liveinthisworld

joined 4 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

What you're talking about is supposed anonymity in obfuscation, and that has been proven to not work.

Also, most VPN companies keep logs and can be subpoenaed. Not all, but most. I2P is meant to anonymize your traffic, so I do not see the point of your statement

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I can understand the argument against bandwidth, but how do you conclude that it is not anonymous enough? Even against a VPN?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Maybe I should have said "it's not anonymous based on your threat model"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Technically speaking, VPN logs tend to include the IP address of clients connecting to them, after which the good VPN providers like Mullvad, IVPN and maybe PIA tend to purge them somewhere in their process. Now, if the VPN is running in a RAM-only node, then these logs probably don't touch storage, which means there's not much need to shred information from hard drives for the VPN provider.

With that said, an ISP can technically log your traffic and see that you're connecting to the IP range associated with a VPN. That and perhaps some more covert side-channel/correlation attacks can, in theory, compromise your identity.

Of course, this is going deep into OPSEC and forensics, and I don't think the NSA is that interested in the average Billy torrenting "The Office" to go through that many logs, even if the studios sue in court. Hence, technically your privacy is somewhat maintained with the good VPN providers, but you're definitely not anonymous

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

For anonymity, yes. Sure you might fool Google trying to match your IP to your traffic but that's about it

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

SFTP over TOR. This should be a requirement at this point.

If you're not doing that, then yes you're technically right in that seedbox companies can be subpoenaed too. I usually use TOR to copy over what little I torrent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

That shouldn't be possible in theory unless I don't know it well enough. Care to provide a screenshot?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's called an outproxy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Man, why is everyone like this? Please read the documentation, the traffic is encrypted and metadata cannot identify you. Unless the NSA has an active hack for I2P lying around, NO-ONE IN THIS WORLD can find out what chunks of traffic just went flying by your internet connection

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

As he said, paid with crypto and managed with his own keys. I don't see how the seedbox provider can trace you if you do that, so there's not that much to worry about

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Unless you PGP-encrypt everything by hand you've just lost the fight

 

Imagine if Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Cox banded together for a showdown against the studios accusing them of liability? AT&T runs an NSA stronghold in Manhattan, they're not going to let their darlings go down in a teeny lawsuit like this. I really want to see this happening. Let them fight.

 

What else is everyone using to get music? Other than Soulseek.

view more: next ›