Fenix Outfitters        
Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Computer privacy?

  1. #1
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    585

    Default Computer privacy?

    I used to have Norton Internet Security 2003 installed, which came with a file shredder that conformed to DoD standards. Does anyone know a reliable, and hopefully free!, programme that does this?

    Ideally, I would like to be able to delete individual files but I have an old hard drive which needs wiping completely.

    Thank you!

  2. #2
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Edinburgh UK
    Posts
    630

    Default Re: Computer privacy?


  3. #3
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Let me know if you need a program that runs under linux. I can provide it.

    I must ask, why would you need it? It takes VERY sophisticated equipment to recover information that has been erased and over-written even once. The DoD standard is something along the lines of 7 overwrites with various patterns and random data sources.

    If a disk is already dead, you can 'erase it' by many means. I understand an arc welder does a great job. I bet a local machine/welding shop might do it for free just for the fun of it. Heat plus electrical fields plus physical damage! If it's not dead, you can use a batch file to repetitively copy a large file to the drive over and over.

    Daniel
    (P.S Thermite is a favorite for spy stories about hackers. A little bit on top of the drive, ignite it and nothing left to examine)

  4. #4
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    I forgot about the mundane. You can have tapes and disks 'degaused' by teh same companies that provide shredding service. You can buy your own degausser.



    Daniel
    (P.S. One hacker supposedly installed an coil around the door jamb and activated it when the door was opened if the computer was turned off. . The FBI agent pulled the power from the computer and carried it to the truck, only to find the disk was erased. The coil created a magnetic field that srambled the data fairly well.) Have you guessed that I used to be in the computer security field? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

  5. #5
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    2,407

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    a high power video tape eraser from radio shack works well

  6. #6
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,903

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    An unshielded AV subwoofer placed next to the computer works rather well, as i once found out by complete accident. Watch an action movie with lots of explosions and if the magnetic field doesnt trash the drive, the vibrations will do a pretty thorough job on the mechanisms.

  7. #7
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    [ QUOTE ]
    ...It takes VERY sophisticated equipment to recover information that has been erased and over-written even once.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    VERY sophisticated equipment is becoming the norm. Your drive writes to the platter using a head that was state of the art years and years ago. Your drive may be dissassembled and write traces may be read by reassembling them into a drive equiped with heads a little closer to the state of the art than your's are. This equipment is in the process of being commoditized and its use is no longer confined to those with pockets as deep as the Fed.

    [ QUOTE ]
    ...The DoD standard is something along the lines of 7 overwrites with various patterns and random data sources.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    The 7 pass DoD standard has two things wrong with it:

    1)-- It was written a really long time ago and HDD heads have really come a long way since then.

    2)-- Data overwriten seven times could still be read at the time of the initial writing of the standard with what were then state of the art heads. The standard was written to guarantee that any data wiped with that method would be recoverable by anyone with the right hardware. Peter Guttman (Da Man) said as much way back in the mid 90s.

    The trend towards more advanced, cheaper, more accessable equipment will only make secure deletion of sensitive data more and more problematical in the future. We are rapidly reaching a convergence where it will become impossible to assume that any attacker lacks the resources to read 'securely deleted' files.

    The bottom line is that in the real world it must be assumed that there is no reliable way to remove plaintext which has been written to a hard drive. So the safest approach is simply to NEVER write sensitive data to any hard drive in plaintext. That is the reality.

    Write to transparent encrypted volume(s) or just transparently encrypt your whole drive, OS and all.

    Just say no to plaintext.

  8. #8
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    I have to agree, encrypted volumes are better. Even that's not perfect, as it assumes that 1) you've protected the keys well enough and 2) the encryption has no weaknesses. It's not often that both of these happen among lay-people.

    Encryption plus wiping works well, simply because the tech has a hard time figuring out when they have garbage and when they have data.

    As for better heads, at the same time we have drives that are more sensitive and that use weaker signals. Where they gain in reading capability from better tools they lose in weaker singals and more data per square mm.

    Personally, I figure I don't want any information on my computer (encrypted or otherwise) that I would not want on the front page of the local paper.

    Sadly, most of the used drives and used computers I've bought were not wiped or even formated. I had internal IP addresses and host names at the JPL (Jet Propulsion Lab) on one system that I bought. I wiped that one myself.

    To play devils advocate, if the department of home land security (why do I always want to type 'fatherland'?) wanted info on me they would simply serve a warrant while I was away from home. They'd fake a power fialure to crash the syatems, then they'd duplicate my drives and add spyware to watch what I do. All perfectly legal. They spend months and years on these things.

