Google spybots?

Mary · SearchIRC Admin Joined: 03 May 2003 Posts: 692

Two weeks ago, one of the SearchIRC helpers saw a user on a Google IP join his channel on GRnet, and then part a short time later without saying anything. Yesterday, we were alerted to this thread: http://manero.org/weblog/archives/000133.html

Google is definitely sending bots out to visit specific channels on a variety of networks. Not surprisingly, Google isn't letting the cat out of the bag. They just say they are testing something that is search related, and it will be expanded in the future.

Admins who have observed the actions of the bot say it is joining channels and running /whois on users, but it is not gathering server information or messaging anyone in the channels they visit.

This type of behavior is consistant with the actions of the ChatScan bot which appeared in early 2000. ChatScan bots joined channels randomly and parking there like an idle user, broadcasting channel text to their website. The idea was, people would visit and see which channels had interesting conversations and then join them. In actuality, it was a persistant, ban evading spybot that published channel conversations and user information without the knowledge or permission of the participants. There is a decidedly slanted article about ChatScan on http://dir.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/02/25/chatscan/index.html
As you might expect, users and networks made sure ChatScan didn't last long.

Is this Google's aim? There is at least one reporter who thinks Google may be planning to spy on IRC chats and make the logs available in text form much as one can search through their archives of newsgroup posts. http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/33835.html

If anyone has further information, let us know. This is worth watching.

Mary

Mary · SearchIRC Admin Joined: 03 May 2003 Posts: 692

Seems the subject, and a link to SearchIRC, has made the front page of /.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/11/11/131256&tid=

Jason · Posted: Nov 11, 2003 12:00pm Post subject:

for those of you interested in how slashdot hits a site, here's a little graph:

Orange = # of searches on the site
Black = # of visitors * 20 (so they are viewable on the graph)

moonman · Lurker Joined: 15 Jul 2003 Posts: 212

ooh i think i see it

[al5001] · Guest

This might mean that we will be getting more traffic on IRC.

Exceter · none Joined: 15 May 2003 Posts: 19

I just put a K-Line on *@*.google.com.
I dont like that someone is spying my users...

Regards,
Ex

U · Eleet Joined: 18 Jun 2003 Posts: 521 Location: IRC

Instead of blocking *@*.google.com, what you may want to do is inform your users of it.

Also, I haven't seen the bots yet, but I have a feeling they will come from multiple sources, not just google.com-a good reason to advise your users to be wary of odd looking bots or clients in their channels, if they have reason to be concerned about such things Smile

Its likely you're not going to be able to block them all Smile

[al5001] · Guest

I don't mind a google bot going on my network.

If you are doing something illegal and people find out, who cares. There is really nothing anyone can do to shut down your network. What are the cops going to do? DDoS your server? I don't think so. They need proof before they can arrest you, and since logs can be edited, there is no stable evidence that can be taken.

Just relax. It's not the end of the world nor the end of IRC.

ed · Posted: Nov 28, 2003 9:52am Post subject:

Mary · SearchIRC Admin Joined: 03 May 2003 Posts: 692

U.S. federal law allows recording of electronic communications only with the consent of at least one party. A regular user can log channel conversations with their client because they are a party, or participant, in the conversation. However, a bot whose sole purpose is to log conversations between two or more people is not a human being that is participating in the conversation. It is a listening device. It is illegal under all US jurisdictions to record a conversation in which one is not a party, without a court order. (Which the RIAA already has, and uses vigorously.)

I have heard some people say moding a channel -s so it appears in /list is implied authorization to covertly hide recording devices in that channel. That's ridiculous. IRC isn't public. IRC networks are privately owned, and thus the channels within those networks are private as well. /List allows channel operators to publicize the purpose of the channel and the activities within -- but since when has publicizing an event been an invitation to attend, never mind do anything else at that event? If you put your wedding announcement in the newspaper, are you inviting all 3.2 million readers to show up at your reception, or consenting to a hidden camera from America's Funniest Videos in your hotel room on your wedding night? NO. Well, a SIM that advertises a meeting at 9 pm Friday is notifying members of the meeting, they are not issuing an invitation for 350 chatters to join, or authorizing some company to log their session and publish it on the web.

We don't know what Google intends doing as a result of their "experiments" on IRC. But according to Irchiver's recently updated website, that program is in channels now, logging conversations. They do not say what network, what channels, or which users are being logged.

[al5001] · Guest

Still though there really isn't anything they are going to do. What? You think cops are gonna go after some 12 year old kid downloading an mp3 illegally for his mp3 player because he can't afford CD's and his parents won't buy them?

You guys can't be serious. Now when you transfer illegal software, it's different. To me, if you want free software, switch to linux or unix. It will give you a totally better OS than windows, and give you open source software.

MP3s are music. Music in my mind should be free. I don't care if people distribute mp3s on my network. And if the producers want to take me to court they might as well do so, cause they don't own the music, the singers do.

For some reason I find they are targeting young teenagers as a profitable source by selling CDs and I find that to be breaking the law, since the only way you can afford them high-priced pieces of plastic is to get a job. When I see 12 year olds mowing lawns and washing cars till their eyes pop out, it makes me think of child labour.

Which again is against the law. We do not live in a 3rd world country.

Also, is it illegal to photocopy a picture from a magazine and give it to someone? I think not. So how is this any different than distributing copied music?

(Just an opinion)

ed · Posted: Nov 28, 2003 10:49pm Post subject:

U · Eleet Joined: 18 Jun 2003 Posts: 521 Location: IRC

I wouldn't be too shocked if googles purpose is to set up a search engine for irc (kinda like searchirc) and charge a nominal fee to access said service so people can search for files.

Or, they are just trying to get thier hands into the pie-lord knows they have their fingers in about everything else already....

ed · Posted: Nov 29, 2003 11:16am Post subject:

It seems odd for Google to be dabbling in a illegal file sharing search engine. Then again, who knows what the geeks over at Google are doing Wink

Wiggle · Newbie Joined: 01 Nov 2003 Posts: 81

Hmm yes. I don't think google would become the newest packetnews. At least I hope it doesn't. I've always loved google (because of their cool logo changes on holidays Wink

).