View Full Version : IP address security issues

27th July 2013, 07:20
as well as some more security conscious members, appear to be quite competent in using web proxy servers to mask their original IP and location.

After a member wrote that I wanted to ask what web proxy servers are reliable and easy to use? Since it's become a concern recently any help would be appreciated.

27th July 2013, 08:03
Here is one I am going to try out. Curious on anyone's thoughts on it if they have used it.


27th July 2013, 08:08

they offer free proxy usage and you can also pay for it and have a realy fast proxy vpn connection.

27th July 2013, 08:09
My proxy server works well for me ... but that's not surprising, as I run it on my own web server, mostly just for my own use.

So my post doesn't really answer the question of this thread :).

Star Tsar
27th July 2013, 08:37
How can one trust those "proxy" severs? The only way is to run your own like Paul!


27th July 2013, 09:37
www.torproject.org is a better method to hide yourself. You can read up on it on the link provided.

You can also google deepnet and darknet and find-out how people hide child pornography, guns, & drugs on the deepnet using tor.

When the time comes for us to really get organized and rebellious, we need to get on tor for sure.

27th July 2013, 10:17
www.torproject.org is a better method to hide yourself. You can read up on it on the link provided.
So far as I can tell, the exit nodes for TOR are not secure, and may even well be dominated by nodes controlled by the very bastards who designed, implemented, and deployed TOR - the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (as stated on Tor: Overview -- torproject.org (https://www.torproject.org/about/overview.html.en).) The combination of watching packet contents at the exit nodes, plus watching traffic flow between known TOR nodes, would provide an intelligence agency with full visibility into what passes through TOR.

27th July 2013, 15:04
Depends who you are trying to be "Secure" from... It takes extreme methods, and resources to hide from the big guys (Ones only the big guys or former big guys have)...

Short of getting a linux LT, loading a VM with all kinds of secret stealth SW like MAC/IP shielding SW (Most of which is a joke) and then driving around looking for a weak wireless connection to hijack, then spoof their connection... all those old school ways are still no guarantee they won't know its you. Even then you have to change the normal cadence of your wording... like my ("..." which is basically a signature) and word structure...

The big guys "Quantum Computing" and "Non Local", and "True Point to Point" communications/connections (Protocol is not even a correct term anymore, "Ancient Term" just like "Fire Wall" and many others used by US NetWk Admins Every Day)...

We are all sitting ducks, so just keep out the little guys and wave or flip off the big guys and go about your business. IMHO.

27th July 2013, 15:38
so just keep out the little guys and wave or flip off the big guys and go about your business
ty & agree so please your suggestion for the little guy? Was it any of the ones mentioned above and hopefully minimal or no cost?

Bill Ryan
27th July 2013, 18:39
www.torproject.org (http://www.torproject.org) is a better method to hide yourself. You can read up on it on the link provided.

I use this for all my e-mails now. Nothing is encrypted per se, but it works by relaying delivery via a whole chain of other servers globally so that the IP address on your e-mails (or Google searches, come to that) is located, pretty much randomly, anywhere else in the world. (Right now, if I sent an e-mail, the originating IP would say I was in Iceland. But yesterday, it said I was in Japan. :) )

27th July 2013, 19:26
Someone asked me via PM whether, given the reports that all data is routed through a central spy point, what does it matter whether we use Skype and TOR ... or not? And given that, would not encryption be particularly important?

Here's my answer, which perhaps others will want to see as well.


I suspect that not all Internet traffic goes through a single point, as that would be a serious performance and reliability choke point. But I do presume that they have hooks into most or all of the major Internet trunk lines carrying the backbone traffic, and that most Internet traffic will pass through these trunk lines.

We face multiple "enemies", and we face different levels of threat from each of them.

Roughly, there are the major intelligence agencies, such as the NSA, and there are the small time crooks who might just be trying to steal money from your bank account.

The main sorts of thing that we can do to protect ourselves from the small time crooks include things like having unique and strong passwords on our bank and email (password resetting) accounts, and not clicking on links in email sent us from what appear to be our banks or email providers. Also don't send $25 to someone from Nigeria to access a million dollar bounty or answer questions that a stranger asks you on the phone call you received. And various other security measures like that.

For the major intelligence agencies, it depends on whether we are already a targeted individual. I presume that the NSA collects and stores and runs automated filters on vast amounts of the data it sees traveling through the major communication company networks and on the Internet trunk lines. But it mostly just stores that data, indexed, awaiting a search query from one of the bosses. Then, when you become a figure of interest (say you become a serious candidate for political office, or pose some threat to them with insider information, or piss off someone very powerful) your data can be pulled up and examined more closely, looking for weaknesses (ways they can blackmail you, perhaps, or track down your whereabouts.) If you become a really serious target, such as a Supreme Court justice or President or a chief nuclear scientist for Iran, then they can and will go further and do their best to get monitoring software directly in the computer you use. They also apparently insert generally useful (to them) hooks into major pieces of software, such as Windows and Mac OS, and into key pieces of firmware, such as (I'm guessing more here) Intel BIOS firmware for at least some versions.

I presume that using encryption and avoiding the obvious main corporate allies of the NSA (such as Microsoft, the major telco companies, Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Skype, ...) can reduce the size of your footprint on the Web that can be easily and automatically searched. Well, you can't really avoid all these allies and do much on the Web, but you can minimize how much of your information they can easily track. They will likely have a lot of your encrypted transmissions stored, and likey still be able to crack that encryption if you become a target of sufficient interest to them (depending on how strong that encryption is.) I suspect it would be next to impossible for US Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts to use a computer or to access the Web without having every key stroke and mouse click recorded by the NSA, and that every word that Roberts has typed and sent over the Web for the last decade has been decoded and examined. Such control of Obama may be less urgent as I suspect they have him more strongly mind controlled.

Careful use of encryption should be able to reduce the portion of one's Web presence that can be automatically indexed and searched. If you are engaged in something that even now would be considered an interesting threat to the bastards in power, this could delay the time when they notice you, and make their initial searches on your stored data more difficult.

Proper use of encryption can also thwart the efforts of someone, say a small time crook at an Internet cafe or with access to your hotel's wi-fi, to sniff your account passwords or personal information from what you send to the Web, and save you some problems that way.

Obviously, I don't know the actual details of what they can and cannot do, or of what they are doing or not. The above is a guess. It almost certainly misses the mark on some details, and may well miss the mark on the overall situation.