New version 2.05 beta 01.

[Frederic]

Hi All,

We are please to announce that the new version 2.05 beta 01 is out.

Here are the links for download:
- English release: http://looknstop.soft4ever.com/Beta/En/2.05b1/LooknStop_Setup_205b1.exe
- French release: http://looknstop.soft4ever.com/Beta/Fr/2.05b1/Installation_LooknStop_205b1.exe

To install this new version over an existing one, no need to uninstall first the current one, just run the setup and anwser Yes to the question.

Here the content of this version (quite the same as the preview (http://looknstop.soft4ever.com/Beta/En/2.05b1/preview.htm)):

Features Added:
DLL Filtering (Windows 2000-XP only)
Port & IP selection for the Application Filtering
Plug-in interface for localization, rule creation and log analysis by third party applications.
Detection of troyans that are using DLL injection or DNS request through svchost/services.
Detection of non-standard protocols and drivers under Win2000/XP.
Changes:
Signature verification improvements (Windows 2000-XP only).
New attribute in Application Filtering to have only blocking access in the log or all access.
Addition of GB unit for statistic display in the Welcome page (however there is still the 4 GB limitation)
All miscellaneous options in one list in the Advanced Options dialog box.
In the "U/D #" column addition of a '-' or '+' information to know if the packet has been blocked or allowed.
In the Application Filtering, it is now possible to sort the lines by clicking on the column headers.
Addition of the 'TCP or UDP' selection to the list of protocols in the rule edition dialog box
Automatic log entries removal when reaching a limit (configurable by the user).
Application filtering: automatic removal of applications which no longer exist
Fixes:
Under some 2003 Server configuration, the network interface wasn't correctly detected.
The field "IP to exclude for auto-detection" was sometimes badly interpreted.
The rule names in the log are now correct even if some rule have been added without applied yet.
Crash when the maximum number of Internet Filtering rules was reached.
About plugins, you will find more information here:
http://www.looknstop.com/En/Plugins/plugin.htm

In case of problem, please use the following Web form to report the problem to us:
http://www.looknstop.com/En/support_2.05beta.htm

This version will expire by March, 2003, the official 2.05 or a new beta will be available before.

To re-install the 2.04 over the 2.05b1, two solutions:

1- uninstall the 2.05b1, reboot, reinstall 2.04, reboot
2- remove lnsfw.vxd/lnsfw1.vxd (Windows 9x/Me) or lnsfw.sys/lnsfw1.sys (2000/XP) and remove fwapi.dll, then execute the 2.04 setup and reboot

Regards,

Frederic

[Andreas1]

cool! great! super!

downloading now and looking forward to giving it a go.
Thanks for the improvements, Frédéric

Andreas

[manuangi]

I'm so excited the new 2.05's finally out! ;D

I'll download it at once!! ;)

btw...is a full guide to how to use the new features already done?

[MickeyTheMan]

-{ Quote: " quoting: manuangi link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=0#msg106983 date=1070583631]
btw...is a full guide to how to use the new features already done?
" }-
The help file incuded covers it

[Jazzie1]

Cool, been waiting on this! Thx for releasing it!!!
BTW: If I could get Andreas to give me back my Suse Linux cd's it would be complete!!! ;)))

LOL
CU
Jazzie

[ellison64]

Hi...
Is there anything new in this version for 98 users or is it not worth installing if you have the 2.04 version?
tia
ellison

[Phant0m]

Hey ellison64

Read the very first thread in this topic closely... ;)

[ellison64]

Ok,,,ive read it again.What i would consider important updates such as dll injection detection that warrants an update seem to be only for xp / 2000...why is that?.
tia
ellison

[Phant0m]

DLL Injection using resources specifically to Win2K/XP… :'(

[ellison64]

sorry phantom...meant dll injection :-[ .Im not an expert but assumed malware that uses dll injection methods can happen on all operating systems.
ellison

[Phant0m]

Hey

ahhh me bad...

"Detection of troyans that are using DLL injection or DNS request through svchost/services."

