Privacy Wipe Apps ?
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: u-tube
Next: "Progress" [was: Scanner driver]
From: Spamblk on 13 Jan 2010 21:28 whome? wrote in news:tbfsk5905v3d3s8celq1t2h6vcj3edveus(a)4ax.com: > The Tor server has an IP. Your ISP logs your > IP and the Tor IP. Once your packets hit the tor server, the > encryption is removed, and the packets continue to your desired web > site. The Tor server has an ISP like you and I do. The Tor ISP logs > all its traffic, including the Tor exit packets. The only thing Tor > does is make your traffic BLIND to your ISP only. Any cop can unmask > you with minimal effort, especially in the UK. Tor is not worth the > time. Forgive me for poking my nose in this with my 2 cents worth. AFAIK the Internet has still the basic architecture based on packet switching as set out years ago by persons such as Vint Cerf and Robert Kahn. So when you send out information to TOR (or whatever) your packets at the first stage go to your local network. I can't see a way you can hide your packets from your ISP or Default Gateway which are on the first few network hops (which you can view using a utility such as traceroute (TRACERT if using MSDOS). It is possible to prevent the destination website from knowing and/or logging your real IP address, that is a different matter. The original post was about privacy. You can have privacy on your local computer (but not on the wider Network), but it requires you to re-organise your affairs quite a bit. There is not only the issue of a browsers history, but there are also "Local Shared Objects" used by internal and external flash players, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Shared_Object http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_gateway Computers also open files in the directory indicated by the TEMP or TMP environment variables. It would be an idea to assign these variables to a ramdisk or directory you can wipe later if you are looking for privacy and you are not operating inside a suitable sandbox.
From: »Q« on 13 Jan 2010 23:01 In <news:18569798a2961ab118bb23f18af681eb(a)aracari.org>, hummingbird <hummingbírd(a)127.0.0.1> wrote: > Pricelessware distributor of unlawful CD.ISOs '»Q«' wrote thus: For people who aren't kooks obsessed with a fictitious international gang of criminals, the perfectly lawful Pricelessware CDs are available from <http://downloads.remarqs.net/pl/>. > >In <news:703b8da3f98cc9b2ddbcecbd3570ab07(a)aracari.org>, > >hummingbird <hummingbírd(a)127.0.0.1> wrote: > > > >> 'whome?' wrote thus: > >> > >> >On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:44:12 +0000, hummingbird > >> ><hummingbírd(a)127.0.0.1> wrote: > >> > > >> >>'whome?' wrote thus: > > > >> >>>I've used FF for years, and never knew it had Private Browsing. > >> >>>IT is a check box in Options | Privacy. I use sandboxie just > >> >>>for this purpose. Also, so web sites won't hit me with a drive > >> >>>by download. > >> >> > >> >>Afaik that checkbox in Options tells FF to dump its history when > >> >>you close it down. It doesn't allow you to surf anonymously. > >> > > >> >Who said you could use the web anonymously? > >> > >> Why else would you want a browser that (in your own words) > >> allows you to indulge in "Private Browsing"? > > >Private != anonymous. > > Correct. Glad I could help clear it up for you. > That's consistent with what I wrote previously. Not so. You also snipped the link to a page that clears up your confusion about what the Private Browsing mode actually is, <http://support.mozilla.com/kb/Private+Browsing>.
From: za kAT on 14 Jan 2010 05:54 On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:34:25 +0000, hummingbird wrote: > 'za kAT' wrote thus: > >>On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:23:12 +0000, hummingbird wrote: >> >>> I am at ease with myself and my life. >> >>Ah! Low expectations. Just as well. > > Do not judge others by yourself, Stubbo. Seems a reasonable benchmark to me. Your method of reading a book which fuels hatred, and assuming the prejudices of the author because you're stupid, spiteful, and vindictive by nurture and nature, then exposing yourself as a complete arsehole by quoting the nonsense ad infinitum, displays a complete lack of judgement. <shrug> -- za kAT
From: za kAT on 14 Jan 2010 07:48 On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:21:32 +0000, hummingbird wrote: > LOL. There you go again, not rolling on the floor today? It's not usual for a comic to laugh at their own gags. If you trying to break the mould, here's an honest appraisal .... it's just become a prompt to laugh at you. -- za kAT
From: za kAT on 14 Jan 2010 07:50
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:21:32 +0000, hummingbird wrote: How are you doing on the search for my IP? I can get the lads down at "The Sweeney" to give you a hand. -- za kAT |