uTorrent client is stealing your CPU cycles to mine Bitcoins

By gradient456
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

I switched to Tribler (from uTorrent) for performance reasons (and the lack of adware) and greater anonymity - apparently, I also dodged a rather nasty bullet in the process.

Grand Master

Elliot B.

Posted
Posted

And this is why I'm still running 2.2.1 version of uTorrent.  

There have been so, so many things added and bugs fixed since that version - but I think I'll do the same now :(

Grand Master

devHead

Posted
Posted

Glad I switched over to Tixati a while back.

I love Tixati also, and would be using it if one particular site had it on their white-list.  Right now, I'm using uTorrent 2.2.1, which was their best version until they started bloating it all up. But I still hate the fact that Categories in uTorrent don't show in the dropdown if you don't have a particular torrent being seeded in that category.  In Tixati, they're permanently  there, and you can select them by hitting a radio button.

Thanks for the heads up! :) Off to find new torrent app (any recommendations?) and clean my PC from unwanted junk.  :crazy:

Tixati is good; not the prettiest UI, but pretty customizable.  

Grand Master

Rippleman

Posted
Posted

I just installed utorrent and I do not have what they claim is being installed.

 

Out of curiousity, how much extra power (on average) can a bit miner use on an average consumer machine per month? $10? $20? $50? $100? 

 

Sounds like utorrent will be the target of a class action lawsuit based on not disclosing "your power bill will be increase by X amount"

Grand Master

+Random Stranger Subscriber¹

Posted
  • Subscriber¹
Posted

There have been so, so many things added and bugs fixed since that version - but I think I'll do the same now :(

 

do you really need the added bulk?    and as for bugs,  1.8.2 version i am using -   i notice no issues.      it downloads torrents.  it reports correct usage to the tracker.  

i can label torrents, sort them in any way i want.   i can set download and upload custom limits.  i have tons of options.

 

 

 

tell me why even 2.2.1 is better then 1.8.2 and i might switch.    but i doubt there is a real reason.

Grand Master

Elliot B.

Posted
Posted

do you really need the added bulk?    and as for bugs,  1.8.2 version i am using -   i notice no issues.      it downloads torrents.  it reports correct usage to the tracker.  

i can label torrents, sort them in any way i want.   i can set download and upload custom limits.  i have tons of options.

 

 

 

tell me why even 2.2.1 is better then 1.8.2 and i might switch.    but i doubt there is a real reason.

I'm sure the torrent back-end that all clients stick to, has been updated lots since uTorrent 1.8.2 was released. You'll fall behind and miss out on features, optimizations etc. of the back-end, not just the client itself.

 

Saying that, as I said, I'm unhappy with uTorrent these days. However, I feel that, rather than drop to a very old version, it's better for me to switch clients completely.

Grand Master

FunkyMike

Posted
Posted

uTorrent seems to have issues with disk overloading for me so I switched to qBittorrent not too long ago.

 

No drops in speed or disk issues anymore.

 

Not sure if anyone ever experienced these issues before but they couldn't be fixed via the memory allocation functions which are found in the settings.

  • Decebalvs Rex and +Random Stranger
  • Like 2
Contributor

gradient456

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for the heads up! :) Off to find new torrent app (any recommendations?) and clean my PC from unwanted junk.  :crazy:

 

 

There have been so, so many things added and bugs fixed since that version - but I think I'll do the same now :(

Try Qbitttorrent. it has the same UI and is free from adware and mining

  • Obry and Aergan
  • Like 2
Grand Master

+Random Stranger Subscriber¹

Posted
  • Subscriber¹
Posted

I'm sure the torrent back-end that all clients stick to, has been updated lots since uTorrent 1.8.2 was released. You'll fall behind and miss out on features, optimizations etc. of the back-end, not just the client itself.

 

this is what i am trying to figure out.  outside of geekery where i must have the latest and greatest....          do i really care and/or need this feature or optimizations?   will it have a noticeable effect?

uTorrent seems to have issues with disk overloading for me so I switched to qBittorrent not too long ago.

 

No drops in speed or disk issues anymore.

 

Not sure if anyone ever experienced these issues before but they couldn't be fixed via the memory allocation functions which are found in the settings.

 

 

 

hmmm.   really?      i am going to give it a go.    i never had issues with that until last few month. i don't know what changed, but if it is a bug and not an issue with my aging disk drives... i will switch in a heartbeat.

Grand Master

firey

Posted
Posted

I didn't see any un-exepcted CPU usage or strange items in startup.  Nothing in any of the program files or anything.. but as I don't support tactics like that.. I've uninstalled uTorrents and moved to qTorrent.

