BitComet

I noticed in BitComet that the "total downloaded" for a file is often bigger than the file size. Like for a 30 MB file, there will be 80MB downloaded. What's going on here? I'd use utorrent, but for some reason BitComet gets better speeds.

If a piece that is downloaded appears corrupted, your BT client will have to redownload that piece, meaning the amount of data transferred will be greater than the actual file size. 80MB for a 30MB download seems rather excessive, though - there's probably someone with a hacked/crap client spewing bad data into the swarm and causing these problems. Some film, TV and music companies actually do this on purpose, deliberately "poisoning" torrents of their copyrighted material to make it slower and harder for people to complete the download.

But the poisoning can only come from a single source, correct? So long as I'm not reuploading bad data, that's fine with me.

As for the original question, you can check the more advanced info on the torrent for bad data records. I think it was just a count bug though, or else BitComet sucks ass at banning bad seeds.

You might have HDD corruption, too.

>>3
The .torrent files contains hashes that allow you to verify if each chunk of the torrent is valid. Even if a bad client is uploading bad data, your client will just discard it once it realizes that the data is fake. The completed torrent is guaranteed to be identical to the file described in the .torrent file.