I don't re-call Win9x/ME using svchost & services... :)

[ellison64]

You are correct that 98 dont use svchost /services.Im thinking of exploits like pcaudit that uses dll injection to bypass firewall.It seems to bypass 2.04 and i assumed the dll injection detection would stop this...but only for 2000 and xp or am i missing something here?
tia ellison

[Phant0m]

You are missing something, if you really interested in this read through http://www.codetools.com/system/hooksys.asp

[ellison64]

thanks for the link phantom...however it doesnt really help me at all.All i really wanted to know is whether the new version with the dll filtering etc thats for xp 2000 will stop dll injection exploits like pcaudit.On 98 and using 2.04 it doesnt
ellison

[Morgoth]

What about leaktests (or trojans) that inject themselves into open processes by modifying one of its threads (cd. Copycat?) ?

2.04b2 stops Thermite but not Copycat. How does 2.05b1 fare against Copycat?

[gkweb]

NO firewall passes Copycat.

As of now, the only way to prevent such leaktest to simply launch or run, is to use Application Monitoring feature/software as you can read in the other post we talkeld :)

I am very impatient to see the first firewall which will really pass this leaktest, just wish it will be Look'n'Stop ;)

[Morgoth]

-{ Quote: "NO firewall passes Copycat.

[...]

I am very impatient to see the first firewall which will really pass this leaktest" }-

Wait one ... does this mean that
- LnS 2.05b1 also fails the test

or instead

- 2.05b1 has not been tested yet (against Copycat) ??

-{ Quote: "just wish it will be Look'n'Stop " }-

Me too, unless Zonealarm or Outpost fix their memory leak bugs... ::)

[gkweb]

No firewalls mean not one, even Look'n'Stop 2.05 beta1.

And as JV Morris said on the other thread, any dishonnest firewall vendors could be compelled to identify directly the leaktest MD5 fingerprint to be the first to "pass" it.
This is why when this time will come, i will do my best to ensure the leaktest is really passed ;)

[Morgoth]

-{ Quote: "No firewalls mean not one, even Look'n'Stop 2.05 beta1." }-

Damn! Now I'm more impatient than ever.

Hey, why not set up an opinion poll as to which firewall will be the first to (fully) pass the dreaded Copycat test ?! :D

[Phant0m]

Giving that Copycat source was available and probably still available and yet Software Firewall vendors wasn’t capable of implementing proper detections by now after all this time with Copycat being around, I ‘d be surprised to see a Software Firewall release a version that actually sees Copycat exploiting Trusted Applications to access, to access Internet resources… ;)

[Morgoth]

The difference between Thermite & Copycat was explained to me a few posts ago (in a nutshell!!).

Basically, the only difference is that Thermite creates a new thread in the open process whereas Copycat modifies an existing thread. The intricacies of these leaktests may be beyond my scope, but the way it sounds these 2 tests look pretty similar to me! So if at least one FW (namely LnS) was able to "truly" pass the Thermite test, then surely we won't have to wait that long B4 the other one is defeated as well, shall we?

Perhaps there are no (real) trojans out there that use the 2nd method, so no FW vendor may have bothered to attend to it yet (BTW, how does the Beast trojan work? Does it operate in Thermite or in Copycat fashion??)

C'mon folks, LnS & the Rest - so many good firewalls out there, it's about time one of them took the lead and distinguished itself from the pack! Show us what you've got!! ;D ;D

[gkweb]

Even if Thermite and Copycat are pretty similar, Copycat is by far harder to catch.
Indeed Thermite has to take a risk in _adding_ a malicious content.
However, a trusted application already launched and running, without any thread or DLL injected is untampered with from the firewall point of view.
And it's hard to tell if sudently the trusted application access the internet, from
one of his _own_ thread which it has created itself, if it is manipulated maliciously or if it is legitimate.

Solution exists i think, but monitoring with scrutiny all thread of all processes in real time would take so much ressources (i think) that we have to find something more accurate, and it isn't so easy :)

[Morgoth]

-{ Quote: "Even if Thermite and Copycat are pretty similar, Copycat is by far harder to catch.