    Daniel

  9. #9

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Really what kind of measures are worth bothering with, depends on who the adversary is and what kind of data you have.

    What I suggest for most people is use a laptop computer and keep it locked in a drawer when not in use. IBM laptops in particular support a hard drive password that, while it does not encrypt the drive, can't be bypassed without the capabilities of an electronics lab.

    If you're doing something -really- hush-hush, you need to encrypt the drive.

  10. #10
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    1,274

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    I always format very small and useless hard drives I've used in the past with a 20 pound sledge hammer!!!! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] It works great and it's really fast!

  11. #11
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    The problem with brute force is that it leaves the magnetic tracks there. It's possible to smooth out the platters and mount them on spcial spindles in a recovery center. Very expensive, very time intensive and not generally worthwhile, but a possibility.

    I figure no one will ever really want to go through that much hassle looking for my info. If they ever do, they will be sadly dissapointed with how little there is to find.

    Daniel

  12. #12
    Flashaholic* ACMarina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Brookston, IN
    Posts
    3,119

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    How about incinerators?? I've had more than a few hardware BBQ's in the burner. .

  13. #13
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    [ QUOTE ]
    gadget_lover said:
    ...I figure no one will ever really want to go through that much hassle looking for my info. If they ever do, they will be sadly dissapointed with how little there is to find.

    Daniel

    [/ QUOTE ]
    I'm afraid mine would be disappointing, too.

    OT

    From 'civic minded' point of view I think that it is much better for society as a whole if more people would guard their data and (therefore their privacy) much more carefully -- as though they had something to hide.

    It really doesn't bother me that my government can read my email. What really gets me is that they can read my email SO CHEAPLY! While part of the government can go to the courts and get some doddering judge to grant permission for them to monitor my snail mail, the whole process is prohibitively expensive. That's GOOD from a privacy point of view. It is so expensive and resource intensive that they must weigh the facts very carefully before deciding to monitor the snail mail of even one person! For the same expenditure of resources I'd guess that they could monitor a couple HUNDRED THOUSAND email accounts for keywords.

    My point is that if it is cheap and easy enough to surveil the entire population, that is where we will eventually end up. So from my point of view, everyone should encrypt everything. I don't care if someone wants to read my email and has the ability to do so. I just want to make damn sure that it will be expensive enough that it won't be sucked up with a vacuum cleaner and filtered on a wholesale level. To a lesser extent, the same applies to hard drives.

    In some countries (like Germany) which have very recent memories of total government intrusion and no privacy, good citizens are encouraged to use encryption even for routine email for this reason. A couple years ago the German government even set up a website so it's citizens could PRACTICE sending and receiving encrypted emails.

    They realize (correctly) that a combination of rapidly advancing information technology coupled with citizens who tend to be apathetic about their own privacy can lead to disaster when mixed with the all too human nature of public officials.

  14. #14
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    MS
    Posts
    598

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Sub Umbra has it right. As he said "My point is that if it is cheap and easy enough to surveil the entire population, that is where we will eventually end up."

    It already has being done, the people engaged in ID theft are the dumb crooked ones. The real stuff hasn't hit the fan yet. I know people who have been in law enforcement for years, and they can't believe how easy it is to get information (and the kinds) these days.

    I don't want my information out there wholesale either, but my life history is all over public and semi public computers (like the DMV). All I can hope to do about 20 year old information is move more often. All any one needs to know is your birthdate. It's better if they know where you were born, but just a name and birth date brings up enough information to find out the rest once someone wants to look for it.....

  15. #15
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    I'll third that.

    I worked at the phone company as a tech years ago.
    When the feds had to get a warrant to tap a phone line, I saw only one a year in a switching office with 10,000 phones. Big yellow box that sat on the floor; hard to miss. That was in a town with a high crime rate.

    Now they need the ability to do it without detection and without a warrant? Why?

    I'd use encryption if I had any faith in it. I'd send encrypted e-mail, but then I'd have to teach my parents how to use it. They live in different states. they are in thier 70s.

    That's where the problem starts. If they need help I can't tell them over the phone, for once an pasphrase is compromised it has to be changed AND any data that it protected that might have been copied is also compromised. The phone may be tapped (mine or theirs). The mail may be read. The PC could have keystroke logging programs. Did you know there's a keyboard cable that records your keystrokes? $49.99!

