Anonx

[Switeck]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@9 March 2004 - 23:22
do u know how many laws they are breaking by decrypting private communications and recording (wire tap) ?

I dont care if ur so-called "supreme court" "ordered" such covert operation just to find out what a user is doing behind an encrypted vpn network. It's just plain stupid to do something this cost consuming operation just to catch a few pirates.

Doesn't make sense at all

It doesn't make sense because you MISSED my point.

With a proxy alone, the data ISN'T encrypted or compressed -- it's just routed through an outside ip before going to the rest of the internet.

Your ISP wouldn't have to decrypt your communications. And they almost certainly already have in their terms of service stipulations which says they can monitor your connection almost at any time for little/no reason whatsoever. There's LOTS of EULAs (End-User's Licensing Agreements) which 'allow' all sorts of otherwise illegal things. Read Microsoft's sometime.

Also "Bandwidth Hogs" tend to attract ISP's attention, even if they don't say anything about it.

Now an ISP probably WON'T get a copyright notice about you if you're running on a proxy, but if you switched over to a proxy BECAUSE they recieved copyright notices then they may already be monitoring you.

RIAA has not been too intelligent about their 'anti-piracy' campaign's spending. Rabidly angry, powerful people seldom do consider all the costs of their actions. Even though ISPs no longer HAVE to comply with blanket-issue lists of ips seeking names, some still are out of FEAR of RIAA's direct litigation of them.

[Ok, correction, AnonXO is saying the service *IS* encrypted and CAN be compressed. But such may not be the case with simpler proxys.]

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by Switeck+10 March 2004 - 14:49--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Switeck @ 10 March 2004 - 14:49)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-james_bond_rulez@9 March 2004 - 23:22
do u know how many laws they are breaking by decrypting private communications and recording (wire tap) ?

I dont care if ur so-called "supreme court" "ordered" such covert operation just to find out what a user is doing behind an encrypted vpn network. It&#39;s just plain stupid to do something this cost consuming operation just to catch a few pirates.

Doesn&#39;t make sense at all

It doesn&#39;t make sense because you MISSED my point.

With a proxy alone, the data ISN&#39;T encrypted or compressed -- it&#39;s just routed through an outside ip before going to the rest of the internet.

Your ISP wouldn&#39;t have to decrypt your communications. And they almost certainly already have in their terms of service stipulations which says they can monitor your connection almost at any time for little/no reason whatsoever. There&#39;s LOTS of EULAs (End-User&#39;s Licensing Agreements) which &#39;allow&#39; all sorts of otherwise illegal things. Read Microsoft&#39;s sometime.

Also "Bandwidth Hogs" tend to attract ISP&#39;s attention, even if they don&#39;t say anything about it.

Now an ISP probably WON&#39;T get a copyright notice about you if you&#39;re running on a proxy, but if you switched over to a proxy BECAUSE they recieved copyright notices then they may already be monitoring you.

RIAA has not been too intelligent about their &#39;anti-piracy&#39; campaign&#39;s spending. Rabidly angry, powerful people seldom do consider all the costs of their actions. Even though ISPs no longer HAVE to comply with blanket-issue lists of ips seeking names, some still are out of FEAR of RIAA&#39;s direct litigation of them.

[Ok, correction, AnonXO is saying the service *IS* encrypted and CAN be compressed. But such may not be the case with simpler proxys.] [/b][/quote]
ya ur right

just to say that i&#39;ve never received another copyright complaint after i used anonx,need i say more?

[Switeck]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+12 March 2004 - 15:10--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez @ 12 March 2004 - 15:10)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Switeck@10 March 2004 - 14:49
[Ok, correction, AnonXO is saying the service *IS* encrypted and CAN be compressed. But such may not be the case with simpler proxys.]

ya ur right

just to say that i&#39;ve never received another copyright complaint after i used anonx,need i say more? [/b][/quote]
Anonx DOES offer the protection I said was NEEDED. Now your ISP can only tell that a lot of traffic is going to/from your ip to Anonx&#39;s ip regions -- but they cannot determine what that traffic is, due to the encryption+compression.

I&#39;ve read about a couple people who run a proxy server from 1 computer on their network to another then out to the internet thinking THAT offers some protection. But I sincerely doubt that offers any protection at all.

[shn]

Originally posted by AnonXO@8 March 2004 - 13:14
Let take a simlar situation.&nbsp;

I go into a 7-11 gas station and buy a prepaid calling card.&nbsp; I find a payphone, dial into a known corp pbx, exploit it&#39;s weakness, and start making international calls on their nickel.


Who&#39;s at fault.

1.&nbsp; 7-11 for selling me the anonymous prepaid calling card?
2.&nbsp; The payphone vendor?
3.&nbsp; The local phone company?
4.&nbsp; The crop. pbx vendor?
5.&nbsp; The individual you is stealing international long distance?

Bad Analogy

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by shn+12 March 2004 - 13:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shn @ 12 March 2004 - 13:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-AnonXO@8 March 2004 - 13:14
Let take a simlar situation.&nbsp;

I go into a 7-11 gas station and buy a prepaid calling card.&nbsp; I find a payphone, dial into a known corp pbx, exploit it&#39;s weakness, and start making international calls on their nickel.


Who&#39;s at fault.

1. 7-11 for selling me the anonymous prepaid calling card?
2. The payphone vendor?
3. The local phone company?
4. The crop. pbx vendor?
5. The individual you is stealing international long distance?

Bad Analogy [/b][/quote]
why dont u stfu? anonxo is the admin of anonx network.

if you dont like this topic then leave, no need to insult other ppl

[shn]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+12 March 2004 - 16:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez &#064; 12 March 2004 - 16:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by shn@12 March 2004 - 13:31
<!--QuoteBegin-AnonXO

@8 March 2004 - 13:14
Let take a simlar situation.&nbsp;

I go into a 7-11 gas station and buy a prepaid calling card.&nbsp; I find a payphone, dial into a known corp pbx, exploit it&#39;s weakness, and start making international calls on their nickel.


Who&#39;s at fault.

1.&nbsp; 7-11 for selling me the anonymous prepaid calling card?
2.&nbsp; The payphone vendor?
3.&nbsp; The local phone company?
4.&nbsp; The crop. pbx vendor?
5.&nbsp; The individual you is stealing international long distance?

Bad Analogy

why dont u stfu? anonxo is the admin of anonx network.

if you dont like this topic then leave, no need to insult other ppl [/b][/quote]
He&#39;s not the admin of this forum so I could care less.