[...]

Solution exists i think, but monitoring with scrutiny all thread of all processes in real time would take so much ressources (i think) that we have to find something more accurate, and it isn't so easy" }-

Now see - I'll have nightmares again! :'(

[gkweb]

I'm sorry, it wasn't my purpose :-\

keep the faith in Look'n'Stop, Frederic is well aware of the situation, and i'm sure it will try to find a solution ;)
About others firewall vendors i don't know if they are investigating the pb or not, but who knows.

Smile :D

[Phant0m]

From my view Look ‘n’ Stop has already distinguished itself from the pack from the very beginning.

[Morgoth]

hehe - the problem is actually a tad more complicated, I think:

A trojan can modify a thread in an open process to access the Net, sure enough that's a cause for concern. But there are far greater threats as well!

For example, could the trojan modify a thread to make it, say, delete all files on the HDD, or format the HDD, or damage the CMOS, or even FLASH THE BIOS? (yipes! mega-nightmares again :'( ;D)

If so, a firewall (or whatever we may call it) should be able to recognize all possible threats, not just leaks.

[gkweb]

what you are saying is not suposed to be handle by a firewall, the threat could delete directly all your files...

But the purpose of a trojan is to provide an access to someone else, not to delete your entire hardrive.
The purpose of a virus is to duplicate, if into each computer it infects it destroy all, it won't really spread ;)

But the fact that a trojan can use a trusted application like Copycat is something that ideally should be handle by a firewall.

[Morgoth]

-{ Quote: "From my view Look ‘n’ Stop has already distinguished itself from the pack from the very beginning." }-

Sure. Maybe. But U know what, I could swear that that's what the Zonelabs guys think about ZA, the Sygate guys about SPF, the Agnitum guys about Outpost, Symantec guys about NIS... ;D

The point is, only users or independent firewall reviewers can be given credit when making such statements - makes sense, too. No doubt U do believe what you say, but I'm sure you understand that objectivity is crucial ;)

U see, I have about 6 different firewalls (inc. LnS) and keep changing the one I use. Take it as a caprice if U wish, but the fact is EACH FIREWALL HAS ITS OWN BENEFITS - and drawbacks.

I like ZA's multiple "bonuses" (anti-popup, cookie-killer, script-blocking - VERY useful stuff) and its new 'Application monitoring' option, Outpost's even greater number of "bonus" features (flash popup blocking), LnS and Sygate's low CPU and RAM usage (esp. during online GAMING),... I dislike ZA and Outpost's famous memory leaks, the lack of extra features in LnS & SPF (privacy, anti-popup, ...),...

..and the list could go on.

Every firewall will have assets that some others lack. If a vendor was to release a "super-firewall" - one that will comprise all the advantages of the others, minus the drawbacks (I'd call it the Holy Grail ;D), this would mean certain death for the competitors, if they failed to follow in promptly.

BTW, notwithstanding an eventual "anti-copycat-trojan" upgrade, are there any plans to include privacy, ad-killing and script-blocking features into LnS in the immediate future? These are minor features I agreee, but U bet they would be greatly appreciated :)

[gkweb]

I don't think they would, because LnS is wanted to be light, and just a firewall.
In addition, for each user a firewall is something different, me i don't care of any web stuff that i handle with other software/methods.

If you are interested in handling popup/cookies stuff, personally i'm happy with Mozilla FireBird browser ;)


But of course only Fredric can answer to your question :)

[Phant0m]

I can define a Software Firewall.
I can’t define how Popup/Cookies handling and so on correspond with a Software Firewall, matter of fact likewise for even Application Filtering Filtering.

There were numerous reasons why I choose Look ‘n’ Stop, and few reasons are Look ‘n’ Stop is by far one of the most

* Easiest on System Resources
* Smallest
* Stable
…

Now when I see potentials in a product I dedicate myself to it, saves a lot of grief in the long run. As much as dedicated myself to Look ‘n’ Stop I’d drop it in a heart-beat the moment Popup-Cookie Handling and so on became implemented which turns a very good potential Software Firewall into bloat-ware and which cripples everything I believe a Software Firewall should be.

