i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
while i am connected to internet via my vpn
thnx a lot...
--
skype:mranep
cell:813-610-2978; work:813-386-4500; work2:813-915-1663
On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 01:40:05 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio wrote:
>> hello,
>
>> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
>> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
>> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
>> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
>> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
>
>> thnx a lot...
>
>> --
>> skype:mranep
>> cell:813-610-2978; work:813-386-4500; work2:813-915-1663
>
> Get a packet sniffer and look at the data going out. It should
> all be encrypted data except the vpn's ip address. Here is a good
> simple one here:
>
> PacketViewer: Easy program to sniff and view IP packets.
> http://patrice-zwenger.co.cc/my_programs.html
HERE is more good TECH...Other posters specifically ITALIAN and JAP
anonymouses and Pinino...PAY ATTENTION...
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
> hello,
>
> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
>
> thnx a lot...
Hi, apart from other methods, if you use Firefox as i do...GOOD...
You could install Calomel which shows lots of info about whether a
www is SSL/HTTPS or not. Also it shows the SSL strength etc etc...
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>
>> hello,
>>
>> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
>> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
>> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
>> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
>> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
>>
>> thnx a lot...
>
> Hi, apart from other methods, if you use Firefox as i do...GOOD...
>
> You could install Calomel which shows lots of info about whether a
> www is SSL/HTTPS or not. Also it shows the SSL strength etc etc...
>
> Visual display icon which changes various colors in real time, from
> Green right through to Red depending on strength...Colors are Easy to
> FOLLOW...
thnx for the answer but this only works for https sites...
the thing i want to do is to test if i am secure while i am
connecting to internet via my VPN.
for example i want to go www.wilderssecurity.com without vpn...my isp
can see that i am surfing on it
while i am connected via VPN it says secure online aes 256bit...so my
isp shouldnt see that i am surfing on www.wilderssecurity.com
thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
is there a way to do it?
--
skype:mranep
cell:813-610-2978; work:813-386-4500; work2:813-915-1663
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
> hello,
>
> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
There's a simple, easy to check. Visit a secure web site you've visited
before and see if there's any warnings/errors issued. If you get the same
connect as you do naked, your SSL connection is in tact. NOTE: this assumes
you haven't crippled your security by shutting off SSL warnings.
The packet sniffer advice... useless really. Nobody here is savy enough to
know if the garble you'll sniff is actually encrypted, and if so, to whom.
And even if everything *looks* kosher a packet capture won't tell you
diddly about MITM attacks, which are your real concern here. Questioning
SSL itself borders on clinical paranoia.
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:22:21 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
> thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
>
> is there a way to do it?
What software are you using for the VPN connection? Sometimes you simply
have to trust the system, the man, the community, whatever you want to call
it.
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:53:23 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:22:21 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>
>> thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
>>
>> is there a way to do it?
>
> What software are you using for the VPN connection? Sometimes you simply
> have to trust the system, the man, the community, whatever you want to call
> it.
LOL...******* Coward TROLL can't keep his posts straight...
ACT JAP TROLL: "If you're relying on "trust" when using proxies and
thinking anonymity and privacy, you're simply misusing proxies."
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:49:47 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>
>> hello,
>>
>> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
>> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
>> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
>> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
>> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
>
> There's a simple, easy to check. Visit a secure web site you've visited
> before and see if there's any warnings/errors issued. If you get the same
> connect as you do naked, your SSL connection is in tact. NOTE: this assumes
> you haven't crippled your security by shutting off SSL warnings.
>
> The packet sniffer advice... useless really. Nobody here is savy enough to
> know if the garble you'll sniff is actually encrypted, and if so, to whom.
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:49:47 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>
>> hello,
>>
>> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
>> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
>> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
>> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
>> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
>
> There's a simple, easy to check. Visit a secure web site you've visited
> before and see if there's any warnings/errors issued. If you get the same
> connect as you do naked, your SSL connection is in tact. NOTE: this assumes
> you haven't crippled your security by shutting off SSL warnings.
>
> The packet sniffer advice... useless really. Nobody here is savy enough to
> know if the garble you'll sniff is actually encrypted, and if so, to whom.
> And even if everything *looks* kosher a packet capture won't tell you
> diddly about MITM attacks, which are your real concern here. Questioning
> SSL itself borders on clinical paranoia.
