|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > October 2006 > All servers should be SSL, but TLA wouldn't like it
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
All servers should be SSL, but TLA wouldn't like it
|
|
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2006-10-29, 1:12 pm |
| greets ppl,
There used to be a great little program called 'Stealther' that could
encrypt your traffic between you box and the Stealther proxy servers.
Stealther is no longer updated, no longer works, and is unreliable at best.
What I'm looking to do is encrypt my traffic through my ISP. Don't like the
thought of them harvesting everything people do, for whatever purpose they
may ultimately use it for.
Personally I think all servers should be SSL connect, but oh no, TLA I'm
sure wouldn't like that one bit.
AKAIK, there seem to be two primary (pay) alternatives. Anonymizer and
Steganos. From checking the sites, I believe that both, upon purchasing
subscriptions, provide you will a client side proxy app that all your
browser traffic will be encrypted through and sent along to their servers.
Good enough.
But on the other hand, is this the only way to securely tunnel through
one's ISP?
Been doing a lot of searches and finding apps bearing names such as SSH
Tunnel, SSL Tunnel, HTTP Tunnel and so forth. All of them have the ability
to encrypt data from your box to a server. Question is, which server? It
would seem there are none, unless your willing to pay for one. In plain
english, my question is are there any *free* SSL proxy servers capable of
client-side SSL connect (as opposed to a server side SSL connect).
My goal is to encrypt my HTTP traffic through my ISP (and any other
potential snoops that might be along the way). If I gotta go Anonymizer or
Steganos I will, but can this be done for free, avoiding subscriptions with
a service, with the right app? btw I'm running XP.
Thanks.
DB
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2006-10-29, 7:13 pm |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer schreef:
> greets ppl,
>
> There used to be a great little program called 'Stealther' that could
> encrypt your traffic between you box and the Stealther proxy servers.
> Stealther is no longer updated, no longer works, and is unreliable at best.
I never heard of it.
> What I'm looking to do is encrypt my traffic through my ISP. Don't like the
> thought of them harvesting everything people do, for whatever purpose they
> may ultimately use it for.
Read
http://tor.freehaven.net/svn/trunk/...tor-design.html
and see if it is what you are looking for. I think it will be :-) It is
pretty fast for a free service also!
> Personally I think all servers should be SSL connect, but oh no, TLA I'm
> sure wouldn't like that one bit.
They haven't stopped TOR from being developed so far. Just how much
legislation would it take to force a backdoor into TOR? IANAL,
Thomas
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2006-10-30, 1:12 am |
| >I never heard of it.
www.stealther.com
>
>Read
>http://tor.freehaven.net/svn/trunk/...tor-design.html
>and see if it is what you are looking for. I think it will be :-) It is
>pretty fast for a free service also!
Verrry nice! Already have it downloaded and running.
Basically could be thought of as a "remailer system" for net traffic.
Latency time is very acceptable too. I ran Ethereal to capture some packets
in and out of the NIC with Tor active. Application layer (DoD model)
totally obscured and non existent FAIAP.
Once I get a dedicated box to run my remailer on again, I think I'm also
going to run a Tor server. These days, this service is simply invaluable
imo. Once again imo, this makes Anonymizer and Steganos look like junk by
comparison.
Thanks for the info!
DB
| |
| Anonymous 2006-10-31, 7:12 am |
| On 29 Oct 2006, Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
<anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote:
>greets ppl,
>
> There used to be a great little program called 'Stealther' that could
>encrypt your traffic between you box and the Stealther proxy servers.
>Stealther is no longer updated, no longer works, and is unreliable at best.
>
>What I'm looking to do is encrypt my traffic through my ISP. Don't like the
>thought of them harvesting everything people do, for whatever purpose they
>may ultimately use it for.
>
>Personally I think all servers should be SSL connect, but oh no, TLA I'm
>sure wouldn't like that one bit.
>
>AKAIK, there seem to be two primary (pay) alternatives. Anonymizer and
>Steganos. From checking the sites, I believe that both, upon purchasing
>subscriptions, provide you will a client side proxy app that all your
>browser traffic will be encrypted through and sent along to their servers.
>Good enough.
>
>But on the other hand, is this the only way to securely tunnel through
>one's ISP?
>
>Been doing a lot of searches and finding apps bearing names such as SSH
>Tunnel, SSL Tunnel, HTTP Tunnel and so forth. All of them have the ability
>to encrypt data from your box to a server. Question is, which server? It
>would seem there are none, unless your willing to pay for one. In plain
>english, my question is are there any *free* SSL proxy servers capable of
>client-side SSL connect (as opposed to a server side SSL connect).
>
>My goal is to encrypt my HTTP traffic through my ISP (and any other
>potential snoops that might be along the way). If I gotta go Anonymizer or
>Steganos I will, but can this be done for free, avoiding subscriptions with
>a service, with the right app? btw I'm running XP.
>Thanks.
>
>DB
Tor is your answer:
http://tor.eff.org
Open source, freeware. (gpl I believe)
|
|
|
|
|