What alternatives are available and where can they be found.
Thanks.


Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente   |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore   |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni      |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Oct 21, 12:20 pm, George Orwell <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> What alternatives are available and where can they be found.
> Thanks.
>
> Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
> non corrisponde ad un utente   |message is not related to a real
> reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
> di un sistema anonimizzatore   |anonymous system
> Per maggiori informazioni      |For more info
>                  https://www.mixmaster.it


http://www.webservertalk.com/archiv...-4-1874339.html


http://www.webservertalk.com/archiv...-6-1107556.html


http://search.webservertalk.com/message2107173.html

Firefox,Tor,Google.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

"George Orwell" <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
 news:6f951c388f0db77f8178742d2c512f79@mi
xmaster.it...
> What alternatives are available and where can they be
> found.
> Thanks.
>

Do you mean for Windows?  There don't appear to be any, but it
depends on your requirements.  You could, for example, use
Mixmaster command line to post, as I am doing here, after
formatting your message in Notepad.  It depends on how paranoid
you are, and how much of your correspondence you think would be
interesting to Big Brother.

Quicksilver and JBN both appear to be dated.  Quicksilver is useful
to me for creating and manipulating nym server accounts, but
getting its other features to actually work appears to be too much
of a chore for me.  Perhaps if you are a Windows programmer you
could grab the source code and bring one or both up to date.

Both PGP and GPG integrate somewhat into popular Windows email
programs.  With some practice, one can get rather good at using
them.  This message was created and sent using Notepad, Mixmaster
2.9b38msvc and Outlook Express.

Cheers,

Anonymous

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Anonymous <cripto@ecn.org> wrote:
>"George Orwell" <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
> news:6f951c388f0db77f8178742d2c512f79@mi
xmaster.it... 
>
>Do you mean for Windows?  There don't appear to be any, but it
>depends on your requirements.  You could, for example, use
>Mixmaster command line to post, as I am doing here, after
>formatting your message in Notepad.  It depends on how paranoid
>you are, and how much of your correspondence you think would be
>interesting to Big Brother.
>
>Quicksilver and JBN both appear to be dated.  Quicksilver is useful
>to me for creating and manipulating nym server accounts, but
>getting its other features to actually work appears to be too much
>of a chore for me.  Perhaps if you are a Windows programmer you
>could grab the source code and bring one or both up to date.
>
Question.   Vista seems to disable jbn and qs.   Are jbn and qs obsolete?
I use old pc with windows sp2.   New laptop with vista incompatible.

Would like automatic program like these, not "hand roll" improvisation, if
available for vista.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

<jbnuser@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote in message
 news:01d0b338fdbc09b10569d0b520f2d8d7@re
mailer.metacolo.com...
>
> Anonymous <cripto@ecn.org> wrote: 
> Question.   Vista seems to disable jbn and qs.   Are jbn and qs
> obsolete? I use old pc with windows sp2.   New laptop with
> vista incompatible.
>
> Would like automatic program like these, not "hand roll"
> improvisation, if available for vista.
>
Three alternatives come to mind.

1) Source is available.  Fix whatever is broken in JBN or
Quicksilver that makes it incompatible with Vista.  As a
retired Windows programmer, I can assure you that programming
for Windows sucks.  That's why I don't do it anymore.  I would
of course be glad for whatever improvements someone else
makes.  It might be as simple as recompiling with new libraries
and header files.  I am sure if you started this project you
could get lots of technical help here.

2) Stop whining and hand roll all your encrypted messages.

3) Try Anonymizer or other commercial alternative.

Cheers,

Anonymouse

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 02:05:01 +0000 (UTC), jbnuser@remailer.metacolo.com wrot
e:

>
>Anonymous <cripto@ecn.org> wrote: 

<snipped>
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Question.   Vista seems to disable jbn and qs.   Are jbn and qs obsolete?
>I use old pc with windows sp2.   New laptop with vista incompatible.
>
>Would like automatic program like these, not "hand roll" improvisation, if
>available for vista.

The more I hear about Vista, the less I like it.  I have post-poned upgradin
g
because of it.  I am tempted to go down the Linux route, except my one
and only experience was very painful.  No PnP.  Maybe things are better
now. . .

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 03:53:55 +0100 (BST), Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net> wrot
e:

><jbnuser@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote in message
> news:01d0b338fdbc09b10569d0b520f2d8d7@re
mailer.metacolo.com... 
>Three alternatives come to mind.
>
>1) Source is available.  Fix whatever is broken in JBN or
>Quicksilver that makes it incompatible with Vista.  As a
>retired Windows programmer, I can assure you that programming
>for Windows sucks.  That's why I don't do it anymore.  I would
>of course be glad for whatever improvements someone else
>makes.  It might be as simple as recompiling with new libraries
>and header files.  I am sure if you started this project you
>could get lots of technical help here.
>
>2) Stop whining and hand roll all your encrypted messages.
>
>3) Try Anonymizer or other commercial alternative.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Anonymouse

Or 4.  Go back to XP and continue enjoying the advantages of
QS and JBN.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article < 01d0b338fdbc09b10569d0b520f2d8d7@remaile
r.metacolo.com>
jbnuser@remailer.metacolo.com wrote:
>
>
> Anonymous <cripto@ecn.org> wrote: 
> Question.   Vista seems to disable jbn and qs.   Are jbn and qs obsolete?

QS works just fine in Vista.


Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente   |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore   |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni      |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article
<3abe112cf7cb892ca7d16a2a0dfdef16@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>
Anonymous <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> <jbnuser@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote in message
>  news:01d0b338fdbc09b10569d0b520f2d8d7@re
mailer.metacolo.com... 
> Three alternatives come to mind.
>
> 1) Source is available.  Fix whatever is broken in JBN or
> Quicksilver that makes it incompatible with Vista.  As a
> retired Windows programmer, I can assure you that programming
> for Windows sucks.  That's why I don't do it anymore.  I would
> of course be glad for whatever improvements someone else
> makes.  It might be as simple as recompiling with new libraries
> and header files.  I am sure if you started this project you
> could get lots of technical help here.

QS source is available for review only. Richard says individuals can
compile existing code for their own use. Distribution is not
permitted.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

George Orwell wrote:

> In article < 01d0b338fdbc09b10569d0b520f2d8d7@remaile
r.metacolo.com>
> jbnuser@remailer.metacolo.com wrote: 
>
> QS works just fine in Vista.

Depends 100% on your version of Vista.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]