Anonymizer Private Surfing

[srfox]

Anybody ever use this or their secure tunneling?

[Dan Perez]

Hi srfox,

I remember there being a thread about this a while back and found this

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=10788

You may want to read through that while waiting for others to post their experience (I have never tried it myself so I have no input aside from the URL :) )

Regards,

Dan

[eyespy]

Here is another thread...

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=3582;start=msg24462#msg24462

and another

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=3391

regards,
bill :)

[ArchAngel_8]

I tried it a while back.... I was on a dial up conection, which may have been the cause, but web pages loaded really slow, and many would not load correctally. I got rid of it for that reason as well as really not needing theat kind of service....

[snowbound]

I tried it and had the same problems as ArchAngel_8.

Web pages took forever to load, for some reason couldn't visit some of my favorite websites any more so i got rid of it after 2 days.

Don't know if it was something i did but my system didn't like it at all.





snowbound

[brian gill]

I`ve tried one or two of these anonymizing services,mainly out of interest,and the only one that seemed to work with reasonable speed,was
Megaproxy,an SSL/TLS secure service.It`s free for limited use,but of course the paid service is more elaborate. I`m not sure of the real need for
much greater levels of encryption,or whatever-unless you want to do something profoundly illegal!
https://www.megaproxy.com/_secure/

[srfox]

I've used Anonymizer.com for a while now for surfing and I don't see any slowdowns that are noticeable; in fact I'm thinking of getting the whole suite. A lot depends on what you want to do and settings you use. I have the added protection of ZoneAlarm Privacy settings which prevents ip address and browser type/settings from being revealed. If I'm doing research and have my email open, I just use the onlline logon to anonymizer to surf with and check over my settings, depending on what I'm doing. I really don't see a need to use encrypted SSH (as this will also prevent some things from being seen on a website), but I will often set history to be encrypted.

[ArchAngel_8]

Hey.. I think if I could have a service such as Anonomys browsing, without any negative effects, I go for it. But I really don't feel the need to waste recources on it. I guess its a trade off,.. Privacy verses cost(monitary & system recources). I acttually am more concerned with adware/spyware than being tracked by my ISP or Government. And viruses, trojans, worms, and now, wirless security. I rarely visit any sites that I would not admit visiting, or that would prove troubling for me with my GOV/ISP/Friends. But as I said, the option would be nice! ::)

[Paul Wilders]

Question: who is guarding the guard? Services like these do keep logs. So, how "private" is someone who's making use of services like these?

regards.

paul

[brian gill]

8)
I must naturally agree,but I would imagine that there are circumstances where the anonymizer is based in another country,and this might facilitate the user visiting websites that are proscribed in their native country,without his/her own ISP logging the traffic,or the authorities being easily aware of the content.I don`t just refer to unsavoury pictures!Extreme political organizations might be a case in point-remembering that one mans freedom fighter can be another mans terrorist.Of course I realize that the CIA/MI5/FSB or whoever, can probably command technology to get round the more basic encryption used on SSL/TLS websites,but then probably would find it hard to monitor the millions of these users.Maybe I`ve got this all wrong,of course! 8)

[srfox]

Well, it boils down to trust. I do trust Anonymizer.com, but once again, the government could access that info if they so demanded. I imagine though that anonymizer takes some precautions with regard someone trying to access those logs without his knowledge. And there is the sheer number of users. So, most probably there would have to be an official investigation before any data was turned over. At least on this site, I don't know about others.

[John Doe]

What I have done, which works really well is sign up for AnonX (http://www.anonx.com) AS WELL AS Anonymizer so when I go to the link above that shows your real IP thru java it shows the IP of Anonymizer but then under the Real IP section, instead of it being able to grab my true IP it can only get the IP of the AnonX VPN. This is more or less equivalent to chaining proxies I guess.

It certainly makes it just that little bit harder to trace/track me. :)

[John Doe]

Sorry, got my threads mixed up. The java link I was talking about is:

http://www.stilllistener.addr.com/checkpoint1/Java/

Surprising how, even behind 1 proxy it can still grab your REAL IP address. You need at least 2 proxies.

