Discussion:
The Newbie Help File
(too old to reply)
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-17 01:58:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The Newbie Help file


This is a simplistic way to achieve good anonymity and privacy on the Net. It is primarily aimed at
newbies. More advanced users may prefer their own methods.

You need both anonymity and privacy. These are inter related but not the same. Let's start with
anonymity.

It is imperative that your ISP cannot usefully monitor your activites whilst online. This means
that even if they actually try and monitor you (through a legal Warrant for example) they will learn
little or nothing at all of your activities. You will need your usual ISP for non critical browsing
and Emails, etc.

But for anonymity, use a wireless hotspot. These are all over the place nowadays. If you have an
iPod you can download an app that will find one in any area of the world.

You will need a small laptop bought for cash. You never use it to access the Net using your normal
ISP. All files you download, are later copied across to your similarly configured desktop.

If you wish to use one laptop for everything, meaning normal usage through your ISP, then you will
need to partition it into 3 parts. The first partition is your usual one for non critical usage.
The second and third are for your secret files. If you prefer to use two separate computers, then
you only need to partition it into 2 parts.

You will need to have dual booting set up. If you use a Macbook, use Boot Camp (details on the
Apple Website). If you use Windows or Linux, you will need to manually install aanother operating
system into the second partition. The most important thing about this second boot is it must never,
ever access the Net via your ISP. For maximum safety instal Linux, or buy a second copy of Windows
for cash. Activate this copy of Windows by using a wireless hot spot, or activate from a public
phone in the next city. Do not activate using either your ISP or your home telephone. This is
because all incoming calls to activate are logged by Microsoft for future reference and available to
LEA for tracing a user.

The third partition is for privacy, which is dealt with further on.

Your second partition will never again (after activation) have direct contact with the Net. So
there is no need to install anti virus (which will try and call home, anyway). You should disable
all parts of the program that are required to dial out or access the Net. Use Control Panel to find
these. In Win XP it is in Network Connections. Just disable everything.

You will need a copy of VMWare workstation 7. This can be justified by using it to create a clean
copy of Windows or Linux somewhere on your system. Perhaps on the second boot drive, or wherever.
Use your imagination. You must be able to justify having this program. Thus there must be a normmal,
possibly encrypted partition or external hard drive available that it can access to justify its
presence. To mimimise logging, install a cache cleaner, for example CCleaner. This is not perfect,
but will hopefully destroy your VMWare logs.


Now onto privacy.

Install Truecrypt on your second boot partition. Then use it to encrypt the whole of the third
partition. Or you could use an external drive. USB drives are far slower than using an internal
partition. After Truecrypt has done its bit, put some non contentious adult porn, or whatever you
wish that is legal, into this first encrypted partition, or use it to justify having VMWare by
installing another operating system within it. Now create a hidden encrypted partition. To preserve
plausible deniability it is absolutely essential that you can show why it is impossible to open this
partition. In the US you may be able to successfully argue it is priviliged information. But the
way the world is going and definitely if you live in the UK, you must show why this partition is
impossible for anyone to access.

This is done by creating several header keys, using Truecrypt, and copying them in a damaged form
onto a flash drive. To damage them open in Notepad and just input a few white space characters, or
just destroy the second half (or the first) of some of these header keys. Now fill the drive with
some backup files, music or legal pics, programs or whatever. Whilst this data is being written,
pull the drive out of your USB slot. This should irreparably damage the drive. If it doesn't try
again and again until it does. Sometimes the drive will drop from, say, 2 Gigs back to just 200 megs
or so. Perfect. You claim this flash drive contains the only key files for your Truecrypt hidden
partition. Even if forensics do recover the drive, the keyfiles will still show as damaged. You
could deliberately damage some pics or programs to reinforce this idea.

Naturally there will be a way for you (and only you) to access this Truecrypt encrypted hidden
partition.

When you are creating this partition choose several files to be used by Truecrypt as keyfiles. I
suggest 6 or more, plus a long passphrase. These files can be backups of your legal photo
collection which you have already put on the second boot partitiion. This further justifies this
partition as a secure backup for your photo shots, or your iTunes music. Because it is only for
backup there is no need for an Internet connection.

Next you use VMWare Workstation to install a client Windows (or Linux) operating system onto yoour
Truecrypt hidden partition. This is simplicity itself with version 7 of Workstation. There are
several cheaper alternatives. Maybe you already use one or have a preference. Fine. Just as long as
it never writes anything of your hidden operating system back onto the the host partition page file.
With Workstation 7, choose Edit, Preferences, Memory, and ensure that "Fit all virtual machine
memory into reserved Host RAM" is enabled. This is vital. I would not use the Windows freebie
version, as nothing that Microsoft does can be trusted, especially when it comes to logging things
you do.

Most important: Use a different login user name and password. Make absolutely sure that you never
input any personal info into this copy of Windows. This means you should never use your Credit Card
for any reason. Even if an attacker manages to penetrate this system whilst online, they will not
find anything of use to them to identify you.


How does this all fit together?

You will boot into your second partition. You then use Truecrypt to open your hidden partition. Now
you start VMWare and use it to boot into the client Windows installation within your hidden
partition. If you have been successful, everything you do from now on is truly private. Nothing
should be written to the host computer (your second boot partition) paging file and all VMWare logs
should be trashed by CCCleaner. Just remember to run it everytime you close your virtual Windows
system. If you are using a small laptop as a drone, you can copy all your new material, postings,
etc, onto your home desktop at your leisure. Naturally, it will be similalry configured with a
second boot partition, VMWare and Truecrypt.

You can now install all your favorite programs for viewing pics, etc. But first, most important
download (using a wireless link) the latest version of Tor. Get the complete Windows (or whatever)
package. Next install Firefox as your default browser onto your guest Windows operating system. Now
install Tor with the Torbutton, which comes with the Tor download package. Tor will also install
Privoxy. This helps to screen out any damaging info that your system might try and send. However,
if you have taken my advice there will be nothing that will be traceable on the system to send out
anyway.

You will need an antivirus program. Google for a freebie. Do not use your CC to buy any programs
that you intend using in your private folder.

If you install any other programs which have the capability to access the Net, ensure they are all
configured to route through Tor as proxy. For example, if you choose to install Flashget (strongly
recommended) you should set it to route only via Tor. Go Tools, Options, Proxy, Add. On the Title
line type: Tor, then click on Socks5. Now input 127.0.0.1 on the Server line and 9050 on the Port
line. Click, OK and again OK. Before using in anger, check to see if you can access the Net when
Tor is not enabled. If you can, check your configuration. The same test should also be performed
with Firefox.