    So I don't bother.

    Of course, if I talk my clients into it, I can make a fortune teaching them how to use it every few months. Hmmmmm...



    Daniel

  16. #16
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    No security will ever be perfect.That is the nature of the beast. We owe it to ourselves to try to make our communications/data more secure. Yes there are key-loggers, Trojans and countless other tools that attackers can use against us but we shouldn't let ourselves feel so helpless that we refuse to take any action on our own behalf.

    While the various countermeasures are imperfect, whether they be hardware, software or services provided by a third party, we gain a great deal of security through their use, anyway. Anything out of the mainstream that you do to secure your data will require added analysis, tools, action and greater expense to attack than if you do nothing. Right now in the States, 'Joe Consumer's' data is pretty much a monoculture. It's in plaintext. As I inferred before, it can all be sucked up and dealt with very cheaply as a wholesale commodity. Almost any action you take to secure your data/comms will at least have the effect of de-commoditizing it and making it much more expensive to read.

    There is something else about 'Joe Consumer's' attitude about his data that really bothers me. His irrational fears have caused him to go into a paralysis where he refuses to do ANYTHING to make his data safer.

    Let me give a couple of examples in the real world where people find an identical standard perfectly adequate for every aspect of their lives except for their data and computers.

    Why do you lock your house/apartment doors when you go to work? Don't you know that someone could pick the lock? Don't you know that they could just crash in the door if they wanted to get in? Of course you know that. You lock your doors because you know that it helps -- that in fact it is quite a bit better than doing nothing.

    Why do you lock your car? That's even worse than your house. Even more people are skilled at entering locked cars. There are many more methods to enter a locked car than there are to enter a locked house -- including towing it away! All of the anti-theft measures we use with our cars are imperfect. Locks, alarms and LoJack can all be defeated by a determined attacker. Yet people still lock their cars.

    I find it really weird that we embrace these imperfect methods for our houses and our cars and yet we demand perfection for our computer security -- or we just won't play the game. In any discussion of computer security there are always those who pipe in with reasons why various methods of securing a computer and its data are imperfect, which is their stated reason for inaction. And yet these same people lock their cars and homes when they leave and are somehow able to accept these very imperfect solutions for the physical security of their own personal property.

    I don't mean to sound like I'm responding to any particular poster here. I've just noticed this trend in EVERY discussion I've ever heard about consumer level computer security and I'll admit to spending far too much time pondering personal privacy issues. It just fascinates me. Deeply.

  17. #17
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    As an amateur locksmith and a certified computer professional (ISCP certified) with a security background, let me explain the difference....


    You lock your physical property with what you believe to be strong locks (most have no idea how strong they are) because it's easy to do and you want to block casual thieves. You value what you think is being protected. The assumtion is that anyone could try to break in at any time. You are the only one who needs to unlock it. You can easily give keys to whomeever needs one.


    Most people think that sending an e-mail from their computer to their mother is a point to point transaction. They don't realize that there may be up to 100 employees of various ISPs that could monitor an individual message. They think it's safe. They also don't lose anything of value when joe_the_network_guy snoops packets and reads their note to grandma. Grandma still gets the note and they never know it was snooped.


    The reality is that an ISP employee is very unlikely to target a message from you to anyone else. Like a post office employee, they are too busy to bother most of the time.

    I don't feel helpless, by the way. If I want to get secure information to someone I send them an encrypted copy, a link to a program to decode it and I call, visit or write them to give them the key. I still don't know if their computer has been compromised, but it's a start.

    Sub_umbra; Let me point out that you did absolutely nothing to make your last post more secure. You did not even obfuscate the subject nor use euphemisms to hide your meaning. You did not PGP sign it to ensure it was not altered. You did not ROT13 encode it or even type it backwards. Why? I suspect because 1) there was nothing to hide and 2) There was nothing to lose and 3) because you wanted people to be able to read it. Plus, it'a a hassle.


    Zbfg crbcyr ner pbaprearq nobhg frphevgl hagvy vg pnhfrf na
    vapbairavrapr. Gung vf gur onar bs gur frphevgl cebsrffvbany.


    Daniel

  18. #18
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    [ QUOTE ]

    As an amateur locksmith and a certified computer professional (ISCP certified) with a security background,...