[srfox]

It would still be hard for it to grab my ip from proxy, because the last four digits of my ip are also blocked by my zoneAlarm Pro. And the header info is entirely blocked from third parties.

[John Doe]

-{ Quote: " quoting: srfox link=board=20;threadid=14240;start=0#msg123202 date=1074892539]
It would still be hard for it to grab my ip from proxy, because the last four digits of my ip are also blocked by my zoneAlarm Pro. And the header info is entirely blocked from third parties.
" }-

I tried Zonealarm but it was just too heavy on system resources for me so unfortunately I have to rely on the old fashioned chaining proxies approach.

By connecting to AnonX first and then connecting to Anonymizer I am shielded from any snooping sites and I also use Cotse (http://www.cotse.net) for my email so in effect I am going through 3 proxies. Hopefully, if anyone was trying to track me, by the time they'd traced through AnonX's logs (based in Vanatu I might add, same as Kazaa's founders) and then anonymizer's logs and then Cotse's logs it would make it very difficult to actually trace me and my web surfing habits.

Works for me with very little delay in browsing. Check it out, it's definitely worth it:

AnonX: http://www.anonx.com
Anonymizer: http://www.anonymizer.com
Cotse: http://www.cotse.net

[solarpowered candle]

I just recently received an email from news @anonymiser.com, and running it through Benign, as I always do to my emails, i noticed that It comes with more than 20 images from external servers removed and 1 undesirable tag removed and 1 external CSS stylesheet blocked and 1 scripting removed . Perhaps these may not seem to big a problem to most , but they are none the less the most that i have ever received via one email from any source.

[John Doe]

-{ Quote: " quoting: solarpowered candle link=board=20;threadid=14240;start=15#msg124092 date=1075116360]
I just recently received an email from news @anonymiser.com, and running it through Benign, as I always do to my emails, i noticed that It comes with more than 20 images from external servers removed and 1 undesirable tag removed and 1 external CSS stylesheet blocked and 1 scripting removed . Perhaps these may not seem to big a problem to most , but they are none the less the most that i have ever received via one email from any source.

" }-

Yes, for a privacy/anonymity company their newsletters and website are pretty poor, a good example of what happens when you let the marketing monkeys have too free a reign on things :)

Their SSH service is very good though (if you can look past all the marketing BS).

[srfox]

hey, did you check the address: anonymiser.com or did you just misspell it. Maybe it came from someone else.

[solarpowered candle]

Well it would be good if it wasnt from them , but it is . About a year or so ago there were a few threads here about this product , so I had a try of it .I subscribed to the newsletter and still pariodically receive it . Not that Im actually interested in the product anymore . Its unnecesary for my purposes and did have a massive slow down on my system . Try it for yourself srfox download Benign and run your newsletter back to yourself and you will see. As john doe says marketing companies are possibly behind it all. However Im sure they are aware of this themselves .

[srfox]

yes, I have Anonymizer and I like it fine. Usually I use it from their site as I do research, so all my browser windows don't use it. So, I seldom use the tool bar as it has a habit of making access to my email impossible. The good thing about using it from their site is you can access this remotely. And I am thinking about getting the total shield, but right now that will have to wait. I have Mail Washer, so perhaps I will try benign sometime. In the meantime, I'll just leave the graphics turned off when reading newsletters from them. I'm sure they are aware of this, and I'll probably send them a note on it. I'll let you know what they say.

[anonx]

Anonx covers all ip traffic, not just http
that means complete anonymous internet use

[tuatara]

As Paul said before,(and i in previous threads) they all keep there logfiles active.

There is NO reason to use logfiles if you are running an anon-proxy.

Experienced users know that anon proxies in the USA are NEVER safe.

So if you want to use an anon proxy (or anon proxy service) ask if they keep their logfiles and if they do... it is NOT an ANON proxy !!!!!!

Proxy chain is better, but will slow down the http connection a lot.

Proxy roulette is stupid, how more anon-proxies you use (not in chain),
the greater the risk.

Disable Java and Javascript and Flash in your browser (sorry),
but that is safer!

Then there are anon proxies which are not fully anonymouse
(check with: http://leader.ru/secure/who.html)

At last .....
And even if you are using anon proxies: Remember... the traffic from you to your ISP,
can still be sniffed !!!