How make usenet 100% safe?

[0990pollp]

Hi

I understand that when downloading with SSL it is safe, but lets say one does download a NBZ from one of the search sites because the NZB downloaded is not through SSL is there a way to make it safe?

with torrents you have VPN active 100% even when surfing so it is 100% anonymous.

[dogie]

you can never be 100% safe mate, theres always some factor that we are not aware of untill it will appear :)

[TrollinThunder]

Just wear a condom while using all that HD porn.

[0990pollp]

thanks fo reply.

but this means usenet is 0% safe if using search sites as merlins portal for example.

because when you download the nzb you tell the whole world look I'm downloading this file.

one way ofcourse is to use VPN but that gives 2x cpu load.

edit I mean having both SSL and VPN gives 2x load.

well thats disaoppinting with torrents when using VPN where no data is stored it is 100% safe as with usenet everyone will see what nzb files are downloaded.

it's a shame that usenet has higher speed vs torrents.

[Chame1eon]

Why are you worried about people knowing what you are downloading?

[c0ld]

Most of the free indexers allow https connections. https://www.nzbindex.nl/ and https://www.binsearch.info/ for instance.

[lovato]

quit using it

[yann]

well thats disaoppinting with torrents when using VPN where no data is stored it is 100% safe as with usenet everyone will see what nzb files are downloaded.
If you used a VPN with torrents (whichs a lot of VPN providers frown on), you can use the NZB sites the same way - the load of the VPN is neglegible for a modern system, imo.

Besides, people have pointed out that many serach places, plus NZBmatrix, for example, supports SSL connections.

The NZB is simply a text file with a long list of message IDs. Possessing it is in the same league as possessing a .torrent file, ie, not criminal or anything like that.

it's a shame that usenet has higher speed vs torrents.
No, it's not a shame - it's by design, and we gladly pay for the priviledge. ;)

[whiteboy]

I think you are being way paranoid worrying about getting caught downloading nzb's.

On a side note could someone explain the benefit of using a news providers ssl connection. I understand it is more secure but not sure exactly what the benefit is.

[Beck38]

Virtually all (*ALL*) the cableco's in the U.S. are, and have been for quite a while, using deep-packet inspection h/w and s/w that, while it can't 'crack' ssl (although there are some folks, myself included, that given enough cpu horsepower....) can easily collect (without using any esoteric means) the ip address you are connected to.

That is how they (the 'cablecos') can and do throttle things like P2P, newsgroups, etc. Just because you d/l a nzb doesn't mean that you are using it, though. I'll bet I d/l about 5 for every one I actually end up tasking the hoover to vacuum up, simply because I find a 'better' file.




On a side note could someone explain the benefit of using a news providers ssl connection. I understand it is more secure but not sure exactly what the benefit is.



Simply because certain providers (like the cablecos) can easily screw traffic types, and SSL helps hide it a bit. However, as they've gotten more and more bitchy (like coming up with low monthly transfer limits) they feel that they need to get more aggressive at 'network monitoring' and the like.

It takes human power to track things down, though, but they make so much money on the systems as it is, and they can make much more by overselling their capacity, that there is great incentive to put forth the effort, especially since they fully believe that the 'bandwidth hogs' are ruining their systems, even though they actually can't prove it (but they do have the receipt's for the fines from the FCC they've had to pay for the 'throttling').

I've never, and will never (hopefully), be on cable internet. My current low-apeed DSL line is 1/4 the 'full-out' speed of the local cableco, but THROUGHPUT (actual bits transferred over a month) is THREE TIMES the transfer limits of the cableco. This, at ONE THIRD the price of the cableco. Hmmm. Think I'll keep it.

Now if the state PUC doesn't screw the pooch and lets the telco stops offering DSL...

[whiteboy]

Virtually all (*ALL*) the cableco's in the U.S. are, and have been for quite a while, using deep-packet inspection h/w and s/w that, while it can't 'crack' ssl (although there are some folks, myself included, that given enough cpu horsepower....) can easily collect (without using any esoteric means) the ip address you are connected to.

That is how they (the 'cablecos') can and do throttle things like P2P, newsgroups, etc. Just because you d/l a nzb doesn't mean that you are using it, though. I'll bet I d/l about 5 for every one I actually end up tasking the hoover to vacuum up, simply because I find a 'better' file.




On a side note could someone explain the benefit of using a news providers ssl connection. I understand it is more secure but not sure exactly what the benefit is.



Simply because certain providers (like the cablecos) can easily screw traffic types, and SSL helps hide it a bit. However, as they've gotten more and more bitchy (like coming up with low monthly transfer limits) they feel that they need to get more aggressive at 'network monitoring' and the like.