    Sub_umbra; Let me point out that you did absolutely nothing to make your last post more secure. You did not even obfuscate the subject nor use euphemisms to hide your meaning. You did not PGP sign it to ensure it was not altered. You did not ROT13 encode it or even type it backwards. Why? I suspect because 1) there was nothing to hide and 2) There was nothing to lose and 3) because you wanted people to be able to read it. Plus, it'a a hassle.


    [/ QUOTE ]
    Emphasis mine.

    I didn't mean any offense. I explicitly stated that I was only addressing issues, not posters.

    As far as your assertion that I 'did absolutely nothing to make my post secure', you're wrong. Perhaps it did not appear to meet your security standards. Your security standards are not an issue when it comes to my posts on CPF. It was very secure by my standards. I used an stunnel proxy to a server a thousand miles away from where I live (that is, if you can really believe a guy like me [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). If you knew my ISP and put a carnivore box on it you wouldn't get Jack on my posts that way. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Even if you have access to the CPF servers -- you're still not going to get Jack on my posts. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] You're going to get exactly what you're reading right now. Period.

    As far as the security of my posts goes, they look pretty much like what I wrote.

    I know enough not to make stupid challenges to people I don't know, but since you brought it up, aside from the stunnel use, there are still a half dozen measures I've taken that I haven't told you about -- you're at least three subpoenas and quite a bit of good old fashioned legwork (read expensive) away from my real name.

    Things are not always what they seem -- even for certified computer professionals. Actually, if that's what I look like to certified computer professionals, then I'm still on the right track. Thanks for the critique. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

    As far as obfuscation goes, in my posts, I see no need for it. I used no dangerous key words. If I'm going to be taken away in the night for what I've written here today I'll be pretty far down a very long line of folks far more rad than I. I'll just part my hair on the other side and move if I see that trend beginning. I wrote my posts with the intent of being easily understood. Just being understood is truly enough of a challenge for me in this world. I tend to use obfuscation on other levels...

    I'm sorry if I've offended you in some way. That was not my intent. I just tend to be a little evangelical about privacy issues...sorry.

  19. #19
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Damn! I forgot to point out that I was having fun again! I'm not offended in any way. I LIKE security and wish it was practical to educate more people so that we'd have fewer DDOS, Phoshing and Spoofing problems.

    I AM HAVING FUN:

    [ QUOTE ]
    As far as obfuscation goes, in my posts, I see no need for it.

    [/ QUOTE ] That was my point. During most of our life, theres no reason for privacy nor security.

    Using Stunnel to a distant proxy is, by definition, a reason to look into your actions under the homeland security act. How do you know the proxy has not been compromised?

    Because you are using half a dozen other measures, you probably use the same ones consistantly. That makes it easier to plan an intercept.

    We've discussed Computer, privacy, Encryption, Stunnel, proxy, security, homeland security, ISP and Carnivore. What makes you think we have not triggered something based on key words?

    Personally, I'm also a privacy advocate. I would love it if every law change brought about by 911 were undone. The various agencies had plenty of data that would have prevented the disaster if only someone had understood the significance. They had plenty of tools that they did not use.

    The law that allows warrentless searches and spying on personal communications is a people problem, not a technological one. So are the laws that protect copyright forever, except in wierd cases. Did you know, for instance, that every PM you send via CPF belongs to Sasha? Did you know that if you are exchanging PM's regarding a miracle invention, Sasha could sell that to someone and it's totally legal.

    Yeah, there's lots to fix. It just occured to me that the advocation of encrypting everything tends to come from those that wish to create enough smoke that they are not noticed. Hiding anything? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

    Please, remember I'm just having fun. Say stop and I will. Don't get offended.

    Daniel

  20. #20
    *Flashaholic*
    tvodrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Hawthorne, NV
    Posts
    4,987

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    My read of Daniel's post re Sub's was humor. A smiley would maybe have alleviated any doubts? Please keep the knowledge flowing for us non-computer security aware folks flowing! I have Norton AV, ZoneAlarm, AdWatch monitoring, and Spybot S&D. When I open IE (run FireFox except when going for an update from Uncle Bill) SpywareGuard immediately detects CWS varient infesting one end of my computer to the other! I get the update and clean most of it out with AdAware and SpyBot S&D, but they can't get it all [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] . I have nothing on this box that I would worry about falling into enemy hands. Same for my emails/PM's etc. I can only hope that a "secure" purchase online is!
    Edit: as to shredding a HDD, I have a bunch of magnets that will hold a 1" pad to my frig door, not to mention a large oxy-acetylene rig. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

    Larry

  21. #21
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    That should work, Larry. Use the torch to melt it to slag then drop a few magnets on it when it's cooled. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

    There is a virus (or two) that change your IE security settings so that a specific foreign site is considered local. Then it makes that site your home page. It re infects every time you run I.E.