Personally I like to use products created by different individuals with knack which deals in a specific field, I see the Nicety of this, I’m sorry you don’t…

[Morgoth]

-{ Quote: "Personally I like to use products created by different individuals with knack which deals in a specific field, I see the Nicety of this, I’m sorry you don’t…" }-

... in short, this means 'No' to my last question ;D

-{ Quote: "As much as dedicated myself to Look ‘n’ Stop I’d drop it in a heart-beat the moment Popup-Cookie Handling and so on became implemented which turns a very good potential Software Firewall into bloat-ware and which cripples everything I believe a Software Firewall should be." }-

umm ... another solution would be to implement such extra features as anti-cookie, anti-popup, etc... but let the user switch 'em on/off at will - simple, isn't it? Read my previous post again - I referred 2 these features as minor "bonus" options, implying that OF COURSE they don't perform 'firewall' functions as such! Even though YOU use a firewall without such extra options, I bet U still do resort to, say, a seperate popup-killer app, right? So why not have it all-in-one?

I don't see how these features could "bloat up" an FW app - especially if as I said they can be switched off. It's not like we're talking about built-in DivX encoders or something...
U get anti-popup apps as freeware on the web that take less than 100Kb - and each of these apps has about as much impact on your system as a marshmallow thrown at an M1A2 tank. Anti-popup & privacy options certainly can't be the reason for the memory leaks that plague Outpost & ZA (it would be too simple & too good to be true). Besides, if I recall correctly (haven't used Kerio 4 a while), Kerio uses hardly any more resources than LnS, yet it also has built-in popup, cookie & script blockers (True, I don't make much of Kerio's outbound protection, though...)

Face it comrade, "multiware" would be a more appropriate term than "bloatware". Willing to set up another poll? "How many users would like to have privacy, ad-blocking & script-blocking built into their firewall app?" I wouldn't be surprised if the majority were to share my opinion ;)

Besides, such extra features was only one my "auxiliary" requests, so you needn't have harped on it.
"Much ado about nothing" they say...

And since you seem to prefer the other way ("simpleware" or whatever you may call it), an you suggest a good freeware app that combines ad-blocking, script-blocking and cookie-blocking all in one? Like I said, there are more than one similar apps on the Net, but which one would U suggest? For example, which one do you personally use in conjunction with LnS?

[gkweb]

Mozilla ;D

[Morgoth]

I've heard of Modzilla - but it's a japanese browser ;D.

I just use good old IE.

I was talking about a simple little app, that is, not part of a bigger prog (such as FW, browser, ...).

Actually, these are not that easy to find - U get ad-killers, privacy-enforcers, script-blockers, but never all 3 in 1... Perhaps you may have heard of one? (PS. it has to be small, and free )

[Klaus]

Morgoth,

I've had the same debate with Phant0m a few weeks ago:

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=16772

I agree, these features would definitely be nice as long as they are kept seperated from the main code (e. g. via plug-ins!).

I'm using Ad Muncher (http://www.admuncher.com) as the "simple little 3 in 1 app". It's very small and fast. It's only free for the first 30 days but easily worth its money. (You can get the latest beta version at IRC (EFNet) #admuncher).

@Frederic: will there be a german version of 2.05 beta x?

[Phant0m]

Plug-In are fine, separate Application fine, however I rather use utility like AdMuncher which is unique and incredibly strong filtering system that deals with many aspects.

Klaus, you surely know how to pick web-Filtering Systems :)

[Morgoth]

Right U are, Klaus 8)

Plug-ins would be the best compromise - part of the app, yet without being part of it.