Some Important Notes!

1. Common sense dictates that this file must be stored within your hidden partition.

2. Remember, this is only a guide. If you know of a better way to achieve anonymity and privacy, use
it. Better still, tell us all how you do it.

3. Newbies are always joining the Net.I believe it is our solemn duty to help them. Remember, we
were all newbies once.

4. My pgp key:

- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: PGP 9.0b1
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=RNRk
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-17 14:35:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The Newbie Help file

<FLUSH!>

A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".

We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
prattling completely irrelevant in context.

Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
"FAQ".
Anonymous
2010-03-17 18:13:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> MAC addresses

What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-17 20:07:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Anonymous wrote:

>> MAC addresses
>
> What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?

It's a "serial number" unique to your network interface, and it's
transmitted IN THE CLEAR every time you connect. VMWare, Tor... don't
matter because they don't even deal with that layer of the connection.

Some network interfaces allow you to modify or "spoof" a different or
even random MAC address, some do not.
Anonymous
2010-03-17 21:47:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> Anonymous wrote:
>
>>> MAC addresses
>>
>> What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?
>
> It's a "serial number" unique to your network interface, and it's
> transmitted IN THE CLEAR every time you connect. VMWare, Tor... don't
> matter because they don't even deal with that layer of the connection.
>
> Some network interfaces allow you to modify or "spoof" a different or
> even random MAC address, some do not.

Technitium MAC Address Changer - freeware
http://www.technitium.com/tmac/index.html
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-18 04:18:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:07:28 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:

>Anonymous wrote:
>
>>> MAC addresses
>>
>> What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?
>
>It's a "serial number" unique to your network interface, and it's
>transmitted IN THE CLEAR every time you connect. VMWare, Tor... don't
>matter because they don't even deal with that layer of the connection.
>
>Some network interfaces allow you to modify or "spoof" a different or
>even random MAC address, some do not.

Let me see if I have this right. You say my laptop will always send the
same MAC address to each hotspot I connect to. OK, so what? The laptop
was bought for cash, the software running on it was bought for cash or
hacked. So nothing is know about me. Whereas, if I connect to my ISP my
true identity is known through my unique user ID. If my MAC address is
also sent to my ISP then all my precious anonymity for this laptop is
wasted. Ever after if I use a hotspot, theoretically I could with some effort
and cooperation between systems be traced and identified.

Thus my insistence on not making any connection to the ISP on that laptop.

I am not saying it is perfect, just preferable to using my own ISP.

If you are running XP try this: Start > Run > CMD > iPconfig/all

You will then see all the connection info about your system.

DL Technitium, http://www.technitium.com/tmac/index.html
extract and install.

(Link kindly given by Anonymous <***@domain.invalid>)

Now you should be able to change your MAC (if it bothers you, that is)
Me? Not bothered. If I am anonymous when using Tor through my ISP, as
many believe they are, then I am doubly anonymous when I use a strange
and unknown hotspot to connect to the Net.

Of course if _you_ are bothered then use Technitium to change your Mac
frequently to ensure you really are untraceable. Obviously pointless if
you connect to your ISP. Whatever machine and MAC address is given,
your uinique login ID ensures they will always be able to identify you.
Anonymous
2010-03-18 13:24:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:07:28 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Anonymous wrote:
>>
>>>> MAC addresses
>>>
>>> What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?
>>
>> It's a "serial number" unique to your network interface, and it's
>> transmitted IN THE CLEAR every time you connect. VMWare, Tor... don't
>> matter because they don't even deal with that layer of the connection.
>>
>> Some network interfaces allow you to modify or "spoof" a different or
>> even random MAC address, some do not.
>
> Let me see if I have this right. You say my laptop will always send the
> same MAC address to each hotspot I connect to. OK, so what? The laptop
> was bought for cash, the software running on it was bought for cash or
> hacked. So nothing is know about me. Whereas, if I connect to my ISP my
> true identity is known through my unique user ID. If my MAC address is
> also sent to my ISP then all my precious anonymity for this laptop is
> wasted. Ever after if I use a hotspot, theoretically I could with some
> effort and cooperation between systems be traced and identified.
>
> Thus my insistence on not making any connection to the ISP on that laptop.
>
> I am not saying it is perfect, just preferable to using my own ISP.
>
> If you are running XP try this: Start > Run > CMD > iPconfig/all
>
> You will then see all the connection info about your system.
>
> DL Technitium, http://www.technitium.com/tmac/index.html
> extract and install.
>
> (Link kindly given by Anonymous <***@domain.invalid>)
>
> Now you should be able to change your MAC (if it bothers you, that is)
> Me? Not bothered. If I am anonymous when using Tor through my ISP, as
> many believe they are, then I am doubly anonymous when I use a strange
> and unknown hotspot to connect to the Net.
>
> Of course if _you_ are bothered then use Technitium to change your Mac
> frequently to ensure you really are untraceable. Obviously pointless if
> you connect to your ISP. Whatever machine and MAC address is given,
> your uinique login ID ensures they will always be able to identify you.

I tried using Technitium on my Windows 7 system. It said that my
MAC address was changed, but up in the topmost window of the program,
the 'MAC Address' was the origional address and the 'Changed' column
still says 'No'. Don't think the program is changing anything on W7
systems.
Non scrivetemi
2010-03-18 18:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

> If I am anonymous when using Tor through my ISP, as
> many believe they are, then I am doubly anonymous when I use a strange
> and unknown hotspot to connect to the Net.

Total rubbish. The very best anonymity you can hope to achieve at this
point in history are mixes and onion routes. Period. Your cloak and
dagger inanity doesn't, and never can, add anything to that. If it has
any effect at all it's going to be a negative one, by virtue of the fact
that it places you in a group with a more diverse threat model. You're
now not only battling an ISP, you're battling an ISP *and* the admins and
other users at said hotspot at the very least.