    Take a look at this one...
    http://www.computing.net/security/ww...rum/14341.html

    Daniel

  22. #22
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Without privacy there can be no security. I need privacy all the time. That's my business. If you do not -- that's your business.

    [ QUOTE ]

    It just occured to me that the advocation of encrypting everything tends to come from those that wish to create enough smoke that they are not noticed. Hiding anything?


    [/ QUOTE ]

    Plenty. 24/7. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Ain't freedom ironic? A cursory review of governments in general in the last century reveals that one of the most serious problems that an individual can have with his government is trying to figure out exactly what it is at any given time that he should be hiding from them. History has shown over and over that sometimes a government will kill a citizen because he failed to hide something as simple as a poem. How do you even know that you have nothing to hide? But again, this is your business.

    If you think that any of the keywords you sited are valid, pick one and Google it. See how many hits you get. I suppose you think that the Feds will look into all of those, too. I guess...they could all be suspicious. No wonder Homeland Security is so expensive. Just checking out all those references to 'Computer' on the WWW is going to be pricey. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] And we know that the visible WEB is just the beginning.

    As far as your elaborate rationalizations about all the ways you would try to prove to me that my methods are futile, I still wonder:

    Are you still locking your house and car when you leave them? Is there something in there that you are trying to hide? Aren't you afraid that you will draw attention to yourself by always keeping them locked up? Do you always drive the same route to and from work? Aren't you afraid that your car may be less secure if someone figures out your patterns?

    I suspect that your answers would sound familiar, but we are coming at this from two different directions.

  23. #23
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Well, It's all point of view, I guess. There are different types of security, and there are different types of privacy.

    I lock my doors when I'm gone to protect my property from theft. I lock them when I'm home to protect myself from danger (I'm already there to prevet theft). To protect my privacy I draw the shades so that I can, if I wish, prance around half clothed. The locked windows prevent someone outside the house from lifting the shade.

    But I open the doors to invite folks in, and I have the shades open most of the
    time to let the sunshine in.

    A story: A friend knew of my lock smithing hobby. He locked his keys in his car one day at lunch and so he asked for help. I made a impromptu lock pick and wrench and had it open litterally in 3 seconds. This was shear luck, by the way. It should have taken longer. Here's the punch line: I had to talk him into locking his car in the future. He felt if it was that simple that he shoudl not even try.

    The previous post also states: Aren't you afraid that you will draw attention to yourself by always keeping them locked up?

    Well, I don't know of many locks that draw attention by being locked VS unlocked. I DO know that elaborate (and visible) security measures will discourage the common thief and make you a target for a professional one. But the advocacy of good physical security does not parallel the advocacy of encryption.


    Yes, freedom is ironic. It's not free. I find it strange that people worry about hiding things from a government that they feel is incompetent. In the post above was the line: [ QUOTE ]
    See how many hits you get. I suppose you think that the Feds will look into all of those

    [/ QUOTE ]

    What I actually did was plant a red flag message if the feds really were using something like Carnivore. One of the simplest ways to look for keywords is to assign points to each message, and add points for each key word match. My post should have had a fairly high count, and you read it, so the anonymous proxy should be under investigation by now. I did not throw in the T word on any of the phrases that would really be searched for....


    BTW, give it a few days and then google on "Computer privacy Encryption Stunnel proxy security homeland security ISP Carnivore". You'll most likely find your post.

  24. #24
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    [ QUOTE ]
    ...BTW, give it a few days and then google on "Computer privacy Encryption Stunnel proxy security homeland security ISP Carnivore". You'll most likely find your post.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Just a little more noise...in a sea of noise. I think you're beginning to come around. Just a few posts ago you would have tried to convince everyone that a search using those common keywords would automagically trigger a full blown investigation by DHS. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

  25. #25
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    I forgot to say....

    In this country (the US) you have the right to use encryption. Well, maybe not the right but at least there is no law saying you can't use it. There are countries like France where it is illegal. You should be writing your congress-person NOW to let them know that you want it to stay that way.

    You do have the right to privacy (again, in the US) but that means that the government is not allowed to peak at certain things, except under certain conditions. I'll tell you the same thing I told my paranoid ex wife. If the powers that be are so incompetent that they need 50 people and 2 years to bust a pot growing operation, what makes you think they have the ability or manpower to spy on you? What makes you think they'd even care? If they had that much manpower, wouldn't about every 10th person work for the FBI?