In wireshark there's a column named Protocol, make sure DNS doesn't
show up (put "dns" without the quotes into the filter search box at
the top).
You should only see TLS/SSL and maybe TCP (I'd need to test that or
have a look at the data inside, is it encrypted?) traffic and local
networking. The latter you can determine by looking at source and
destinations, both should be part of a private IP range: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private...address_spaces or a multicast
address:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:53:23 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:22:21 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>
>> thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
>>
>> is there a way to do it?
>
> What software are you using for the VPN connection? Sometimes you simply
> have to trust the system, the man, the community, whatever you want to call
> it.
And using VPN changes that how again?
They have an ISP too,
they have employees too,
they have a physical location in a state with a (probably friendly to
yours) government too.
Idiot.
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:53:23 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:22:21 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>>
>>> thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
>>>
>>> is there a way to do it?
>>
>> What software are you using for the VPN connection? Sometimes you simply
>> have to trust the system, the man, the community, whatever you want to call
>> it.
>
> LOL...******* Coward TROLL can't keep his posts straight...
>
> ACT JAP TROLL: "If you're relying on "trust" when using proxies and
> thinking anonymity and privacy, you're simply misusing proxies."
>
> THANKS
Our "Japanese" friend is rather inept at trolling apparently learning
nothing from the years he has been doing so. We call this style of
person a very slow learner ;)
-- heremypants@hushmail.com http://heremypants.weebly.com/
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
> hello,
I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the Government
can simply subpoena that company for logs if they want them. So
doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i always
thought that it would be impossible for the government to get a
subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with, which means
they cant produce any probable cause to get the warrant. And, if the
G-Men can break the encryption they would have to admit that in court
and then IT security as we know it would be in question on a global
scale. Do I have the right idea?
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:49:47 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>>
>>> hello,
>>>
>>> i have purchased a vpn service that establish a 256bit ssl tunnel
>>> from my pc and their server. This is what they say... however i want
>>> to test if they are saying the truth. Is there a way that i can
>>> personally test if my isp can monitor my internet activity or not
>>> while i am connected to internet via my vpn
>>
>> There's a simple, easy to check. Visit a secure web site you've visited
>> before and see if there's any warnings/errors issued. If you get the same
>> connect as you do naked, your SSL connection is in tact. NOTE: this assumes
>> you haven't crippled your security by shutting off SSL warnings.
>>
>> The packet sniffer advice... useless really. Nobody here is savy enough to
>> know if the garble you'll sniff is actually encrypted, and if so, to whom.
>> And even if everything *looks* kosher a packet capture won't tell you
>> diddly about MITM attacks, which are your real concern here. Questioning
>> SSL itself borders on clinical paranoia.
>
> In wireshark there's a column named Protocol, make sure DNS doesn't
> show up (put "dns" without the quotes into the filter search box at
> the top).
This won't help. Wireshark's "analysis" begins and ends with a port number
in this scenario. It's trivial to deceive such an observer.
>
> You should only see TLS/SSL and maybe TCP (I'd need to test that or
> have a look at the data inside, is it encrypted?) traffic and local
You can't really know that for sure. One garble is the same as the next. ;)
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:53:23 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:22:21 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>>
>>> thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
>>>
>>> is there a way to do it?
>>
>> What software are you using for the VPN connection? Sometimes you simply
>> have to trust the system, the man, the community, whatever you want to call
>> it.
>
> And using VPN changes that how again?
That question makes absolutely no sense at all. What in Dog's name are you
sputtering about? What imaginary "changes" do you believe you're seeing??
Or are you just having issues with keeping up?
Recap for the handicapped: We're talking about your ISP seeing your
VPN-tunneled data, and more to the point whether or not your encrypted
connection is really encrypted. You can't *really* know that without
trusting the people behind the encryption, the VPN that implements it,
and/or the "community" that may or may not peer review and/or stress test
things.
Let it sink in before you embarrass yourself further.
> They have an ISP too,
> they have employees too,
> they have a physical location in a state with a (probably friendly to
> yours) government too.
So what? What's that got to do with said people being able to peruse your
data or not?
(Yes, you'll be needing a dictionary about now)
> Idiot.
You haven't even a clue what's being discussed, and you're calling someone
else an idiot?
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya
> wrote:
>
>> hello,
>
> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the
> Government can simply subpoena that company for logs if they
> want them. So doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
Only if who you are hiding from is the government. If it is then
you should not use any paid service, in fact, even Tor may not be
enough. If you assume the government is a global adversary with
the ability to monitor the entire Internet realtime and you must
hide from them, then the only truly safe way is not to use the
Internet.
> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i
> always thought that it would be impossible for the government to
> get a subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with,
> which means they cant produce any probable cause to get the
> warrant. And, if the G-Men can break the encryption they would
> have to admit that in court and then IT security as we know it
> would be in question on a global scale. Do I have the right
> idea?
It is more likely that they would be investigating a server or
service you connect to, or material or message they received from
you or saw you post, and so demand to know the origin of the
connection from the provider of the IP you are using.
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 21:08:43 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 16:32:46 -0500, katio wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:53:23 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:22:21 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>>>
>>>> thats what i want to test. my isp can see me or not??
>>>>
>>>> is there a way to do it?
>>>
>>> What software are you using for the VPN connection? Sometimes you simply
>>> have to trust the system, the man, the community, whatever you want to call
>>> it.
>>
>> And using VPN changes that how again?
>
> That question makes absolutely no sense at all.
To you.
> What in Dog's name are you
> sputtering about? What imaginary "changes" do you believe you're seeing??
> Or are you just having issues with keeping up?
Keeping up? Where have you been for three days? You're so far out of
context you push DasFox for first place in wirhtless contribution.
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 20:23:29 -0500, Hito Shirezu wrote:
> Newbie? Apparently I know a bit more than an "expert" like you, eh?
Where is the respect? The toning down of your lies? Responses with
humility? with humility. ;)
We have made it clear to your fate - killfiled by participants in this
group - talking to yourself endlessly,like a looped tape of despair in
solitary confinement! ;0)
> Nathan See <nathan_c@wildersecurity.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hello,
>>
>> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the
>> Government can simply subpoena that company for logs if they
>> want them. So doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
>
> Only if who you are hiding from is the government. If it is then
> you should not use any paid service, in fact, even Tor may not be
> enough. If you assume the government is a global adversary with
> the ability to monitor the entire Internet realtime and you must
> hide from them, then the only truly safe way is not to use the
> Internet.
>
>> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i
>> always thought that it would be impossible for the government to
>> get a subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with,
>> which means they cant produce any probable cause to get the
>> warrant. And, if the G-Men can break the encryption they would
>> have to admit that in court and then IT security as we know it
>> would be in question on a global scale. Do I have the right
>> idea?
>
> It is more likely that they would be investigating a server or
> service you connect to, or material or message they received from
> you or saw you post, and so demand to know the origin of the
> connection from the provider of the IP you are using.
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 23:33:59 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
> On 09 Feb 2011 02:21:15 GMT, Noone wrote:
>
>> Nathan See <nathan_c@wildersecurity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hello,
>>>
>>> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the
>>> Government can simply subpoena that company for logs if they
>>> want them. So doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
>>
>> Only if who you are hiding from is the government. If it is then
>> you should not use any paid service, in fact, even Tor may not be
>> enough. If you assume the government is a global adversary with
>> the ability to monitor the entire Internet realtime and you must
>> hide from them, then the only truly safe way is not to use the
>> Internet.
>>
>>> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i
>>> always thought that it would be impossible for the government to
>>> get a subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with,
>>> which means they cant produce any probable cause to get the
>>> warrant. And, if the G-Men can break the encryption they would
>>> have to admit that in court and then IT security as we know it
>>> would be in question on a global scale. Do I have the right
>>> idea?
>>
>> It is more likely that they would be investigating a server or
>> service you connect to, or material or message they received from
>> you or saw you post, and so demand to know the origin of the
>> connection from the provider of the IP you are using.
>
> I see.
>
> Goodbye ProVPN!
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 23:33:59 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
> On 09 Feb 2011 02:21:15 GMT, Noone wrote:
>
>> Nathan See <nathan_c@wildersecurity.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> hello,
>>>
>>> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the
>>> Government can simply subpoena that company for logs if they
>>> want them. So doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
>>
>> Only if who you are hiding from is the government. If it is then
>> you should not use any paid service, in fact, even Tor may not be
>> enough. If you assume the government is a global adversary with
>> the ability to monitor the entire Internet realtime and you must
>> hide from them, then the only truly safe way is not to use the
>> Internet.