Want *real* anonymity? Run a Tor node. Near perfect cover. And use Tor to
submit remailer messages for your Usenet and whatever. And do it all
right from the comfort of your parents' basement. When you're out and
about, VPN back to your "home" network for everything. That way every bit
of your already anonymous traffic can credibly be blamed on someone else.
And that's as good as it gets with today's tech.
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-19 02:07:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:36:10 +0100 (CET), "Non scrivetemi" <***@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info>
wrote:

>anon wrote:
>
>> If I am anonymous when using Tor through my ISP, as
>> many believe they are, then I am doubly anonymous when I use a strange
>> and unknown hotspot to connect to the Net.
>
>Total rubbish. The very best anonymity you can hope to achieve at this
>point in history are mixes and onion routes. Period. Your cloak and
>dagger inanity doesn't, and never can, add anything to that. If it has
>any effect at all it's going to be a negative one, by virtue of the fact
>that it places you in a group with a more diverse threat model. You're
>now not only battling an ISP, you're battling an ISP *and* the admins and
>other users at said hotspot at the very least.
>
>Want *real* anonymity? Run a Tor node. Near perfect cover. And use Tor to
>submit remailer messages for your Usenet and whatever. And do it all
>right from the comfort of your parents' basement. When you're out and
>about, VPN back to your "home" network for everything. That way every bit
>of your already anonymous traffic can credibly be blamed on someone else.
>And that's as good as it gets with today's tech.

Good for you. That is exactly the type of thing that I was alluding to when
I said if you have a better way use it.

Personally I feel happier using hotspots, but each to their own.

What about the privacy bit? The bit about hiding your activities when a
forensic examination of your laptop is undertaken?
Dave U. Random
2010-03-19 22:08:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

>>Want *real* anonymity? Run a Tor node. Near perfect cover. And use Tor
>>to submit remailer messages for your Usenet and whatever. And do it all
>>right from the comfort of your parents' basement. When you're out and
>>about, VPN back to your "home" network for everything. That way every
>>bit of your already anonymous traffic can credibly be blamed on someone
>>else. And that's as good as it gets with today's tech.
>
> Good for you. That is exactly the type of thing that I was alluding to
> when I said if you have a better way use it.
>
> Personally I feel happier using hotspots, but each to their own.

No, *not* to each their own. You're pretending you're whatever sort of
authority and trying to write something consumable by the public. That
means your hair brained ideas are going to be dissected. Get use to it.

This whole "hotspot machine" crap is third grade bullshit. It doesn't do
one damned thing to enhance your anonymity, it only degrades it. Hotspots
positively *suck* if you want any sort of privacy or anonymity. You're
taking everything on your machine, and everything you do, and handing it
100% over to someone else. And a lot of time that "someone else" includes
every other user at that hotspot, The FBI agent in the reference
section... the troubled teen "hacker" having a late on the veranda...
yeah, hangin' with those dudes when you're trying to be incognito is just
a *brilliant* idea. You have absolutely no control over anything, unlike
being on a nice cozy home network where you're insulated from that crap
to a good degree.

> What about the privacy bit? The bit about hiding your activities when a
> forensic examination of your laptop is undertaken?

Encrypt it. Problem solved.

But, if by forensic examination you mean to say that your threat model is
law enforcement, don't bother. If the logical inference rings true, by
all means please do keep using your hotspots. The more you "art
collectors" expose yourselves, the better a place the world becomes.

<NFGAA>
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-20 00:28:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:08:57 +0100 (CET), Dave U. Random <***@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> wrote:

>anon wrote:
>
>>>Want *real* anonymity? Run a Tor node. Near perfect cover. And use Tor
>>>to submit remailer messages for your Usenet and whatever. And do it all
>>>right from the comfort of your parents' basement. When you're out and
>>>about, VPN back to your "home" network for everything. That way every
>>>bit of your already anonymous traffic can credibly be blamed on someone
>>>else. And that's as good as it gets with today's tech.
>>
>> Good for you. That is exactly the type of thing that I was alluding to
>> when I said if you have a better way use it.
>>
>> Personally I feel happier using hotspots, but each to their own.
>
>No, *not* to each their own. You're pretending you're whatever sort of
>authority and trying to write something consumable by the public. That
>means your hair brained ideas are going to be dissected. Get use to it.

Why so upset by my determination to push hotspots? Are you working for LEA?
Does using hotspots make your job harder? Come on, gimme a break. To try
and argue against hotspots is utter ruubish and if you had a grain of common
sense you would know it.

>This whole "hotspot machine" crap is third grade bullshit. It doesn't do
>one damned thing to enhance your anonymity, it only degrades it. Hotspots
>positively *suck* if you want any sort of privacy or anonymity. You're
>taking everything on your machine, and everything you do, and handing it
>100% over to someone else. And a lot of time that "someone else" includes
>every other user at that hotspot, The FBI agent in the reference
>section... the troubled teen "hacker" having a late on the veranda...
>yeah, hangin' with those dudes when you're trying to be incognito is just
>a *brilliant* idea. You have absolutely no control over anything, unlike
>being on a nice cozy home network where you're insulated from that crap
>to a good degree.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. More rubbish to put people off hotspots. Being on a nice
cozy home network logged into your own ISP, who knows who you are.

What a load of horse shit. I have been patient with your rubbish, but this is
my limit buddy.

>> What about the privacy bit? The bit about hiding your activities when a
>> forensic examination of your laptop is undertaken?
>
>Encrypt it. Problem solved.

Obviously you know very little about forensics, or more likely would have
the rest of us believe that is all it takes, encryption. Bullshit. First off
you seem to be totally unaware that in some countries it is not enough
to just fold your arms and smile enigmaticallfy when LEA bust you. You
can do 2 to 5 in the UK for not cooperating and opening up your encrypted
folders.

>
>But, if by forensic examination you mean to say that your threat model is
>law enforcement, don't bother. If the logical inference rings true, by
>all means please do keep using your hotspots. The more you "art
>collectors" expose yourselves, the better a place the world becomes.
>
><NFGAA>

I see. When logic fails, put in a little innuendo about some illegal or
illicit occupation to help make yourself feel better. You think that
only illegal file copiers and money launderers use encryption and need
anonymity? You are obviously very immature and know very little about
the big world.

Meanwhile I will go on using hotspots and strongly recommend them to
others in my piece. I may change it into a Faq, especially if that pisses
you off even more.