    Now the ones you should worry about are less constrained by the constitution. They are your favorite mega corporations. Hotmail, for instance has the legal right to use your messages any way they see fit. It's a free service and your messages belong to them. Hotmail is owned by MS, who has extensive holdings in other areas, including ISPs and databases. Imagine what they can compile if you put too much info in a message you send through them! and all without a court order.

    So far, I've not seen a hint that Sub_umbra is using an anonymous proxy. Hmmm.

    Daniel

  26. #26
    Flashaholic* Xrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,595

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Very interesting and though provoking thread... please keep up the discussions. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

    [ QUOTE ]
    gadget_lover said:
    So far, I've not seen a hint that Sub_umbra is using an anonymous proxy. Hmmm.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Perhaps this could be another form of security? If a group of people is lead to believe that someone is using an anonymous proxy or other elaborate security measure, wouldn't some be more likely not to bother looking for themselves? (Just a though, no offence Sub_umbra. I'm not saying anything about what you are/aren't using, just trying to make a point).

    -Mike

  27. #27
    Flashaholic* Sub_Umbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    la bonne vie en Amérique
    Posts
    4,757

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    [ QUOTE ]

    ...what makes you think they have the ability or manpower to spy on you? What makes you think they'd even care? If they had that much manpower, wouldn't about every 10th person work for the FBI?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    This doesn't make any sense. In one post you infer that the Fed is so all-knowing and all-seeing that it is risky to use a ubiquitous word like 'computer' on the WWW -- and then a few days later you insist that they are too incompetent to spy on citizens. Those two positions are at odds with each other. Your arguments would be far more believable if you just picked one story and stuck to it.

    [ QUOTE ]

    So far, I've not seen a hint that Sub_umbra is using an anonymous proxy. Hmmm.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    That's kind of an ironic statement. Believe what you like. You're the one who made the studied proclamation that I had "...done absolutely nothing..." to secure my posts. You had absolutely no credible information to base that statement on. You're the one who described yourself as a certified computer professional. Now you've gone from saying I've "...done absolutely nothing..." to secure my posts, to asserting that you see no evidence that I'm using an ano proxy.

    If you couldn't see a proxy before, what on Earth makes you think that you should you be able to see it now?

    [ QUOTE ]
    Sub_Umbra said:
    ...Actually, if that's what I look like to certified computer professionals, then I'm still on the right track. Thanks for the critique. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I'm confident that you have rationalizations that you feel will cover these points, too.

    This has become tedious. It's like arguing about color with a blind man.

  28. #28
    Flashaholic lymph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    280

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    [ QUOTE ]
    gadget_lover said:
    Let me know if you need a program that runs under linux. I can provide it.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Can I get that linux program from you? I'm all out of thermite. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

  29. #29
    *Flashaholic* gadget_lover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Silicon Valley (too near)
    Posts
    7,113

    Default Re: Computer privacy?

    Well, I guess Sub-umbra is opted out of the discussion. I'll respond to his last post and then let it be.

    Please note that I never said that any governmental agency is all seeing. In fact I am pretty sure they miss 90% of what they should be looking at or for. I was poking subtle fun at the paranoia that the feds might be examining harmless communications. Yes, by and large the intelligence agencies are either incompetent or ineffective.

    The comment about having done nothing to secure the post was meant point out that the content of the post was not in any way secured. I don't think I said anything about the poster or method of posting. The poster was, after all, riling against using plain text. In a plain text post.

    The fact that no particular IP address was flagged as coming from an anonymous proxy is a sign that it was working. Well, it was until I saw that Sub_umbra appears to be a client of cotse.net. People should realize that if they are trying to avoid snooping by the government, using a paid annonymous proxy will give the gov a direct link back to you. Last I heard, bank records could be looked at without a warrant if (insert T word here) activity is suspected.

    Not to spread paranoia, but the Goverment has been known to entice evildoers with things like anonymous remailers, honey pots and "services" that attract people they are interested in.

    Thanks for the fun, Subumbra. Sorry that your last post sounded irritated. I thought you were having fun with it too. You probably should shift to a public anonomizer in a foreign country if you really want to stay secret.


    LYMPH; I'll have to find my copy. I forget what it's named. Send me an e-mail and I'll send you a tar ball later today.


    Daniel

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •