News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by leni536 on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:16AM (#11636836)
(Thanks for daveguy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11593881)

https://31.184.194.81/ (sci-hub.io cert)

https://sci-hub.cc (same ip as above, sci-hub.io cert)

https://sci-hub.ac (same ip as above, sci-hub.io cert)

https://sci-hub.bz (uses a separate certificate and ip address -- 104.28.20.155)

And a tor site: scihub22266oqcxt.onion

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by daveguy on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:35AM (#11637019)
You're welcome! Thanks for reposting to keep the info active. One thing to add to that:

https://www.facebook.com/sci.hub.org

Their original domain was sci-hub.org, which got shut down a while back. Occasionally they post updated information to the facebook page.

Also, @fuxy. You can change your /etc/hosts file on a linux or BSD box to include the line:

31.184.194.81 sci-hub.io

That will override the DNS and go straight to the site.

Windows has a similar file located here (at least for win7):

C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts

A perfectly reasonable location for a hosts file.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by oneloop on Thursday May 05, 2016 @01:46PM (#11638227)
Guys, I have a question. If it's this simple to put a server into the onion, why are people not doing this with torrent trackers? I'm thinking specifically about thepiratebay.org which is still banned in the UK (at the ISP level, I believe). Then mirrors appear and then the mirrors get banned?

Why not just put it into the onion? Put it there once, problem solved.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by chejazi on Thursday May 05, 2016 @02:16PM (#11638503)
Perhaps the primary reason is accessibility. Onion addresses are not easily memorized. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooko%27s_triangle

I believe this inconvenience is minor, however.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by oneloop on Thursday May 05, 2016 @02:45PM (#11638734)
Incidentally, is there any fundamental reason why onion addresses are always so cryptic?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by devishard on Thursday May 05, 2016 @04:30PM (#11639440)
The answers are correct, but a less cryptographically-related answer:

When you go to a website on the regular internet, the name you type into your URL bar doesn't contain any location information. Instead, you go to a Dynamic Name Server (DNS) server (often run by your ISP) and and get the IP address, which tells your browser where to go.

With Tor, the hashes you see are analogous to the IP in regular internet: they tell your browser where to go. But there's no DNS for Tor, so you can't hide address behind a name.

Incidentally, this story is about SciHub being blocked at the DNS level, meaning that the domain https://sci-hub.io/ was removed from the DNS servers. But it's still available at the IP level at https://31.184.194.81/

This story demonstrates the need for DNS to be decentralized. ICANN has far too much control and is now using it for censorship that holds back the progress of all of humanity.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by forgotpwtomain on Thursday May 05, 2016 @08:36PM (#11640839)
It's not ICANN censoring them but their registrar which has pulled the domain. I agree that the ICANN monopoly is a bad thing, but the above statement is somewhat misleading.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by oneloop on Thursday May 05, 2016 @06:09PM (#11640033)
So would a sort of decentralized DNS be possible?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by collinmanderson on Thursday May 05, 2016 @08:55PM (#11640918)
Though even if we decentralize DNS, ICANN controls all of the underlying IP addresses.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by mariuolo on Saturday May 07, 2016 @07:06AM (#11649137)
> Though even if we decentralize DNS, ICANN controls all of the underlying IP addresses.

IANA would have to un-delegate a whole range from RIPE.

I don't see that happening unless they want to fracture the network.

Perhaps Elsevier will be able to force ISPs to blacklist that particular IP, but nothing more.

I also suspect they will move the domain under a ccTLD, not subject to the whims of ICANN.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by Uw7yTcf36gTc on Thursday May 05, 2016 @07:14PM (#11640426)
check out namecoin. they are attempting that, afaik.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by chadzawistowski on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:02PM (#11638857)
They don't have to be cryptic, but it takes a lot of brute-forcing to get a memorable one.