Usenet is full of the naysayers such as yourself. No real help, just pathetic
little snide comments to try and put down anyone who has only hoped to
help others. Sorry to spoil your ego trip buddy. But it does not wash.
Nobody Important
2010-03-20 05:04:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@privacy.net wrote:

> Why so upset by my determination to push hotspots? Are you
> working for LEA? Does using hotspots make your job harder? Come
> on, gimme a break. To try and argue against hotspots is utter
> ruubish and if you had a grain of common sense you would know
> it.
>

The first thing many do when connecting thru a public hotspot is to
see what they can find out about others using the same hotspot.
You open yourself up to man-in-the-middle attacks and more.
Basically increasing threats to your privacy.

I would safely bet that at any given public hotspot at any given
time at least two users are poking at what others are doing on the
same hotspot. When you use a public hotspot you are basically
taking something you want private and doing it in public.

Public hotspots should only be used when you are well firewalled
and SSL for everything that passes over that hotspot (openvpn or
Tor or a combo being a good choice) that you don't want everyone
else seeing too.

Your home network wouldn't have these risks and using Tor would be
just as private. If you are worried about your ISP seeing
something you do then it really doesn't make much sense to do it in
public where many can see it. Conversely, if it is safe to do in
public, it is safe to do in private at home.
Anonymous
2010-03-21 18:48:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

>>No, *not* to each their own. You're pretending you're whatever sort of
>>authority and trying to write something consumable by the public. That
>>means your hair brained ideas are going to be dissected. Get use to it.
>
> Why so upset by my determination to push hotspots? Are you working for

<flush>

And there you have it. You can't defend your idiocy with even a *shred*
of anything that resembles an actual, credible argument, so you resort to
the loser's last straw grab... screech an invective over your shoulder as
you run away.

I hope everyone reading this gets a real clear picture of what you really
are now. A comletely clueles rube pretending to be some sort of expert.
Gogarty
2010-03-21 18:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@remailer.paranoici.org>,
***@remailer.paranoici.org says...
>anon wrote:
>
>>>No, *not* to each their own. You're pretending you're whatever sort of
>>>authority and trying to write something consumable by the public. That
>>>means your hair brained ideas are going to be dissected. Get use to it.
>>
>> Why so upset by my determination to push hotspots? Are you working for
>
><flush>
>
>And there you have it. You can't defend your idiocy with even a *shred*
>of anything that resembles an actual, credible argument, so you resort to
>the loser's last straw grab... screech an invective over your shoulder as
>you run away.
>
>I hope everyone reading this gets a real clear picture of what you really
>are now. A comletely clueles rube pretending to be some sort of expert.
>

I suspect that applies to a great many people who frequent this group.
Longer on spewing vitriol than providing assistance.
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-20 05:30:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> Anonymous wrote:
>
> >> MAC addresses
> >
> > What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?
>
> It's a "serial number" unique to your network interface, and it's
> transmitted IN THE CLEAR every time you connect. VMWare, Tor... don't
> matter because they don't even deal with that layer of the connection.
>
> Some network interfaces allow you to modify or "spoof" a different or
> even random MAC address, some do not.

Although intended to be a permanent and globally unique identification, it is possible to
change the MAC address on most of today's hardware, an action often referred to as MAC
spoofing. Unlike IP address spoofing, where a sender spoofing their address in a request
tricks the other party into sending the response elsewhere, in MAC address spoofing, the
response is received by the spoofing party. However, MAC address spoofing is limited to the
local broadcast domain.

A broadcast domain is a logical division of a computer network, in which all nodes can reach
each other by broadcast at the data link layer. A broadcast domain can be within the same
LAN segment or it can be bridged to other LAN segments.

In other words, numb nuts can't detect your MAC address from his lair in Australia!

So change your MAC address, connect to a WIFI net and download whatever you want!

But don't linger too long, read this:

http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/wireless-router-exposes-child-predators-using-the-internet-20090615/
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-20 13:19:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I'm not sure if Comrade Gates is doing something with Windows 7,
but when I changed my MAC address, I couldn't get out of my
computer, no matter what port.
Kulin Remailer
2010-03-24 14:24:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:19:37 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
wrote:

> I'm not sure if Comrade Gates is doing something with Windows 7,
>but when I changed my MAC address, I couldn't get out of my
>computer, no matter what port.

worked fine for me
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
2010-03-24 18:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Kulin Remailer wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:19:37 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
> <***@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if Comrade Gates is doing something with Windows 7,
>>but when I changed my MAC address, I couldn't get out of my computer, no
>>matter what port.
>
> worked fine for me

Some network cards allow it, some do not. In my experience it's about
60/40 in favor of those which do not, but that's a pretty limited sample
size (there's a LOT of different cards out there).
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-24 23:09:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> I'm not sure if Comrade Gates is doing something with Windows 7,
>but when I changed my MAC address, I couldn't get out of my computer, no
>matter what port.

>worked fine for me

>Some network cards allow it, some do not. In my experience it's about
>60/40 in favor of those which do not, but that's a pretty limited sample
>size (there's a LOT of different cards out there).

I don't doubt that my HP is not allowing it. This is the 1st and
last HP I am going to have. Mid range computer and didn't even come
with a line in. Keys repeatedly not working. It's back to Toshiba
for me.
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-20 03:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <hnr657$7p5$***@news.mixmin.net>
Anonymous <***@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> > MAC addresses
>
> What is a MAC addresses and how can it be traced?

I know what the "BIG MAC" address is.

I'm gonna eat you mutha fucka, watch the fuck out!
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-18 02:37:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:35:07 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:

>anon wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> The Newbie Help file
>
><FLUSH!>
>
>A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".
>
>We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
>make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
>difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
>oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
>prattling completely irrelevant in context.
>
>Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
>"FAQ".

Thank you for your comments.

Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots? Are you saying that it is
not used when you connect to your ISP? If so, please explain.
Anonymous
2010-03-18 13:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:35:07 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
> wrote:
>
>> anon wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> The Newbie Help file
>>
>> <FLUSH!>
>>
>> A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".
>>
>> We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
>> make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
>> difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
>> oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
>> prattling completely irrelevant in context.
>>
>> Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
>> "FAQ".
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots? Are you saying
> that it is not used when you connect to your ISP? If so, please explain.