Don't get me wrong, though: web filtering & ad-blocking are a perfect addon for firewalls, but I certainly don't endorse so-called "security programs" that comprise several MAIN applications, all-in-one, for example Anti-trojan, Anti-Virus & Firewall - 3 sub-programs of "equivalent level", all in one - now THAT's bloatware - not to mention the danger of having some malicious code terminate the app, thus neutralizing ALL protections in one shot. Layered protection is always the best choice :)


Ad Muncher, eh ?

Sounds interesting, but ... wait one ... hey, 25$ for about 150kb? Man, that's the most Xpensive Kbytes I've seen so far -this had better be a good prog.

Anyways, I'll check it out - just a byte ;D

[Phant0m]

Hey Morgoth

Don’t let the size fool yea, take Look ‘n’ Stop for an example ;)
AdMuncher is very unique filtering system and as I said earlier very strong packet filtering system.

[Morgoth]

hmmm ... launched Muncher 4 the 1st time, and according to my current FW, it already tried to connect to the Net AND even act as a server, B4 I'd even started my browser!!! Strange, for even my FIREWALL needs no Net access, not to mention server rights, even with privacy & ad-blocking enabled. Paranoid I probably am, but suspecting spyware activity here, or some other malicious intent, God knows what ... *terrible outburst of rage* ... uninstalling software.

I'm looking for a freeware tool now. I know there are such free, small yet efficient apps out there (perhaps better than Muncher), but difficult to find the right one - more difficult than I initially thought, anyways...

BTW, when will the official (non-beta) LnS 2.05 be available?

[Phant0m]

Wrong!

Best method of filtering pop-ups and so forth is to use Local Proxy Server that acts as “Middle-Man” between your Client Applications & Internet, thus means for basic connections to remote servers via port 80tcp the Ad-Muncher or Local Proxy server Software will be seen making the connections instead of the Internet Explorer and whatever. Also Ad-Muncher has Update capabilities for both Application and server-supplied lists.

Also what makes this program unique from the rest;
-{ Quote: " One of the main benefits of Ad Muncher is that it works on the (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((system level)))))))))))))))))))))))) of your operating system (as opposed to working as a local "proxy server"), and is the only advert removing software to our knowledge to do so. What does this mean? This means that there is no noticeable performance decrease, while other advert removers will introduce noticeable "lag", especially on pages with many images." }-

[gkweb]

The current 2.05 beta1 will become 2.05 beta2 or 2.05 official on March, Frederic said it :)

[Morgoth]

Oh, it's a proxy server or something. I've heard of such apps before - Steganos Anonymizer (ultra-SLOW!), Stealth Anonym (faster) & so on...

Well I had a friend test the Muncher (I don't bother anymore, removed it - for now I'll jus' settle for a standard & freeware ad-blocker, without proxies & stuff :P )

True enough he told me about a 'Scramble IP' option or sometin, and when enabling it, his IP seemed to be hidden while surfing on many IP-revealing sites, EXCEPT ONE: Steve Gibson's grc.com site, which kept showing his true IP. Heh, these are clever guys at grc, it seems.

I even looked for such an app once myself, that wuz some time ago, but for MAILING purposes only, wanting to send (fully) anonymous emails to some friends on April 1st ;D

Apparently, proxy server apps - at least those I've heard of - only seem to be able to hide a user's IP while he's browsing, not mailing or anything else...

[gkweb]

You can't really hide your IP, because if you could, no information could be sent back to you (web, mails, etc...).
You must give a valid IP to a website to receive information, and what this kind of proxy does, is to emty a cell of the HTTP header where your IP is written, but your IP is still written in the IP header, fortunaly.

The only way i know to better hide his IP to websites is to go trought real proxy on the Internet (so the IP seen is the proxy one not yours) but a website downloading a script on your computer (like the symantec scan does) will still be able to see your IP.

The only real way to hide is to send a spoofed packet without expecting to see any traffic back to us.

And to get back to Look'n'Stop, like Phant0m i prefer it like it is currently, light :)

[peakaboo]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Morgoth link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=30#msg109374 date=1071164924]
I've heard of Modzilla - but it's a japanese browser ;D.

I just use good old IE.