>>
>>> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i
>>> always thought that it would be impossible for the government to
>>> get a subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with,
>>> which means they cant produce any probable cause to get the
>>> warrant. And, if the G-Men can break the encryption they would
>>> have to admit that in court and then IT security as we know it
>>> would be in question on a global scale. Do I have the right
>>> idea?
>>
>> It is more likely that they would be investigating a server or
>> service you connect to, or material or message they received from
>> you or saw you post, and so demand to know the origin of the
>> connection from the provider of the IP you are using.
>
> I see.
>
> Goodbye ProVPN!
XeroBank makes such claims. Although I don't have the means to verify
what they claim, I haven't seen any contrary evidence. Some do
complain about poor customer service, but nobody AFAIK has complained
that XeroBank snitched on them. Believe in The Wizard!! ;0)
> Nathan See <nathan_c@wildersecurity.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hello,
>>
>> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the
>> Government can simply subpoena that company for logs if they
>> want them. So doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
>
> Only if who you are hiding from is the government. If it is then
> you should not use any paid service, in fact, even Tor may not be
> enough. If you assume the government is a global adversary with
> the ability to monitor the entire Internet realtime and you must
> hide from them, then the only truly safe way is not to use the
> Internet.
>
>> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i
>> always thought that it would be impossible for the government to
>> get a subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with,
>> which means they cant produce any probable cause to get the
>> warrant. And, if the G-Men can break the encryption they would
>> have to admit that in court and then IT security as we know it
>> would be in question on a global scale. Do I have the right
>> idea?
>
> It is more likely that they would be investigating a server or
> service you connect to, or material or message they received from
> you or saw you post, and so demand to know the origin of the
> connection from the provider of the IP you are using.
Do you know of any VPNs that have snitched on their customers other
than Xerobank?
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 17:21:53 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
> Do you know of any VPNs that have snitched on their customers other
> than Xerobank?
I don't know of any VPN providers that have snitched. It's well known
that Hushmail provided investigators with email of customers who were
illegally selling anabolic steroids, but they're not a VPN provider.
Although I've had serious concerns about Anonymizer since its
acquisition some years ago by Abraxas, a purported CIA company, I've
seen no claims that customers have been compromised. There's been the
privacy.li-driven FUD about Metropipe, mostly about poor customer
service, but also hinting at snitching. However, having chatted with
the owner, and also some colleagues, I'm confident that it's a
trustworthy service.
--
An alkaline environment is detrimental to the "flu" organism, hence
alkalizing agents and an alkaline-reacting diet are helpful.
Edgar Cayce for Edgar Cayce Diet Recommendations
MBAM - I put that **** on everything!
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 17:21:53 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
>
>> Do you know of any VPNs that have snitched on their customers
>> other than Xerobank?
>
> I don't know of any VPN providers that have snitched. It's well
> known that Hushmail provided investigators with email of
> customers who were illegally selling anabolic steroids, but
> they're not a VPN provider. Although I've had serious concerns
> about Anonymizer since its acquisition some years ago by
> Abraxas, a purported CIA company, I've seen no claims that
> customers have been compromised. There's been the
> privacy.li-driven FUD about Metropipe, mostly about poor
> customer service, but also hinting at snitching. However, having
> chatted with the owner, and also some colleagues, I'm confident
> that it's a trustworthy service.
Any that are still in business have traced users. In order to keep
your Internet connection you must be able to disconnect abusers and
cooperate with local authorities. If you don't, you are forced to
close, simple as that.
This was all fully covered back in the privacy.li wars when their
admin was all pissed off because they were being ridculed for their
"no logging" and "you are completely anonymous with us" claims.
It's simply not possible for a service to be above the law (or laws
if they are in multiple jurisdictions) they operate under,
regardless of the maketing claims.
> Does anyone know anything about the VPN company:
> http://www.swissvpn.net/
>
> I am interested in all my internet activity being anonymous.
>
Then stop looking for paid vpn services, not one single one of them
is anonymous. It doesn't matter what lies they tell you, they are
not anonymous and cannot be so. On top of this the swiss should be
the last place you trust, they are easily bullied and have
widespread mlats in place.
If you are looking at VPN/proxies the best you can hope for is
privacy, you can't get anonymity. This means trusting the service.
How do you pick a trustworthy service? Easy, if they claim "no
logs" and "you are anonymous with us" then they already lied to you
and so cannot be trusted.
If you are dead set on subscription VPN, I suggest using multiple
services. Find a few that don't immediately lie in their marketing
and chain them.