I think what he is saying is that your MAC address is unique to your
computer. If you use your computer with your own ISP, the ISP will
capture your MAC address. So then if you use your computer on a
hotspot, they would probably be able to find that you had also used
it on your ISP and correlate who you are that way. You could probably
change your MAC address with Technitium every time you went from your
ISP to hotspots (I don't think Technitium works on W7). Making such
switches might be hazardous to you anonymity, however, due to the
possibility of making a 'change' mistake.
Anonymous
2010-03-18 13:56:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:35:07 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> anon wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> The Newbie Help file
>>>
>>> <FLUSH!>
>>>
>>> A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".
>>>
>>> We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
>>> make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
>>> difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
>>> oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
>>> prattling completely irrelevant in context.
>>>
>>> Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
>>> "FAQ".
>>
>> Thank you for your comments.
>>
>> Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots? Are you saying
>> that it is not used when you connect to your ISP? If so, please explain.
>
> I think what he is saying is that your MAC address is unique to your
> computer. If you use your computer with your own ISP, the ISP will
> capture your MAC address. So then if you use your computer on a
> hotspot, they would probably be able to find that you had also used
> it on your ISP and correlate who you are that way. You could probably
> change your MAC address with Technitium every time you went from your
> ISP to hotspots (I don't think Technitium works on W7). Making such
> switches might be hazardous to you anonymity, however, due to the
> possibility of making a 'change' mistake.

I just tried Technitium for the second time (1st time yesterday) and
if shows that the MAC address was changed this time.
Anonymous
2010-03-18 14:06:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
>>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:35:07 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> anon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> The Newbie Help file
>>>>
>>>> <FLUSH!>
>>>>
>>>> A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".
>>>>
>>>> We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
>>>> make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
>>>> difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
>>>> oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
>>>> prattling completely irrelevant in context.
>>>>
>>>> Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
>>>> "FAQ".
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comments.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots? Are you saying
>>> that it is not used when you connect to your ISP? If so, please explain.
>>
>> I think what he is saying is that your MAC address is unique to your
>> computer. If you use your computer with your own ISP, the ISP will
>> capture your MAC address. So then if you use your computer on a
>> hotspot, they would probably be able to find that you had also used
>> it on your ISP and correlate who you are that way. You could probably
>> change your MAC address with Technitium every time you went from your
>> ISP to hotspots (I don't think Technitium works on W7). Making such
>> switches might be hazardous to you anonymity, however, due to the
>> possibility of making a 'change' mistake.
>
> I just tried Technitium for the second time (1st time yesterday) and
> if shows that the MAC address was changed this time.

Another problem, however. After changing the MAC address, I couldn't
get anything from my browser or send any messages through my news
agent until I reset the MAC back to the origional. A reboot didn't do
any good either.
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-18 22:47:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:38:34 -0500, Anonymous <***@domain.invalid> wrote:

>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:35:07 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> anon wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> The Newbie Help file
>>>
>>> <FLUSH!>
>>>
>>> A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".
>>>
>>> We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
>>> make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
>>> difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
>>> oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
>>> prattling completely irrelevant in context.
>>>
>>> Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
>>> "FAQ".
>>
>> Thank you for your comments.
>>
>> Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots? Are you saying
>> that it is not used when you connect to your ISP? If so, please explain.
>
> I think what he is saying is that your MAC address is unique to your
>computer. If you use your computer with your own ISP, the ISP will
>capture your MAC address. So then if you use your computer on a
>hotspot, they would probably be able to find that you had also used
>it on your ISP and correlate who you are that way. You could probably
>change your MAC address with Technitium every time you went from your
>ISP to hotspots (I don't think Technitium works on W7). Making such
>switches might be hazardous to you anonymity, however, due to the
>possibility of making a 'change' mistake.
>
I totally agree.

But that is my reason for recommending you never use your hotspot dedicated laptop
to connect to your ISP!
Gogarty
2010-03-19 01:38:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@privacy.net
says...
>On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:38:34 -0500, Anonymous <***@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:35:07 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> anon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> The Newbie Help file
>>>>
>>>> <FLUSH!>
>>>>
>>>> A perfect example of why noobs shouldn't write "help files".
>>>>
>>>> We'll start off with with the idiotic assertion that VMWare and hotspots
>>>> make you anonymous. Not happening. You apparently don't even know the
>>>> difference between anonymity and privacy, nor are you anything but
>>>> oblivious to facts like MAC addresses making your 'VMWare + hotspot"
>>>> prattling completely irrelevant in context.
>>>>
>>>> Once we've dealt with that, we'll shred the rest of your Dr Who wannabe
>>>> "FAQ".
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comments.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots? Are you saying
>>> that it is not used when you connect to your ISP? If so, please explain.
>>
>> I think what he is saying is that your MAC address is unique to your
>>computer. If you use your computer with your own ISP, the ISP will
>>capture your MAC address. So then if you use your computer on a
>>hotspot, they would probably be able to find that you had also used
>>it on your ISP and correlate who you are that way. You could probably
>>change your MAC address with Technitium every time you went from your
>>ISP to hotspots (I don't think Technitium works on W7). Making such
>>switches might be hazardous to you anonymity, however, due to the
>>possibility of making a 'change' mistake.
>>
>I totally agree.
>
>But that is my reason for recommending you never use your hotspot dedicated
laptop
>to connect to your ISP!

Sob! Too late.
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-19 22:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

> But that is my reason for recommending you never use your hotspot
> dedicated laptop to connect to your ISP!

You guys are *clueless*.

If you have a proper NAT device your ISP can't possibly know what machine
or machines you have connected to your LAN. It really is just that
simple. The ironic part is, the only place you run any real risk of
having a machine identified... is at the hotspots you're prattling on
about.

That's just *one* specific example of how you rubes are advocating
putting your anonymity at risk to try and achieve anonymity. And for
what? So you can feel special? A little James Bond rush, eh?

Gimme a fuckin break.
a***@privacy.net
2010-03-20 00:07:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:40:31 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:

>anon wrote:
>
>> But that is my reason for recommending you never use your hotspot
>> dedicated laptop to connect to your ISP!
>
>You guys are *clueless*.
>
>If you have a proper NAT device your ISP can't possibly know what machine
>or machines you have connected to your LAN. It really is just that
>simple. The ironic part is, the only place you run any real risk of
>having a machine identified... is at the hotspots you're prattling on
>about.
>
>That's just *one* specific example of how you rubes are advocating
>putting your anonymity at risk to try and achieve anonymity. And for
>what? So you can feel special? A little James Bond rush, eh?
>
>Gimme a fuckin break.

Ah, but the crumbs that drop from the table, by such we learn a little more each day. Thanks for
the tip.

