DNS privacy question...

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by Phil McCrevis, Jul 2, 2015.

  1. Timok

    Timok Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Posts:
    58
    Location:
    Germany
  2. UnknownK

    UnknownK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2012
    Posts:
    160
    Location:
    Unknown
    I would like to add something here. I just did a ping to www.startpage.com followed by a ping to startpage.com. Prior to that I had this on my /etc/hosts:

    212.121.101.10 startpage.com

    Here was the result:
    [xxx@yyy ~]$ ping -c 1 www.startpage.com
    PING startpage.com (89.146.4.149) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from rt4bb146-89-149.routit.net (89.146.4.149): icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=768 ms

    --- startpage.com ping statistics ---
    1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 768.702/768.702/768.702/0.000 ms
    [xxx@yyy ~]$ ping -c 1 startpage.com
    PING startpage.com (212.121.101.10) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from startpage.com (212.121.101.10): icmp_seq=1 ttl=46 time=839 ms

    --- startpage.com ping statistics ---
    1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 839.221/839.221/839.221/0.000 ms

    As we can see startpage.com had the ip 212.121.101.10 which was given in my hosts file whereas www.startpage.com had the ip 89.146.4.149. So I think we need to add both www.startpage.com and startpage.com to the hosts file.

    And also we need to add the host name for those sites which are on a shared hosting where multiple websites are on a single ip address, like this:
    <ip-address> <domain-name> <host-name>
    212.121.101.10 www.startpage.com startpage
     
  3. Holysmoke

    Holysmoke Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2014
    Posts:
    130

    I still haven't figured out which is worse. My ISP seeing my traffic or a VPN. these VPN's are shaddy as ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ to me.
     
  4. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    8,931
    Your ISP can hurt you a lot more than any VPN could.
     
  5. Snoop3

    Snoop3 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Posts:
    474
  6. redcell

    redcell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Posts:
    126
    I like to add something worth to mention here. While you're innocently surfing websites, connections are being established in the background.
    Advertising nodes are not only being used for marketing purpose but tracking also.
    Notorious ones like Google's 1e100.net, amazonaws.com and akamaitechnologies.com.

    Pull up your command prompt and type in (case-sensitive):
    netstat -aop tcp 10 | findstr ESTABLISHED

    You'll find out how noisy a simple web surfing actually is. This is where a good understanding and implementation of firewall rules are imperative.
     
  7. MisterB

    MisterB Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Southern Rocky Mountains USA
    Adblocking, anti tracking extensions and MVPS hosts files are all very good in blocking these without messing with firewalls. I use java script blocking as well with only vetted top level domains allowed to run scripts but that isn't for everyone. Lots of people say it "breaks the web". From my point of view, it puts the web back under your control and breaks what you don't want.
     
  8. UnknownK

    UnknownK Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2012
    Posts:
    160
    Location:
    Unknown
    This is very inefficient. They only allow three free searches per ip address and even then it does not list all the subdomains. One can just use Wireshark and use the dns filter to get the subdomains for which dns queries are being sent and just drill/digg subdomain.com to get the ip address of the domain/subdomain.
     
  9. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,784
    Location:
    UK
    Yep, the web started with plain-old HTML markup.
    A lot of what is done with javascript is a) associated with dreadful individual browser quirks and workarounds for that and b) having to cater for old standards. If you could target only modern HTML5 and CSS3, then most user elements could be script-free. Another part is genuine functionality. And the biggest - and most dangerous - part is advertising & tracking.
    And then we come to the fact that browsers were supposed to be individual sandboxes limited to that site, Not sharing with all and sundry, making cross-site attacks easy. And the Browser sandboxes are buggy and leaky, so we cannot trust that they will keep us safe from the javascript code. Unsigned code which could come from pretty much anywhere, and be changed at any time. Doesn't sound a good idea really!
    So whitelisting at least sources of code is a pretty sound policy.
     
  10. Stefan Froberg

    Stefan Froberg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    646
    Ok, I wasn't aware of the limitation. Thanks for the drill/digg tip!
     
Loading...
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.