> and I also figured that while I'm at it, I might as well send my
> traffic through a company that isn't subject to my nations
> judicial system. Some are curious why I feel that way and I
> guess I just want to be as safe as possible.
>
Then make sure you read local law and make sure it protects you.
Your foriegn service may be easier for your country to get
information from than one inside your country.
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 18:55:58 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>
>> hello,
>
> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the Government
> can simply subpoena that company for logs if they want them. So
> doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
>
> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i always
> thought that it would be impossible for the government to get a
> subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with, which means
> they cant produce any probable cause to get the warrant. And, if the
> G-Men can break the encryption they would have to admit that in court
> and then IT security as we know it would be in question on a global
> scale. Do I have the right idea?
First off, let's all be UPFRONT here and tell us what you plan to use
a VPN for?
I mean a subpoena, what are going to do...?
Let's GET REAL here, tell us what you are going to do and then maybe
someone can give you a straight answer...MAN UP...
If all you're going to do is download pirated software, well, depends
how much and if you're going to be a big distributor...
> "Not keeping logs is good. Designs that prevent useful logs from
> being kept are better. Operating in an uncooperative
> jurisdiction is good (as long as it's not more dangerous than
> your local jurisdiction). Designs that prevent coercion by any
> jurisdiction are better."
>
Not keeping logs is not good. First, it's highly likely (damn near
100% likely) that they are lying. If they lie to you right off the
bat, well what does that say about how worthy of your trust they
are? Second, if they are stupid enough to actually not have logs
then their service is not secure at all. You should assume that
every tom, dick, and harry has compromised their machines and is
watching everything you do.
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 18:55:58 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:33:38 -0500, Madhav "Mr. Nepal" Acharya wrote:
>>
>>> hello,
>>
>> I am currently a ProXpn customer and I was told that the Government
>> can simply subpoena that company for logs if they want them. So
>> doesn't that basically make it kind of pointless?
>>
>> just so i can get it off my chest I would like to say that i always
>> thought that it would be impossible for the government to get a
>> subpoena because the traffic is encrypted to begin with, which means
>> they cant produce any probable cause to get the warrant. And, if the
>> G-Men can break the encryption they would have to admit that in court
>> and then IT security as we know it would be in question on a global
>> scale. Do I have the right idea?
>
> First off, let's all be UPFRONT here and tell us what you plan to use
> a VPN for?
>
> I mean a subpoena, what are going to do...?
>
> Let's GET REAL here, tell us what you are going to do and then maybe
> someone can give you a straight answer...MAN UP...
>
> If all you're going to do is download pirated software, well, depends
> how much and if you're going to be a big distributor...
>
> THANKS
It's not about what I'm doing, it's about being as secure as I can be.
On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:33:49 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
> I am interested in all my internet activity being anonymous.
Do you really mean that, if I may ask? When you're on Wilders, for
example, you're not anonymous -- you're Mr.Gump; here, Nathan See.
Although you may participate anonymously on some sites, most now
require an email-verified account. Also, you probably access business
websites as your IRL identity.
What you want, I suspect -- I could less care -- is that each online
identity remains unrelated to the rest. You probably also want all of
your internet activity to be secure from snooping and attacks by
intermediaries.
On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:35:48 -0500, hierophant wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:33:49 -0500, Nathan See wrote:
>
>> I am interested in all my internet activity being anonymous.
>
> Do you really mean that, if I may ask? When you're on Wilders, for
> example, you're not anonymous -- you're Mr.Gump; here, Nathan See.
> Although you may participate anonymously on some sites, most now
> require an email-verified account. Also, you probably access business
> websites as your IRL identity.
>
> What you want, I suspect -- I could less care -- is that each online
> identity remains unrelated to the rest. You probably also want all of
> your internet activity to be secure from snooping and attacks by
> intermediaries.
>
> Is that an accurate assessment?
yes, I would like all of my internet activity to be secure from
snooping and attacks by intermediaries while being sent. I'm not
really concerned if logs are kept that say when I was connected and
for how long. I just don't want any of the data I am sending to be
kept by the VPN company I am sending it through.
and I also figured that while I'm at it, I might as well send my
traffic through a company that isn't subject to my nations judicial
system. Some are curious why I feel that way and I guess I just want
to be as safe as possible.
how can i test my VPN ssl security? 
Linear Mode