I was talking about a simple little app, that is, not part of a bigger prog (such as FW, browser, ...).

Actually, these are not that easy to find - U get ad-killers, privacy-enforcers, script-blockers, but never all 3 in 1... Perhaps you may have heard of one? (PS. it has to be small, and free )
" }-

OT, caught the tail end of this conversation...

if it doesn't help don't use

1 word 4 syllables

Proxomitron

gives you 3 in 1 & more and is free

if you use it out of the box, you will get all you need.

http://www.proxomitron.info/files/index.shtml

use the June version of 4.5

more info: http://www.proxomitron.info/

another source here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prox-list/files/

you have to register for the Proxomitron forum at Yahoo to use their download.

Once you get the hang of it explore other filter sets such as AltoSax filter set - which includes the Jax's IP spoofer... web bug killers, iframe killers, activeX killers and much more.

http://www.computercops.biz/downloads-file-149.html

if you use Proxo, make sure your firewall loopback rules are set up properly, the following link will also help you set up your DNS rules also...

Loopback DNS & other Rules (http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6642367~root=kerio~mode=flat)

some more tips here (post#11 page 2):

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=5367;start=15#bot

proxo will not be able to help you spoof your email.

if you are looking to improve your safety on-line change your browser ( really nice light aps like Opera & Firebird)

back to LNS thread topic

[Andreas1]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Klaus link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=30#msg109641 date=1071246716]
@Frederic: will there be a german version of 2.05 beta x?
" }-

Hier (http://www.commontology.de/pub/deutsch.lng).
This is still subject to improvements but is working so far. (PM me with suggestions if you have some)
I've sent the file to Frédéric as well, I suppose it will be in the next release or available as a download as soon as the website is finished.
Phant0m, you may want to grab a copy of it for your languages download section as well?

On a sidenote, I think that we'll see a next release before March - just because there are so few issues appearing. March is just the date that the beta will expire, so it's the last possible release date for a follow-up release.

CU,
Andreas

[Phant0m]

Hey Andreas(W)

Thanks, that is correct.
Excellent Job Andreas(W), I’ll add that beautiful work shortly after plugin_language.dll becomes updated.

Btw; if you make any modifications could you please contact me by any means for notification purposes, Thanks! ;D

[aptisman]

Hello

An observation!

On my machine (XP Home) the sorting on Application Name in Application Filtering does not stick after a close and re-open.

Anyone else find this?

[Frederic]

-{ Quote: " quoting: aptisman link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=45#msg110533 date=1071485229]
Anyone else find this?
" }-
Yes, me.

It was a beta-tester test ;)

Actually, the sorting state is not saved, since one click only is required to sort again, I don't know if it is very important...

Frederic

[aptisman]

Ah!

My vote would be for the sorting-state to be saved as this would bring LnS into line with a lot of other software in this respect.

[aptisman]

Sorry, a further point.

One click sorts into descending order, if you want ascending order it's two clicks!

[gkweb]

i add too my whish list :)

that would be fine, is :
- to save columns sorting
- to save columns width and size
- to add a column to see which app has filters, which has not

For the last point, i mean that actually, we can't see at first glance if apps has TCP/UDP IP/ports filters (=filtered), or not (= full access).
I would like to have a small column with a small icon just to say if the app has full access to the Internet, or if filters are defined for it.

[aptisman]

Yes, I think that's an excellent suggestion gkweb.

Any chance Frederic?

[Andreas1]

-{ Quote: " quoting: gkweb link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=45#msg110564 date=1071499247]
- to add a column to see which app has filters, which has not
" }-

...maybe with the inverted checkbox indicating an active rule (like in internet filtering, when a rule has applications associated). That would be nice, yes.

Andreas

PS. Some minutes ago, I had a complete crash when i had Applications sorted by path and then clicked on the name column to change the sort order. I will see if i can reproduce it...