However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I connect to my ISP, I am known. Howsoever I
connect to a hotspot I am not known, nor traceable. I use Tor (together with a strict exit node
policy) and no, I do not compromise that policy by over-riding it by using Tor's hidden services.

Thanks again for the tips.
Nobody Important
2010-03-20 08:26:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
***@privacy.net wrote:

> However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I connect
> to my ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a hotspot I am
> not known, nor traceable.

You are traceable while using the hotspot. Most public hotspots are
set up with distributed RF sensors. There are a number of companies
(including IBM and Intel) offering wifi hacker location applications
that perform a crude triagulation through signal strength comparison.
Combined with a timing analysis (timing how long it takes packets to
travel to and from an access point) and it is accurate enough that if
you attract attention while using it you can be physically located.
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-20 13:02:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> crude triagulation

This is the key to this system - crude. Ham radio operators have
what is called a 'fox hunt' (transmitter hunt) where they try to
triangulate a transmitter's location. Signals reflecting off of
mountains and buildings give the fox hunters big problems and I
think I remember that the higher the signal frequency, the worse it
gets. So park down the street just around a corner and your signal
will probably be bouncing all over the place. Also, don't stay in
one place too long. Sitting in the upper floor of a building
would probably be untraceable.
George Orwell
2010-03-21 18:54:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Nomen Nescio wrote:

>> crude triagulation
>
> This is the key to this system - crude.

And we see yet another glaring security fallacy... counting on your enemy
to be weak and incompetent.

Here's a free clue:

The adversaries *you* dimbulbs are facing, by your own words, don't even
vaguely resemble ham operators on a fox hunt. They're well funded and
well equipped, with at least a modicum of expertise. And if you think
your sorry asses will be saved by bouncing radio signal fantasies, you're
even dumber than you first appear.

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it
Anne Onime
2010-03-21 21:08:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010, George Orwell <***@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
>>> crude triagulation
>>
>> This is the key to this system - crude.
>
>And we see yet another glaring security fallacy... counting on your enemy
>to be weak and incompetent.
>
>Here's a free clue:
>
>The adversaries *you* dimbulbs are facing, by your own words, don't even
>vaguely resemble ham operators on a fox hunt. They're well funded and
>well equipped, with at least a modicum of expertise. And if you think
>your sorry asses will be saved by bouncing radio signal fantasies, you're
>even dumber than you first appear.


..In other words, ALWAYS assume that the "enemy", whoever it might be, has
more resources than you do and more resources than you THINK they do.

Security through obscurity is almost ALWAYS a mistake, as are "shortcuts".
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-21 21:44:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
>The adversaries you dimbulbs are facing, by your own words, don't even
>vaguely resemble ham operators on a fox hunt. They're well funded and
>well equipped, with at least a modicum of expertise. And if you think
>your sorry asses will be saved by bouncing radio signal fantasies, you're
>even dumber than you first appear.

Anyone who has to revert to slander to try to make a point should
not be listened to. He has outted himself as a louser. Signal
reflection is definitely a problem when trying to pinpoint a
transmitter. The FCC has the most state of the art equipment and
systems, yet they still have to work hard to find a rouge signal.
If the signal is not continuous, you are NOT going to be able to be
located. Remember, this is a group about privacy and not radio
signal theory. Yet he purports to be an expert in the area. I am a
ham radio operator and at least have radio propagation knowledge.

Further, how could anyone think that someone who is so full of
hatred as this person has shown himself to be would somehow be
familiar with state of the art radio tracking equipment and an
expert on sniffing out radio signals? This guy is an immature troll
or law enforcement type who knows nothing or is trying to scare
you.
Nobody Important
2010-03-22 00:06:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Nomen Nescio wrote:

> The FCC has the most state of the art equipment and
> systems, yet they still have to work hard to find a rouge signal.
> If the signal is not continuous, you are NOT going to be able to
be
> located.

There is one major difference here, area. How fast could they find
the signal when they are within 50 yards of it and six of them
surround it? A lot faster than "NOT being able to be located".

Consider this setup: a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower
power to keep all access areas within camera coverage. The
triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and Intel can
place a person at a specific table or even in a specific car in the
parking lot with the right distribution of APs. When cross
referenced to log files, the security DVR could bring up an image
of the individual sending that data even days after it happened.
This doesn't even cover those that require you register for an
account first.
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-22 12:50:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
>The FCC has the most state of the art equipment and
>systems, yet they still have to work hard to find a rouge signal.
>If the signal is not continuous, you are NOT going to be able to be
>located.
>
>There is one major difference here, area. How fast could they find
>the signal when they are within 50 yards of it and six of them
>surround it? A lot faster than "NOT being able to be located".
>
>Consider this setup: a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower
>power to keep all access areas within camera coverage. The
>triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and Intel can
>place a person at a specific table or even in a specific car in the
>parking lot with the right distribution of APs. When cross
>referenced to log files, the security DVR could bring up an image
>of the individual sending that data even days after it happened.
>This doesn't even cover those that require you register for an
>account first.

With all due respect (please pardon my not being to subdue
laughing out loud after reading your argument), this is truly an
impossibility if anyone has a brain in their head.

1. a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower power to keep all
access areas within camera coverage:
The key here is to never allow yourself within a camera's range.
Go to any of the numerous free wifi spots elsewhere.

2. The triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and Intel
can place a person at a specific table or even in a specific car
in the parking lot with the right distribution of APs:
As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.

3. When cross referenced to log files, the security DVR could bring
up an image of the individual sending that data even days after
it happened:
As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.

4. This doesn't even cover those that require you to register for an
account first:
So what fool would try to stay anonymous and register for an
account to a wifi hub?
Dave U. Random
2010-03-22 16:45:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:
>>The FCC has the most state of the art equipment and
>>systems, yet they still have to work hard to find a rouge signal.
>>If the signal is not continuous, you are NOT going to be able to be
>>located.
>>
>>There is one major difference here, area. How fast could they find
>>the signal when they are within 50 yards of it and six of them
>>surround it? A lot faster than "NOT being able to be located".
>>
>>Consider this setup: a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower
>>power to keep all access areas within camera coverage. The
>>triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and Intel can
>>place a person at a specific table or even in a specific car in the
>>parking lot with the right distribution of APs. When cross
>>referenced to log files, the security DVR could bring up an image
>>of the individual sending that data even days after it happened.
>>This doesn't even cover those that require you register for an account
>>first.
>
> With all due respect (please pardon my not being to subdue
>laughing out loud after reading your argument), this is truly an
>impossibility if anyone has a brain in their head.
>
>1. a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower power to keep all
> access areas within camera coverage:
> The key here is to never allow yourself within a camera's range.