Facebook managed to get https://facebookcorewwwi.onion/

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by oneloop on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:11PM (#11638913)
I get that, my point is why do they have to be brute forced? Why can't you just pick one?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by roywiggins on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:49PM (#11639169)
They're hashes. If you don't have the number that hashes to and address, you can't run a server at that address.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by chadzawistowski on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:33PM (#11639059)
Hashes are easy to run forwards and hard to run backwards.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by curiousgal on Thursday May 05, 2016 @04:18PM (#11639350)
Crypto noob here. Why is that? are the hashes generated from an input randomly?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by falcolas on Thursday May 05, 2016 @05:00PM (#11639635)
A hash verifies an input, but you can not reproduce the input from a hash.

A simplified version: X % 2 = H

If I give you the formula, and a H of 1, can you, with certainty, tell me that my input was 1029? Cryptographic hashes have a similar property, just with a very large collision space - for Tor only 1 in 36^16 inputs will produce a given hash; yet you still can't guarantee that an input that produces that hash is the original input (and just guessing the possible inputs will take you a very long time).

The downside of our hash above is that it gives you a pretty good clue of what the original input was: if you get an H of 1029 from the forumla X % 10000000 = H, you'll have a pretty good idea of what the X was. Cryptographic hashes do not share this weakness - they will stretch the input, and ensure that there are no clues left as to what the original input was.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by rzzzt on Thursday May 05, 2016 @04:52PM (#11639589)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_hash_function

TLDR: they are designed to behave that way. Their alternative name is "one-way hash function".

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by mirimir on Thursday May 05, 2016 @06:36PM (#11640195)
The hash is generated from the onion services's private key.

Edit: I'm wrong. It's based on the hash of the public key. But it's rather confusing. After you create an onion service, you get a private key and an onion address. You don't actually get a public key, just the hostname based on it. I suspect that the public key could be found somehow. But it's not used for anything, that I know of.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by jfoutz on Thursday May 05, 2016 @09:48PM (#11641137)
Perhaps more intuitive, 11*17 is pretty easy to do in your head, but factoring 187 is much harder
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by DarkLinkXXXX on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:20PM (#11638971)
They are cryptographically generated.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by wiml on Friday May 06, 2016 @02:12AM (#11642040)
The answer to that is in the Zooko's Triangle link, give it a read.

But, in short: for a name to be useful in a global context, it has to be unambiguous or unique. If there isn't a centralized naming authority / registry, then that means that you can't be able to pick an arbitrary name. (If you could, you could just decide to use the same name as someone else, and now there's no way to figure out which one of you the name indicates.)

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by bradyd on Thursday May 05, 2016 @02:50PM (#11638775)
They are a hash generated from the service's public key.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by mirimir on Thursday May 05, 2016 @06:36PM (#11640200)
No, from its private key! The same key that's used to sign outgoing content, authenticating to the Tor network.

Edit: I'm wrong. It's based on the hash of the public key.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by ikeboy on Thursday May 05, 2016 @07:02PM (#11640364)
How can anyone verify a hash of the private key without having it? Anyway, see https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/HiddenServ...
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by mirimir on Thursday May 05, 2016 @08:29PM (#11640805)
I don't know the details. But basically, a Tor relay provides some token to the onion server. The onion server signs that token with its private key, and returns the output to the Tor relay. Then the Tor relay verifies that the token was signed by the private key corresponding to the onion hostname.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by gruez on Thursday May 05, 2016 @08:34PM (#11640826)
What about blockchain based DNS solutions like namecoin?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by Tiksi on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:41PM (#11639127)
They do: http://uj3wazyk5u4hnvtk.onion/

But most people don't run tor often or at all.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by ultramancool on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:49PM (#11639168)
If you're lazy and aren't looking for any strong degree of privacy for this kind of thing, you can run an onion transparent proxy on your router fairly easily, so then you can just navigate to .onion domains in any browser and browse away.

Of course, the privacy implications of this are pretty bad if you're just going to load most websites via direct connection. A simple image embed can deanonymize you. But it's probably good enough if you're just going to browse TPB or similar sites and are mostly just looking for a bypass without the privacy concern.