Grand Master

MorganX

Posted
Posted

Just switch to Qbittorent: http://sourceforge.net/projects/qbittorrent/

 

Opensource software that looks similar and does the same

 

Thanks for the link. This is actually great!

Grand Master

+InsaneNutter MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

u  want a good torrent client?    just go back to 1.8.2 and never update the software again.

I believe 1.8.2 is vulnerable to the uTorrent DLL hijacking exploit.

I use uTorrent 2.0.4.22967 which is the last 2.0 version and is not vulnerable to the DLL Hijacking Exploit. I wouldn't use anything after 2.0 however, i'd be tempted to find a different client.

  • SecretAgentMan, Romero and +Random Stranger
  • Like 3
Grand Master

FunkyMike

Posted
Posted

hmmm.   really?      i am going to give it a go.    i never had issues with that until last few month. i don't know what changed, but if it is a bug and not an issue with my aging disk drives... i will switch in a heartbeat.

 

It was fairly easy to make it look akin to utorrent so the switch was super easy once I noticed that it handled better overall. I started by using the standalone portable application because utorrent would have issues with anything single file which was around 10GB +. It showed no issues and didn't slow down the startup on my old 1tb 2.5 platter.

 

qBittorrent doesn't seem to tax my memory and HDD as much as utorrent for some reason.

 

I know a lot of people tend to stick to an older utorrent version specially for this reason.

 

Not sure on what happened to utorrent but try out the portable version on a few files first! ... maybe it will be a good experience!

  • +Random Stranger
  • Like 1
Proficient

Obry

Posted
Posted

Nothing to suggest everyone has moved to qBittorrent in their download stats graph yet...

 

http://sourceforge.net/projects/qbittorrent/files/qbittorrent-win32/qbittorrent-3.1.12/qbittorrent_3.1.12_setup.exe/stats/timeline

 

I assume this only counts SF.net downloads. When I went to their site the primary download link I was given was via FOSSHUB.com. Their download stats aren't as granular as SF.net (they're broken down by the month instead of daily)...

Grand Master

Xenon

Posted
Posted

I just did a search of my computer. I installed utorrent last week and I can not find any trace of Epic. When I installed utorrent I turned down all the bundled software and didn't download the suggest torrent they offer. But what they did is sleazy. I think i am gonna switch to a different program.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By Jose_49 · Posted

      Web search has been one of those crap ware that I try to get rid of asap. It's annoying and slow. It was a cheap way for Microsoft to drive traffic to Bing.
    • Creative Sound Blaster AE-X PCIe review: your headphones will love it

      By WaltC · Posted

      All I can say is that think the USB G8 is better in many ways, and costs the same or slightly less. I wouldn't part with mine. It's even a big improvement over the G6 USB. (You can also use studio phones (up to 600 OHMs I think) with the G8, but I have to say that even relatively cheap 30-50 OHM phones sound absolutely great--far better than through most internal motherboard sound!) Considering the difference in these products I am surprised that Creative is still making the PCIe internal card versions. https://www.headphoneer.com/cr...ve-sound-blaster-g8-review/
    • I have really been nerding out on my desktop icons and feel compelled to share...

      By Nick H. · Posted

      I missed this when you first posted it, but those are awesome icons! I would normally prefer things to be uniform, but each of those icons seems to fit perfectly for the game! If I may ask though, what was your thought process on which icons are circular - MK makes sense - and which ones should be rectangular or square?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good

      By WaltC · Posted

      What I like about Paint is using it almost exclusively for cropping and resizing images I get elsewhere--it's quick, easy and cheap... I keep it glued to my taskbar, in fact. Also, the clipping tool comes in handy, as well (hit print scrn on the keyboard and it activates immediately.)
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good

      By WaltC · Posted

      I still remember it fondly today. It was so cool to work in 64-color Half Bright mode and 4.096-color HAM mode (interlaced) when x86 was still in 4-color CGA or 16-color EGA low res. C= never realized what it had until it was far too late--the failure of C= was the failure of its top management. The C= Amiga was 20 years ahead of its time, I always thought. It didn't hurt that in only 512k of chip memory, the Amiga could preemptively multitask when Apple was still doing gray scale graphics on tiny screens and along with everyone else was doing cooperative multitasking (running more than one app at a time in resident memory, but you could only run one of them at a time--had to manually switch between them.) I had a ball with AREXX scripting running between programs that had AREXX ports so that when you sent other applications data and instructions, those running applications could process the same in real time to output! Memories...

  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      507
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      185
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      84
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      76
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!