It takes human power to track things down, though, but they make so much money on the systems as it is, and they can make much more by overselling their capacity, that there is great incentive to put forth the effort, especially since they fully believe that the 'bandwidth hogs' are ruining their systems, even though they actually can't prove it (but they do have the receipt's for the fines from the FCC they've had to pay for the 'throttling').

I've never, and will never (hopefully), be on cable internet. My current low-apeed DSL line is 1/4 the 'full-out' speed of the local cableco, but THROUGHPUT (actual bits transferred over a month) is THREE TIMES the transfer limits of the cableco. This, at ONE THIRD the price of the cableco. Hmmm. Think I'll keep it.

Now if the state PUC doesn't screw the pooch and lets the telco stops offering DSL...
Ah I see thanks for the info. I am also on slow dsl but it is very stable. I actually tried to switch to time warner. But got pissed at all the bs fees they wanted to charge me. $20 to install which is fine but then another $50 to turn on the wifi. Wtf it takes 1 minute to make an ssid and set a key. I laughed at them at hung up.

[TrollinThunder]

But if you could join an ISP that offered cable without limits, you certainly would. With FiOS I see 35/35 all day, every day, no limits or throttling.

[whiteboy]

But if you could join an ISP that offered cable without limits, you certainly would. With FiOS I see 35/35 all day, every day, no limits or throttling.
That was one of the first things I asked. TW said they have no limits. At least here in socal. Im moving in 2 months anyway so I'm just gonna wait and get a new isp when I move.

[Beck38]

That was one of the first things I asked. TW said they have no limits. At least here in socal. Im moving in 2 months anyway so I'm just gonna wait and get a new isp when I move.

Uhhhh... Time Warner? They are currently rolling out usage limits of 5GB/Month on their systems; those that haven't yet implemented that 'policy' rely on 'fair use' restrictions, which in short, means whatever they say it is.

Good Luck!

[whiteboy]

That was one of the first things I asked. TW said they have no limits. At least here in socal. Im moving in 2 months anyway so I'm just gonna wait and get a new isp when I move.

Uhhhh... Time Warner? They are currently rolling out usage limits of 5GB/Month on their systems; those that haven't yet implemented that 'policy' rely on 'fair use' restrictions, which in short, means whatever they say it is.

Good Luck!
Yah they are roling it out in obscure towns last I read. Either way if you read what I posted I said I didn't sign up.

[omgwtfbbq]

Your ISP doesn't look at what you DL, don't be paranoid.

[Barr_2010]

Your ISP doesn't look at what you DL, don't be paranoid.

I've just started using usenet, I'm new to it and don't fully understand how it works. just have a 5 day trial. Tell me, how private is it? I see it's possible to download in bulk, so what if there's something you don't want to download mixed in, do usenet, or the program used to access their server monitor usage, or, what do ISP's do? What if a file is misrepresented by name, and is there much spyware about to try to avoid?

[jordash]

Ive been caught three times using torrents til i moved to Usenet. The studio or company that catches u informs your isp. Your isp then disables your internet and u must call them to turn it back on(lying about relatives using your computer works well). Where i live(az)its a three strikes rule.
Ive actually setup a mass download of over 200gb several times which took over a day and a half of maxed out connection and haven't heard a thing from my isp.
Ive been downloading for over 8 years and was caught 3 times two of which was the same exact file(ya im an idiot!). Id have to say its not as severe as most would think.

[c0ld]

(although there are some folks, myself included, that given enough cpu horsepower....) can easily collect (without using any esoteric means) the ip address you are connected to.
Considering the ip isn't encrypted, that isn't really saying anything. A simple router would tell you.

[MaddogBC]

Ive been caught three times using torrents til i moved to Usenet. The studio or company that catches u informs your isp. Your isp then disables your internet and u must call them to turn it back on(lying about relatives using your computer works well). Where i live(az)its a three strikes rule.
Ive actually setup a mass download of over 200gb several times which took over a day and a half of maxed out connection and haven't heard a thing from my isp.
Ive been downloading for over 8 years and was caught 3 times two of which was the same exact file(ya im an idiot!). Id have to say its not as severe as most would think.

Never heard of this before, and I'm shocked they have the resources to target individuals here. Would you mind elaborating a little? Was the file a screener or something? I've always thought that with millions of downloads occurring every day (hour?) that the individual would never run into this situation. how common is this? TIA

[jordash]

My first instance was a DVD rip of "The Departed" before it had come out. Im still not 100% sure how its done but i think the studio itself releases it with some sort of tracker. The second and third(fuck im stupid!?) was a season of entourage which i had only taken one of the episodes i didnt have at the time.....at the time.
All three times i used utorrent at piratebay. With the departed i went back and looked at all of the comments and not one person had gotten caught. Since then when i scroll through the comments, at piratebay, before i download i sometimes see others that had the same thing happen to them and them warning others.
Id have to believe its not a random thing due to the fact that i had downloaded the same thing twice and was caught both times. When u try and get online when it happens they send u to there site(isp) and are given a letter from them saying such and such pictures tracked u downloading filename.avi. Please delete this file and contact us to reconnect your service.

