http://timyang.com/2005/09/the-real-top
-ten-tips-for-blogging-anonymously/

This is pretty dogmatic.

#6. Seems incorrect. If you blog
through Tor using a throwaway
email account, presumably you
are well hidden.

#7. He appears to be saying
that PGP can be cracked ("It only
means that someone intercepting
your email will have a hard time
discovering its content.")

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

This guy has overlooked a number of
crucial points.

In "#3 Blog from cybercafes" he
forgets that cafes might well have
hidden cameras and have keylogger
software installed on every computer.

If this is the case, then the Blogger
is screwed, because after the authorities
have (easily) traced a post back to the
cafe, cross-checking the data in the
post with the camera and keylogger data
will point conclusively to the Blogger
on camera.

Not to mention cafes may well have any
kind of other nasty hi tech snooping
software/hardware installed which the
Blogger has no knowledge of.

Maybe even some type of real time Tempest
spyware that shows what you're typing on
screen to the admin sitting in the room
nextdoor. Anyone's guess.

At least if you Blog from your own home
computer (using crypto/proxies/tunnels),
you're sure that your machine has no nasty
hardware installed, and you can scan for
spyware.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

http://timyang.com/2005/09/the-real-top-ten-tips-
for-blogging-anonymously/

This is pretty dogmatic.

#6. Seems incorrect. If you blog
through Tor using a throwaway
email account, presumably you
are well hidden.

#7. He appears to be saying
that PGP can be cracked ("It only
means that someone intercepting
your email will have a hard time
discovering its content.")

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

> At least if you Blog from your own home
> computer (using crypto/proxies/tunnels),
> you're sure that your machine has no nasty
> hardware installed, and you can scan for
> spyware.

Can you really be sure? How do you know that somebody hasn't installed
a tiny listening device somewhere in the house while you were out?

At least if you use a computer at a cyber cafe or library, the people
after you won't know which one out of the hundreds of cafe's that you
use. They can't bug them all.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Nomen Nescio wrote:
 
>
> Can you really be sure? How do you know that somebody hasn't installed a
> tiny listening device somewhere in the house while you were out?

The steel doors, Rottweilers, and alarm system say they didn't. On the
other hand, there's absolutely no assurances at all that the Cafe you're
suing isn't actually a TLA front trying to sucker people like you into
believing they're safe when in fact everything you do and say is being
cataloged with the DNA samples taken from the hair and skin samples you so
eagerly leave behind.

>
> At least if you use a computer at a cyber cafe or library, the people
> after you won't know which one out of the hundreds of cafe's that you use.

<laugh>

I take it you've never heard of an IP address then? Every Cafe has one ya'
know. ;-)

The issue of Cyber Cafe's has been put to bed a long time ago. The icing
on the cake that showed just how insecure they are was the arrest a couple
months ago of a band of Net Scammers/Phishers who like you, thought an
Internet Cafe was a dandy place to remain anonymous. As I recall, some of
them literally wet themselves when the TLA's swooped down on the half
dozen or so hotspots they were using, while they were using them.

> They can't bug them all.

The hell they can't. They just don't have to. 

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In <f088dbfd338cd0c9e14094a4fccbf19f@pseudo.borked.net>, nobody@pseudo.borked.net wrote:[vbc
ol=seagreen]
>http://timyang.com/2005/09/the-real-top-ten-tips-
>for-blogging-anonymously/
>
>This is pretty dogmatic.
>
>#6. Seems incorrect. If you blog
>through Tor using a throwaway
>email account, presumably you
>are well hidden.
>
>#7. He appears to be saying
>that PGP can be cracked ("It only
>means that someone intercepting
>your email will have a hard time
>discovering its content.")[/vbcol]

yeah, if you define a "hard time" as taking 10^127 years to crack it.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

> cataloged with the DNA samples taken from
> the hair and skin samples you so eagerly
> leave behind.

And the copious amounts of semen left
on the screen and keyboard after an
hours worth of looking at Teen Sluts
In The Jungle.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Raz wrote:
 
>
>  And the copious amounts of semen left on the screen and keyboard after an
>  hours worth of looking at Teen Sluts
>  In The Jungle.

Ummmm.... gotta link for that?

ROTFL!

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Thrasher Remailer wrote:

> In <f088dbfd338cd0c9e14094a4fccbf19f@pseudo.borked.net>,
> nobody@pseudo.borked.net wrote: 
>
> yeah, if you define a "hard time" as taking 10^127 years to crack it.

Yeah, this guy really knows little ort nothing about anonymity. I glanced
through his site and in spite of the glaring evidence to the contrary he
suggests that "Internet Cafe's" are more secure than mathematically proved
methods like Tor and remailers. Even goes as far as to suggest you'll
"out" yourself by asking for help using those secure methods, but can't b
e caught using Cafe's because if you "feel them" closing in on you, you
just move to another Cafe.

*laugh*

A clueless hack if you ask me, or maybe someone with an agenda to serve. ;)

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]