Which requires
         | nation-state levels of mobilization just to block an address,
         | with fallout affecting literally thousands of others. They'd
         | have to nuke a block to suppress any site, only for that site
         | to find another address and be back to normal within minutes.
         | Instead they do a WHOIS, send a scary email and boom, you're
         | unknown, unfindable and disconnected. Hoping that word of mouth
         | brings people to your new "address" exactly like losing your
         | phone (and SIM) while abroad.
         | 
         | I know it sucks as a protocol but v6 to me is a massive
         | extremely important development that would change how the
         | internet, and from that all communication, works.
        
           | sitzkrieg wrote:
           | your isp is sharing an IP with other customers? i have never,
           | ever seen that in 3 countries worth of residential isps and
           | doubt its possible and want to make sure its true (and
           | concerning)
        
             | simcop2387 wrote:
             | you'll see it called CGNAT (aka Carrier Grade NAT) and it
             | can be a really big annoyance for a lot of things, usually
             | I see it on mobile/cell connections but I've heard of some
             | DSL providers here in the states using it too.
        
               | heywire wrote:
               | Metronet in the US does CGNAT. I've had them for about a
               | year and a half. Hasn't caused me any real issues other
               | than the occasional captcha.
        
               | WeylandYutani wrote:
               | 4chan is a funny one. Apparently I had the IP of someone
               | who posted "child models".
               | 
               | I'm pretty sure that wasn't me unless I have an alter ego
               | called mister Hyde.
        
             | atahanacar wrote:
             | If you have ever used mobile data, you've shared your IP
             | address with other customers. Many residential ISPs around
             | the world also use CGNAT. I had to call the customer
             | support of mine to have a dedicated IP address. Other
             | providers may force customers to pay for a static IP
             | address if they want to avoid CGNAT.
        
             | fudgefactorfive wrote:
             | Having your own address in most places is a part of a
             | "dedicated business line". My ISP in Switzerland literally
             | refuses to issue so called "static" addresses at all,
             | business or not.
        
           | scarmig wrote:
           | Can't they just send a scary email to the AS administrator
           | who then removes the offending address block from its routing
           | tables? Or are you imagining folks migrating to ones that
           | don't respond to such requests?
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | dark-star wrote:
           | > With IPv6 support and adoption a whole network could be set
           | up independent of any other authority besides BGP. Which
           | requires nation-state levels of mobilization just to block an
           | address, with fallout affecting literally thousands of
           | others.
           | 
           | This is not how it works. Taking down a single IPv6 IP
           | address (or whole AS) is a very simple thing and is done
           | daily to combat spam and DDoS attacks, without requiring
           | "nation-state levels of mobilization" (whatever that means).
           | Also there is essentially no "fallout" at all in IPv6, and
           | there wasn't any fallout in IPv4, too, since routes can be as
           | specific as a single host
        
           | mindslight wrote:
           | IP addresses are just a different type of name, and also
           | assigned by hierarchical entities. NAT isn't the issue,
           | rather it's the incumbent power structures gradually
           | tightening the identity/control screws. If you have a public
           | IP on your physical connection and use that for banned
           | publishing, they go after the account holder listed for the
           | physical connection, which eventually gets back to you - the
           | same as if you obtain that public IP from Digital Ocean or a
           | tunnel broker.
           | 
           | The only way around that is using naming systems that don't
           | rely on centralized authorities, or at least can't be coerced
           | by governments.
        
             | fudgefactorfive wrote:
             | I miss the days of sending someone a letter with some cash
             | for them to associate address A with line B. All I'd have
             | to do to stay essentially anonymous is finding a someone
             | with bad record keeping.
             | 
             | Suddenly someone shows up with address A and threats and
             | then drowns trying to interpret that persons mappings.
             | While that's happening I can find 5 other someones and
             | suddenly I have 6 addresses all of which essentially
             | ephemerally link to my system. Someone else does that for
             | their mapping system and you get to Dijkstra levels of
             | working out how to block connections.
             | 
             | After like 3 levels of middlemen even centralized
             | authorities just struggle to do the actual work of
             | blocking, outside of just issuing the order.
        
             | musicale wrote:
             | I'm not sure how to deliver packets on the internet without
             | destination IP addresses of some sort.
        
       | 0xDEF wrote:
       | Why did they go so hard after Z-Library when all of the other
       | Library Genesis mirrors are still up and running? Is it because
       | Z-Library have ads and paid subscriptions while the others are
       | non-profit volunteers?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-02-13 23:00 UTC)