If the same thing happens with Netflix, it also won't keep me from watching Netflix content, I'll just stop paying for it. Other than the aforementioned Disney+ content, I rarely pirate anything these days and I'd rather not if I can help it.
If the same thing happens with Netflix, it also won't keep me from watching Netflix content, I'll just stop paying for it. Other than the aforementioned Disney+ content, I rarely pirate anything these days and I'd rather not if I can help it.
It's beyond me how Google doesn't scan for this and bring the hammer down. Too busy refining modal popups from iframes I guess.
It's not like Netflix enjoys making it a PITA to use their service, but the people who on the content care a great deal about it. They leverage these disparities to maximize their cash flow.
> Bright Data attains its peers (Residential and Mobile IPs) through the Bright SDK, which is integrated into applications as another form of app monetization.
> App users are presented with the option to opt-in to the Bright Data Network and become a peer (share their device idle resources) in exchange for an ad-free or free application. All peers sharing resources with the Bright Data residential network have personally opted-in and may opt-out at any time.
It would be nice to know which applications have their SDK integrated, so I could avoid them.
[1]: https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/hk-en/security/news/cybercr...
There are two different kinds of proxies (basically — there are more nuances I don’t want to get into): Datacenter (DC) and Residential (Resis). DC proxy servers are blazing fast but easy for a retailer to determine the traffic is coming from a datacenter like AWS so there is a high risk of getting the IP banned. Resis are slower but they are residential IPs so slower but less likely to get banned because they look like traffic from average consumers.
If the average buyer of proxies is buying 100+ IPs per month and IPs get banned constantly, proxy providers need a massive pool of millions of IPs running on residential addresses. That’s where these “free” VPN come into play. The consumer gets no-cost VPN, but their PC becomes an exit node for these residential IP proxy providers who charge people for the proxy access. There are tons of proxy providers but I think most are just reseller accounts of a few massive firms that run the show.
I am only speaking on the topic from a purely technical perspective. I do not want to discuss or spark debate around the ethics or people’s displeasure with the existence of botting and/or scalpers — you asked for a use case, and I’m only answering the question with a multi-billion dollar use case.
The Disney+ one sounded like a (hilarious) bug in their logic. Not sure why that would translate to Netflix
Edit: I may have misunderstood. I thought Disney+ was blocking the user from paying for Disney+ but not from streaming Disney+. I missed the implication that they started pirating the content.
Perhaps the user had a dynamic IP address and kept getting one in the same range that was also used for VPNs. Perhaps he had a static one but Disney banned ranges by the /28 instead of individual addresses.
You're describing a botnet here. There are certainly organizations that will sell you access to their botnet, but I wouldn't describe them as uncontroversial, and I'd like to learn about ones that are structured as companies or that have as authoritative a reach as NordVPN.
I'm not saying this by itself is anything illegal - users generally unwittingly agree to it through wall-of-text ToS.
I agree--they're not denying me their content, they're denying my payment. If this is really where they want to go, they know how it ends (read: someone disrupts their model and they get left in the dust).