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Transparen...

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by Fuxy on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:27AM (#11636921)
Anybody know a linux script/software that would 'lock' a domain down to am IP regardless what the registrar does.

Maybe have even a out of band way of updating it without the registrars involvement.

I guess what I'm looking for would be P2P DNS server although making sure the data is not fake would be difficult without some kind of signing.

Wonder if it could use the bitcoin ledger as a kind of key server?

Edit: I know /etc/hosts does the job it's just lacking if the server changes IP

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by toomuchtodo on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:34AM (#11637009)
Sibling posts are accurate about hard coding /etc/hosts, although Sci Hub needs to move to IPFS [1].

[1] https://ipfs.io/

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by DarkLinkXXXX on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:27PM (#11639018)
I'd like to point out that Sci-Hub not only stores scientific papers, but it will retrieve official pdf's through an institutions proxy if it can and if necessary. It could perhaps store stuff there, but it could not provide that service there (yet).

Until then, torrents of all the files that sci-hub has retrieved (and all files uploaded into libgens scimag section) can be downloaded here. http://libgen.io/scimag/repository_torrent_notforall/

Anyone can torrent these then host them on IPFS without sci-hub's involvement. However, I suspect you'll have a hard time getting any duplicity for all of this. It's over 50mil files!

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by toomuchtodo on Thursday May 05, 2016 @03:35PM (#11639074)
Thank you so much. My hope is that IPFS can serve as the underlying distributed object storage, and then work up from there to have an indexed distributed search system on top of that (Elasticsearch within a docker container using versioned ES index backups in IPFS? With documents referenced by their IPFS content hash for de-duplication?).
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by marcosdumay on Thursday May 05, 2016 @06:49PM (#11640276)
Does anybody know the total size of the repository?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by DarkLinkXXXX on Thursday May 05, 2016 @10:05PM (#11641190)
Not AFAIK, but you good get a good idea by downloading all the torrent files, and extracting the torrent size from the metadata. Or maybe just download 1 torrent (since there's over 500 of them, one per 100k files), and multiply the average size per file.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by toomuchtodo on Thursday May 05, 2016 @09:59PM (#11641173)
~50TB
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by goodplay on Thursday May 05, 2016 @01:36PM (#11638138)
They should partition the papers into fields and sub-fields so that each person could easily host and mirror their field of interest.

This has the additional benefit of having the papers locally for easy indexing and searching.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by toomuchtodo on Thursday May 05, 2016 @01:37PM (#11638157)
I agree such meta data should be captured, but if the papers are converted to IPFS, it'll be easier to copy, ship, and then re-serve the data at end points.

Think of it as a [sneaker|dark]net CDN enabled by content addressable storage.

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by return0 on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:31AM (#11636963)
/etc/hosts ?
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by dethos on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:48AM (#11637130)
For the locking feature I'm not sure, but there are alternative DNS networks such as https://www.opennicproject.org
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by hartator on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:31AM (#11636967)
echo "google.com 127.0.0.1" >> /etc/hosts
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by niels_olson on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:41AM (#11637064)
Yeah, I recommend against this particular example :)
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by amelius on Thursday May 05, 2016 @11:58AM (#11637205)
Do this on your friends and families computers, and change the world.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by alwaysdownvoted on Friday May 06, 2016 @12:15AM (#11641656)
There's a couple of comments showing hostname followed by IP address. Are commenters really putting entries in this format into their HOSTS file? And it works? The correct format, at least on BSD UNIX and Windows, is IP address followed by hostname.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by iainnash on Thursday May 05, 2016 @02:03PM (#11638387)
Would need to be www.google.com to be effective, this just breaks the redirect.
Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by tejtm on Thursday May 05, 2016 @04:09PM (#11639302)
duckduckgo it

echo "google.com 54.215.176.19" >> /etc/hosts

Re:Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name by bra-ket on Thursday May 05, 2016 @02:00PM (#11638357)