[Andreas1]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Andreas(W) link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=45#msg110688 date=1071526936]
PS. Some minutes ago, I had a complete crash when i had Applications sorted by path and then clicked on the name column to change the sort order. I will see if i can reproduce it...
" }-

I had it again: But it was no crash, just a hang. 100% CPU and then after what seemed a long time (a minute or so), the list was sorted. Maybe it can be sped up? And ignore case in the sorting...

HTHH,
Andreas

[gkweb]

Very good suggestion, in this way, it won't add too much "weight" to the GUI and will keep it simple.

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Morgoth link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=30#msg109864 date=1071279648]
Oh, it's a proxy server or something. I've heard of such apps before - Steganos Anonymizer (ultra-SLOW!), Stealth Anonym (faster) & so on...
-{ Quote: "

Are you familar with the difference between local proxy server and remote proxy server? seems to me you are not.

-{ Quote: "
Apparently, proxy server apps - at least those I've heard of - only seem to be able to hide a user's IP while he's browsing, not mailing or anything else...
" }-

Well obviously." }-" }-

[Morgoth]

An adblocker that also comprises a proxy server. Now shouldn't these 2 features be kept seperated, according to you?
Semper idem, sed aliter

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Morgoth link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=45#msg112145 date=1071958884]
An adblocker that also comprises a proxy server. Now shouldn't these 2 features be kept seperated, according to you?
Semper idem, sed aliter
" }-

Lol, not if that the most common mechaism used by a adblocker .

How else would you expect an adblocker to work? By magic?

[Morgoth]

Actually, I was talking about its IP scrambling feature - it does not belong there and anyways it doesn't even fully work (with it enabled, Steve Gibson's grc.com site still sees through it)...

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Morgoth link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=45#msg112354 date=1072019726]
Actually, I was talking about its IP scrambling feature - it does not belong there and anyways it doesn't even fully work (with it enabled, Steve Gibson's grc.com site still sees through it)...
" }-

probably HTTPS. Most annymous proxies let through so called secured streams.

And no, I don't think an Ad-block program should necessarily function as a remote proxy in an attempt to hide your ip. That is a again apple and oranges. Using remote proxies always inccur a cost in surfing speed.

[Morgoth]

Besides, I've never really cared for that - and apparently you concur also with that point. Anonymous surfing may be fun in the beginning - seeing all the sites report a flase IP as being your real IP - but I've read that it ALWAYS slows down surfing to a crawl, so...so much even for the fun part.

No, what I've always been looking for is a way to send fully anonymous email (there we go again - April the 1st stuff, etc...) - like an "SMTP equivalent" of anonymous browsing, without having to resort to "paying subscription services".
Do you or anyone else know of any such app? Freeware, if possible??

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Morgoth link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=45#msg112363 date=1072022221]
Besides, I've never really cared for that - and apparently you concur also with that point. Anonymous surfing may be fun in the beginning - seeing all the sites report a flase IP as being your real IP - but I've read that it ALWAYS slows down surfing to a crawl, so...so much even for the fun part.

" }-

Yes. But proxomitron or most ad blockers work as a local proxy, there shouldn't be much if any reduction in speed.


-{ Quote: "
No, what I've always been looking for is a way to send fully anonymous email (there we go again - April the 1st stuff, etc...) - like an "SMTP equivalent" of anonymous browsing, without having to resort to "paying subscription services".
Do you or anyone else know of any such app? Freeware, if possible??
" }-

Suprisingly many. I can think of 3 ways (by ways i mean methods not software) offhand.

[Phant0m]

Web-filtering using Local Proxy technology actually increases the speed, not reduces

[JayK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Phant0m`` link=board=13;threadid=17293;start=60#msg112369 date=1072022978]
Web-filtering using Local Proxy technology actually increases the speed, not reduces
" }-

I know what you mean, but it depends.

[Phant0m]

Yea depends on the Features and configurations... ;)

[marc75]

Well - what happenend to LnS?! ??? :-\
Does the Development stopped at 2.05b1?? No News
since Months.....

greetings

[gkweb]

not since months, just since december 2003, and next beta or final release must be released before this beta expired (in march ?) so don't worry :)