GreySec Forums

Full Version: The Noob Bot Source Code (Private WoW Bot)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Don't know why I decided to take down the original thread, but just got a DMCA email from one of the devs that made me want to put it back up again.
Do whatever with it.

https://publicdb.host/db/software/TheNoo...G.2016.zip
https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/04cbf...475616615/

[Image: m4S6lze.png]
So, you basically are saying that you aknowledge the reception of a DMCA Takedown notice but you still wanted to share the copyrighted content again anyway ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Mi...yright_Act


You did not received a notice "from one of the devs", but from "the owner of the content".
(11-11-2016, 08:38 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]So, you basically are saying that you aknowledge the reception of a DMCA Takedown notice but you still wanted to share the copyrighted content again anyway ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Mi...yright_Act


You did not received a notice "from one of the devs", but from "the owner of the content".

I don't know why this thread was reported but if DMCA is the reason. Contact the server provider hosting the content, GreySec does not host it considering attachments and such are disabled. Thus users resorts to links, so in this case it should be the server provider hosting public.db I suppose.

Either way US laws such as DMCA doesn't apply here, we are not hosted on american soil.
Do you know anything about WIPO ?

The WIPO Copyright Treaty is implemented in United States law by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). By Decision 2000/278/EC of 16 March 2000, the Council of the European Union approved the treaty on behalf of the European Community. European Union Directives which largely cover the subject matter of the treaty are: Directive 91/250/EC creating copyright protection for software, Directive 96/9/EC on copyright protection for databases and Directive 2001/29/EC prohibiting devices for circumventing "technical protection measures" such as digital rights management.


It's not just "DMCA" for US Soil.

Here the list of all countries who've signed one of the anti-copyright treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pa...agreements


As a website providing link, you're also in the illegality, wether or not a member of your website posted it, your message simply validate the fact that you don't care about breaking internationals laws.

Where the file is hosted does not matter as long as you provide a means of distribution though your website linking to it.
(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]Do you know anything about WIPO ?
I'm not all that read up on this legal mumbo-jumbo, I do not.  But now I am thanks to you. I give you my regards.

(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]The WIPO Copyright Treaty is implemented in United States law by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). 
So DMCA is an US implemented law? 

(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]By Decision 2000/278/EC of 16 March 2000, the Council of the European Union approved the treaty on behalf of the European Community. European Union Directives which largely cover the subject matter of the treaty are: Directive 91/250/EC creating copyright protection for software, Directive 96/9/EC on copyright protection for databases and Directive 2001/29/EC prohibiting devices for circumventing "technical protection measures" such as digital rights management.
And that means the US-based law, DMCA will apply to all WIPO countries? 

(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]It's not just "DMCA" for US Soil.
From my understanding it is, DMCA is american only and thus it applies there. Other countries have their own copy-right laws, like you said DMCA is an implementation of WIPO in the us. But does that mean that the exact same implementation also called DMCA will apply to all other WIPO countries as well?

I'm sure the other WIPO countries have their own implementations of this but in other forms and shapes. I couldn't imagine a US national copy-right legislation to apply all over the world. But I guess I may be wrong, who knows. 

(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]Here the list of all countries who've signed one of the anti-copyright treaty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pa...agreements
Right, that's good to keep in mind. A list of countries from WIPO. But does it really mean anything here? DMCA is still a US law. I'm neither a US citizen neither do I host the content of greysec there. 

But I'm sure if you find the exact implementations of WIPO for their other countries, whom I can imagine having their own copy right laws. Refer those laws and legal complaints to me, but that is of course assuming you know where I live or where the content is hosted. 

(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]As a website providing link, you're also in the illegality, wether or not a member of your website posted it, your message simply validate the fact that you don't care about breaking internationals laws.
My message? Did I ever explicitly state that I do not care about international law? Since when did DMCA, a US-based copyright law; become an international law? Did it somehow slip into the geneva convention? If so, I guess I'm off to North Korea.

(11-11-2016, 09:13 AM)Sundark Wrote: [ -> ]Where the file is hosted does not matter as long as you provide a means of distribution though your website linking to it.

Absolutley ridiculous, that's a complete invalidation of digital freedom of speech right there. But then again that's only my thoughts on it. But if you want to play the legal game here.

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230)

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act

While we do our best to remove highly illegal content such as child pornography and financial fraud, users are otherwise responsible for their own content and might be held responsible if law enforcement decides to pursue it and such.

I won't lay a finger on a user n'or in anyway restrict their right to freedom of speech given it's within the limits of our rules. Unless someone hands me a court order something as legally as binding as that I will not do anything. Maybe that makes me a cyber terrorist, a bloody villian with no respect for law? Yes, maybe. But if that's what it means to stay true to myself and protect my users, then so be it.

Think about where you are, this is not facebook. While we are not explicitly a black hat forum, neither are we a strict white hat forum either. The users with their own content shapes the forum, we do not advocate crimes but the users may. And if they do, the forum is not responsible but rather the users themselfs. That's my philosophy anyway.
Make sense, that's why google is removing copyright infrigment links from their databases.

Google must be hosting movies, mp3, source code, books... right ?

You do not make any sense, as you share the link and refuse to remove it from copyright owner requests, you are working against WIPO and publicly mock internationals laws which can be used against you in court.


From the link you gave me... Btw: Caymans Islands is under UK juridiction, and as long as I know, they are not out of europe just yet.
Quote:Directive 2000/31/EC[48] establishes a safe haven regime for hosting providers:

Article 14 establishes that hosting providers are not responsible for the content they host as long as (1) the acts in question are neutral intermediary acts of a mere technical, automatic and passive capacity; (2) they are not informed of its illegal character, and (3) they act promptly to remove or disable access to the material when informed of it.

You are not responsible AS LONG AS YOU DONT KNOW.

But you have been notified, therefor, you cannot use the fact that you did not know in court if we would ever go that far.

Take your chance before it's too late, providing 5 years of our works for free make us lose alot of money and it wont be long until I claim the loss in court.
I don't care, we're not google. Take your legal white knight complaints somewhere else, fundementally we're not exactly in the ethical zone either. File as many court complaints as you want. If shit falls down I'll just open up a tor hidden service for greysec.
It's funny that he released TheNoobBot simultanously as he released MiraiBotnet, perhaps he tampered our compiled DLL (SlimDX, fasm_managed, RecastLayer) to make you part of MiraiBotnet.

You are not only providing a private source code, you're also letting him hacking all your community.

PS: Check the URL, remove the file from it and explore the directory.

Code:
[DIR]    MiraiBotnet/    2016-10-12 01:20    -    
[   ]    TheNoobBot.05.AUG.2016.zip    2016-10-12 01:20    22M

Code:
Parent Directory         -    
[   ]    dlr.src.zip    2016-10-12 01:20    11K    
[   ]    loader.src.zip    2016-10-12 01:20    27K    
[   ]    mirai.src.zip    2016-10-12 01:20    70K    
[TXT]    thread.html    2016-10-12 01:20    17K

Funny that he decided to re-allow download of it because he was mad at a DMCA request, then just uploaded MiraiBotnet in bulk with it.

He even kept the tutorial thread for it in case he forgot how to inject mirai's loader into a dll.
It's funny that you expect anyone to take you seriously here.
You know what, I don't even care showing more proof.

Enjoy being part of a botnet for trying to fuck a man business.
Pages: 1 2