Oh, so you know for certain where all of the cameras are 'eh?

> Go to any of the numerous free wifi spots elsewhere.
>
>2. The triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and Intel
> can place a person at a specific table or even in a specific car
> in the parking lot with the right distribution of APs:
> As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
>
>3. When cross referenced to log files, the security DVR could bring
> up an image of the individual sending that data even days after
> it happened:
> As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.

Again, you apparently have inside knowledge of where all the cameras are.
MOST people are doing good if they can spot the ones in plain sight, never
mind the concealed cameras that aren't advertised

>4. This doesn't even cover those that require you to register for an
> account first:
> So what fool would try to stay anonymous and register for an
> account to a wifi hub?

Apparently you?

Oh, by the way.


SHUT UP EELBASH!!
Nobody Important
2010-03-22 18:06:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:

> 1. a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower power to keep all
> access areas within camera coverage:
> The key here is to never allow yourself within a camera's
> range. Go to any of the numerous free wifi spots elsewhere.
>
> 2. The triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and
> Intel
> can place a person at a specific table or even in a specific
> car in the parking lot with the right distribution of APs:
> As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
>
> 3. When cross referenced to log files, the security DVR could
> bring
> up an image of the individual sending that data even days
> after it happened:
> As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
>
> 4. This doesn't even cover those that require you to register
> for an
> account first:
> So what fool would try to stay anonymous and register for an
> account to a wifi hub?
>

So your argument has changed from "use a hotspot for untraceable
anonymity" to "use only specific hotspots where you know how it is
set up and where the cameras are located and hide while doing it".

This means we have come full circle to my earlier statement that I
have quoted below (which, amusingly, was a precurser to this
argument).

"However, assuming you don't use the machine/OS combo for anything
but your hotspot surfing, don't keep using the same hotspot,
position yourself so you are not easily found and you aren't on any
camera, don't transfer lots of data over a long period, make sure
your machine is well secured, and all ensure all data transfer is
SSL secured, it is a fine occassional solution for an "oops, I
messed up and am traceable back to my origin" protection."

Are you arguing for the sake of arguing now? Can I assume you now
see the potential pitfalls to just randomly using hotspots that you
demanded I list for you?
Anne Onime
2010-03-24 01:16:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@198.186.190.224>
Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> > 1. a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower power to keep all
> > access areas within camera coverage:
> > The key here is to never allow yourself within a camera's
> > range. Go to any of the numerous free wifi spots elsewhere.
> >
> > 2. The triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and
> > Intel
> > can place a person at a specific table or even in a specific
> > car in the parking lot with the right distribution of APs:
> > As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
> >
> > 3. When cross referenced to log files, the security DVR could
> > bring
> > up an image of the individual sending that data even days
> > after it happened:
> > As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
> >
> > 4. This doesn't even cover those that require you to register
> > for an
> > account first:
> > So what fool would try to stay anonymous and register for an
> > account to a wifi hub?
> >
>
> So your argument has changed from "use a hotspot for untraceable
> anonymity" to "use only specific hotspots where you know how it is
> set up and where the cameras are located and hide while doing it".
>

Or do what I do, us an antenna to remotely access the hotspot!

http://www.engadget.com/2005/11/15/how-to-build-a-wifi-biquad-dish-antenna/
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-25 04:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@rip.ax.lt>
Anne Onime <***@rip.ax.lt> wrote:
>
> In article <***@198.186.190.224>
> Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:
> >
> > > 1. a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower power to keep all
> > > access areas within camera coverage:
> > > The key here is to never allow yourself within a camera's
> > > range. Go to any of the numerous free wifi spots elsewhere.
> > >
> > > 2. The triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and
> > > Intel
> > > can place a person at a specific table or even in a specific
> > > car in the parking lot with the right distribution of APs:
> > > As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
> > >
> > > 3. When cross referenced to log files, the security DVR could
> > > bring
> > > up an image of the individual sending that data even days
> > > after it happened:
> > > As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
> > >
> > > 4. This doesn't even cover those that require you to register
> > > for an
> > > account first:
> > > So what fool would try to stay anonymous and register for an
> > > account to a wifi hub?
> > >
> >
> > So your argument has changed from "use a hotspot for untraceable
> > anonymity" to "use only specific hotspots where you know how it is
> > set up and where the cameras are located and hide while doing it".
> >
>
> Or do what I do, us an antenna to remotely access the hotspot!
>
> http://www.engadget.com/2005/11/15/how-to-build-a-wifi-biquad-dish-antenna/

I built an amazing wifi antenna, not this one though.
I was downloading masses of kiddie porn.
But what's funny, while I was miles away from the hotspot, the cops were using one of these
tracing systems.
So they busted this fat bearded guy with glasses because he was the only one nearby.
They beat the shit out of him with rhino hide whips.
I jerked off to the cp and then downloaded some more!
Anonymous
2010-03-26 06:08:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> In article <***@rip.ax.lt>
> Anne Onime <***@rip.ax.lt> wrote:
> >
> > In article <***@198.186.190.224>
> > Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 1. a hotspot is using distributed RF at lower power to keep all
> > > > access areas within camera coverage:
> > > > The key here is to never allow yourself within a camera's
> > > > range. Go to any of the numerous free wifi spots elsewhere.
> > > >
> > > > 2. The triangulation and timing analysis provided by IBM and
> > > > Intel
> > > > can place a person at a specific table or even in a specific
> > > > car in the parking lot with the right distribution of APs:
> > > > As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
> > > >
> > > > 3. When cross referenced to log files, the security DVR could
> > > > bring
> > > > up an image of the individual sending that data even days
> > > > after it happened:
> > > > As was already stated, don't get anywhere near a transmitter.
> > > >
> > > > 4. This doesn't even cover those that require you to register
> > > > for an
> > > > account first:
> > > > So what fool would try to stay anonymous and register for an
> > > > account to a wifi hub?
> > > >
> > >
> > > So your argument has changed from "use a hotspot for untraceable
> > > anonymity" to "use only specific hotspots where you know how it is
> > > set up and where the cameras are located and hide while doing it".
> > >
> >
> > Or do what I do, us an antenna to remotely access the hotspot!
> >
> > http://www.engadget.com/2005/11/15/how-to-build-a-wifi-biquad-dish-antenna/
>


> They beat the shit out of him with rhino hide whips.