[cola]

Never heard of this before, and I'm shocked they have the resources to target individuals here. Would you mind elaborating a little? Was the file a screener or something? I've always thought that with millions of downloads occurring every day (hour?) that the individual would never run into this situation. how common is this? TIA

Its pretty simple. The anti-p2p group uses a computer to connect to the tracker, then pulls a list of the IPs off the tracker. Letters are then sent out to the ISPs of those IPs with the DMCA information. It's all automated.

[Barr_2010]

if someone on usenet downloaded something illegal by downloading a big chunk of a newsgroup at once, would they be liable? I have read though that they dont know whats being downloaded. Is that true?

[cola]

if someone on usenet downloaded something illegal by downloading a big chunk of a newsgroup at once, would they be liable? I have read though that they dont know whats being downloaded. Is that true?


They don't know and don't care whats being downloaded. The logs would be too large to handle anyways. Now, lets say you were to download a large chunk from a random newsgroup and then went through a boarder crossing. If police found anything illegal during the search, then you would be liable.

Basically, any time a law enforcement agency searches your computer and finds illegal stuff, you will be liable.

[jb7]

how about this:

Subscribe to a monthly VPN
Use usenet that has SSL (e.g astrawebs)

Before downloading your nzb, log in to your VPN.

With VPN enabled, download your nzb using SSL

so two layers of security, that's probably as safe as you can get?

[cola]

how about this:

Subscribe to a monthly VPN
Use usenet that has SSL (e.g astrawebs)

Before downloading your nzb, log in to your VPN.

With VPN enabled, download your nzb using SSL

so two layers of security, that's probably as safe as you can get?

What are you trying to protect yourself from? No one ever gets in trouble for downloading.

People only get in trouble for posting.

edit: Even in your scenario, your IP would lead to the VPN. Whoever was tracking you would just ask for the IP that was using the vpn, which would still lead to you.

[jb7]

how about this:

Subscribe to a monthly VPN
Use usenet that has SSL (e.g astrawebs)

Before downloading your nzb, log in to your VPN.

With VPN enabled, download your nzb using SSL

so two layers of security, that's probably as safe as you can get?

What are you trying to protect yourself from? No one ever gets in trouble for downloading.

People only get in trouble for posting.

edit: Even in your scenario, your IP would lead to the VPN. Whoever was tracking you would just ask for the IP that was using the vpn, which would still lead to you.

Am from the UK, so recent events have made it necessary to increase security :whistling. So is there no point using a VPN?

[cola]

Am from the UK, so recent events have made it necessary to increase security :whistling. So is there no point using a VPN?

You'd be better off using an unsecured wifi connection or some wifi hot spot if you're that paranoid.

If I was that paranoid, this is what I would do:

Go buy a prepaid credit card with cash at a store. When you register the card use tor (or unsecured wifi or hotspot, or both) and enter in fake name/address. They won't let you refill the card, but its not a big deal.

Then while on tor, go buy a usenet acct using the same card.

Then use the unsecured wifi and/or hot spots to download from usenet.

Any activity would be extremely hard to trace back to you. Where as under your plan, the usenet account, the vpn, and your isp account would all have your real name tied to it.

edit: Oh and if you wanted to take it a bit further, you could change your mac address every time you connect to a hot spot.

[jb7]

Lol don't need anything that serious, was just wondering what the casually most secure way was. But thanks for taking the time to reply

[cola]

You're either not secure or secure. There isn't really anything in the middle. But you still have nothing to worry about unless you're posting.

[c0ld]

[QUOTE=jb7;3435332]this is what I would do:

Go buy a prepaid credit card with cash at a store. When you register the card use tor (or unsecured wifi or hotspot, or both) and enter in fake name/address. They won't let you refill the card, but its not a big deal.

Then while on tor, go buy a usenet acct using the same card.
Can't do the card thing in the UK. Even prepaid cards need full background info to buy. We have a fairly fraud proof banking system.


So is there no point using a VPN?A VPN in another jurisdiction will make it very hard for law enforcement and media companies to cut through all the red tape and get to you.

[cola]

Can't do the card thing in the UK. Even prepaid cards need full background info to buy. We have a fairly fraud proof banking system.

At least in the US, if you don't give your social security number, they won't let you get a real card and won't let you reload the card, but you are still able to use the money you put on the initial card.