Hacker News Reader

Comment by galapago | Hacker News Reader

There is an encrypted message [1] in the last commit of their website (popcorn-time.github.io).

[1] https://github.com/popcorn-time/popcorn-time.github.io/commi...

It just occurred to me. It's probably completely unlikely, so I'll put my tinfoil hat on for a moment...

What is the possibility that Github was DDoSed by agents working in or for the movie industry because of Popcorn Time, attempting to either disrupt development or access?

I know, I know. It's outrageous. Unlikely. Crazy, even. But to say I'd be surprised this day and age would be a bit of an overstatement...

It seems unlikely.

The movie/recording industry has actually been known to use DDOS attacks. IIRC, they hired a company in India to launch a DDOS against some cyberlocker, which prompted Operation Payback.

That sounds interesting. Do you have a link to more information?

http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/movie-industry-launch...

http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-outfit-tries-to-erase-hi...

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111014/02583316350/confus...

Considering the resources required to DDoS a site like Github these days, and the sheer amount of motivation you'd need to achieve even a 30 min takedown ... I and my tinfoil hat are right there with you.

Well, differently to (mostly) pirate sites, GitHub hosts a ton of projects, how should they know that this is related to Popcorn Time? If they have any specific clue, they is quite a risk that they publish that and get real problems.

I guess full name credits to prove their participation in case of job interviews while not making it too easy for the lawyers to address them. A timestamped, maybe later revealed proof of knowledge or secret communication doesn't make a lot of sense here.

A simple hash of the full names would do, wouldn't it?

Well, but everyone could try guessing the names then, something they probably don't want. After all, it's just speculation what they have hidden there.

A hash with a sufficiently long random string appended, then.

I couldn't find the related public key to decrypt it :(

If they like the public to read it, they would have used a signature instead of an encryption. ;)

I haven't checked, but I'd guess he means the public key id whose private key should be used for decryption.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com