I beieve the term for beating someone with a rhino hide whip is "sjambokked".

As in "They sjambokked this fat bearded guy with glasses because he was the only one
nearby."

> I jerked off to the cp and then downloaded some more!

Which hand, may I ask?

I use the left so I can click on the pics with my dominant right hand!
George Orwell
2010-03-24 02:05:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@198.186.190.224>
Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> ***@privacy.net wrote:
>
> > However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I connect
> > to my ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a hotspot I am
> > not known, nor traceable.
>
> You are traceable while using the hotspot. Most public hotspots are
> set up with distributed RF sensors. There are a number of companies
> (including IBM and Intel) offering wifi hacker location applications
> that perform a crude triagulation through signal strength comparison.
> Combined with a timing analysis (timing how long it takes packets to
> travel to and from an access point) and it is accurate enough that if
> you attract attention while using it you can be physically located.

What really bothers me about this is that you are perfectly content with big brother
monitoring your every move. You seem to be a major proponent for our loss of privacy,

In other words, even if some of your preposterous claims are true, you are a douchebag!


Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it
Nobody Important
2010-03-24 18:06:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
George Orwell <***@mixmaster.it> wrote:

> In article <***@198.186.190.224>
> Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> ***@privacy.net wrote:
>>
>> > However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I
>> > connect to my ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a
>> > hotspot I am not known, nor traceable.
>>
>> You are traceable while using the hotspot. Most public
>> hotspots are set up with distributed RF sensors. There are a
>> number of companies (including IBM and Intel) offering wifi
>> hacker location applications that perform a crude triagulation
>> through signal strength comparison. Combined with a timing
>> analysis (timing how long it takes packets to travel to and
>> from an access point) and it is accurate enough that if you
>> attract attention while using it you can be physically located.
>
> What really bothers me about this is that you are perfectly
> content with big brother monitoring your every move. You seem to
> be a major proponent for our loss of privacy,

This is an immature tactic. You are apparently too delicate to be
putting together a document that will be peer reviewed, try again
when you have grown up.
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-25 04:15:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@198.186.190.224>
Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> George Orwell <***@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> > In article <***@198.186.190.224>
> > Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> ***@privacy.net wrote:
> >>
> >> > However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I
> >> > connect to my ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a
> >> > hotspot I am not known, nor traceable.
> >>
> >> You are traceable while using the hotspot. Most public
> >> hotspots are set up with distributed RF sensors. There are a
> >> number of companies (including IBM and Intel) offering wifi
> >> hacker location applications that perform a crude triagulation
> >> through signal strength comparison. Combined with a timing
> >> analysis (timing how long it takes packets to travel to and
> >> from an access point) and it is accurate enough that if you
> >> attract attention while using it you can be physically located.
> >
> > What really bothers me about this is that you are perfectly
> > content with big brother monitoring your every move. You seem to
> > be a major proponent for our loss of privacy,
>
> This is an immature tactic. You are apparently too delicate to be
> putting together a document that will be peer reviewed, try again
> when you have grown up.

You can't quote properly, you're just a dumb fuck!
Nobody Important
2010-03-25 08:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Nomen Nescio <***@dizum.com> wrote:

> In article <***@198.186.190.224>
> Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> George Orwell <***@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <***@198.186.190.224>
>> > Nobody Important <***@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> ***@privacy.net wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I
>> >> > connect to my ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a
>> >> > hotspot I am not known, nor traceable.
>> >>
>> >> You are traceable while using the hotspot. Most public
>> >> hotspots are set up with distributed RF sensors. There are a
>> >> number of companies (including IBM and Intel) offering wifi
>> >> hacker location applications that perform a crude
triagulation
>> >> through signal strength comparison. Combined with a timing
>> >> analysis (timing how long it takes packets to travel to and
>> >> from an access point) and it is accurate enough that if you
>> >> attract attention while using it you can be physically
located.
>> >
>> > What really bothers me about this is that you are perfectly
>> > content with big brother monitoring your every move. You seem
to
>> > be a major proponent for our loss of privacy,
>>
>> This is an immature tactic. You are apparently too delicate to
be
>> putting together a document that will be peer reviewed, try
again
>> when you have grown up.
>
> You can't quote properly, you're just a dumb fuck!

Point out where I quoted wrong.
Anonymous
2010-03-21 19:14:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

> However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I connect to my
> ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a hotspot I am not known, nor
> traceable.

Is that a fact? Then since your hotspot is so secure, you have no need of
things like Tor or remailers, correct?
Anonymous
2010-03-21 20:10:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> anon wrote:
>
>> However, traceability is what it is about. Howsoever I connect to my
>> ISP, I am known. Howsoever I connect to a hotspot I am not known, nor
>> traceable.
>
> Is that a fact? Then since your hotspot is so secure, you have no need of
> things like Tor or remailers, correct?

I didn't see him say anything about not using Tor. Did you?
Nomen Nescio
2010-03-21 22:33:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Anonymous wrote:

>> Is that a fact? Then since your hotspot is so secure, you have
>> no need of things like Tor or remailers, correct?
>
> I didn't see him say anything about not using Tor. Did you?

I didn't see him say anything about not signing up for a hotspot account
by providing his passport and one major credit card either.
Gogarty
2010-03-20 12:31:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@dizum.com>, ***@dizum.com
says...
>anon wrote:
>
>> But that is my reason for recommending you never use your hotspot
>> dedicated laptop to connect to your ISP!
>
>You guys are *clueless*.
>
>If you have a proper NAT device your ISP can't possibly know what machine
>or machines you have connected to your LAN. It really is just that
>simple. The ironic part is, the only place you run any real risk of
>having a machine identified... is at the hotspots you're prattling on
>about.
>
>That's just *one* specific example of how you rubes are advocating
>putting your anonymity at risk to try and achieve anonymity. And for
>what? So you can feel special? A little James Bond rush, eh?
>
>Gimme a fuckin break.
>
There ya go! Captain Marvel Secret Decoder Ring. That's really what it's
all about. Very few people really, really require complete anonymity.
Anonymous
2010-03-18 18:14:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
anon wrote:

> Are you saying that a MAC address is unique to hotspots?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address
Loading...