How do anonymous VPN work? Simple words, but not too simple. Aproposed answer here.

[Dustin]

Nope. You *still* don't get it. I'll try and make it as foolproof
as possible, though I doubt it will help.

You've got to be one of the dumbest ****ing people I've had to read
posts by in a long time. Well, since encountering BD that is. Please,
go away. Your too damn stupid for your own good.

that is just here to flame and not lern. Your choice. So the last

Minor point, but it's "learn." You've done this in several posts now;
and I don't know if your trying to be a smartass or what, but it
doesn't workout so well in the smartass sense. IE: Your not coming
across as a smartass to me, rather, a dumbass.

I came here hoping to confirm this simple fact rather than have to
teach you so-called experts. A classic case of the student knowing
more than the teacher.

Not in this case.

Now please go back to talking about your beloved viruses. After
this exercise I wonder whether you even know what you're talking
about there.

When you have time, feel free to lookup the word "encryption". Your the
student here.

Have a nice day. Likely my last post in this thread unless somebody
can advance this discussion with more knowledge than what you've
shown so far.

This thread was doomed when most of us realized you don't understand
encryption.

 

[Dustin]

Advanced languages? Thanks for the laugh! It's Visual Basic for the
21st century (yeah, I know there's also a VB.NET but it's the same
engine). Using Microsoft's MSIL offerings hardly makes you an advanced
programmer.

Just slightly above that of a script kiddy, imho. What say you?

 

[Dustin]

Nope. Try again pinhead Ant. What you don't realize is that VB for
the 21st century is in fact an advanced language (as manifested by

Ray, Do you understand the structure of the compiled EXE you can
distribute? Are you able to isolate the individual sections of it? If
you answer no to either question, you are *not* an advanced programmer.
Your using a very high level language that does all the real work
behind the scenes for you. I suspect you don't even know which API is
used for what, although at the end of the day, your c#, vb, c++, asm
, all use the same ones.

As you use such a later 21stcentury paint a gui then write the code
style language, you probably have no clue what's actually going on
between the various pieces of hardware in the machine; and that's what
you really want to program, after all.

<snip pointless driven about auto/vs stickshift> I too can drive a
stick, it's what I learned to drive on. Why? because if you can drive a
stick, you can drive anything. Sticks have atleast one advantage over
an automatic; And that's a system wide brake failure. In a stick shift,
you can gear her down and keep riding the gears to bring her to a full
stop; with or without the ebreak; and you won't tear the engine or
trans up doing it. You *cannot* do that with an auto. Another
advantage, you can roll start a stick shift thats got a bad battery or
a spent starter. You won't be doing that with an auto unless you can
get it rolling upto highway speed (atleast 45mph); and you risk serious
damage roll starting an automatic in that manner; whereas the stick
shift does no harm to the drive train or the engine roll starting.

A third advantage; you have more actual control over the vehicle in a
stick shift; *you* decide when/if it changes gears and into which gear;
which gives you actual greater control over the driveline to avoid a
spinout scenario.

That's three advantages off the top of my head for the stick shift. Oh,
one more; a stick shift transmission uses less horsepower (IE: less is
lost) than an automatic transmission.

 

[FromTheRafters]

User's computer is "A". ISP / gateway that user's computer uses to
connect to internet is "B" Steganos Anonym server is "C". Endpoint
user wants to connect to is "D".

Using Steganos Anonym you get a guaranteed HTTPS handshake between
points: A,B,C guaranteed.

***
Wrong, you could get a handshake between A and C (AC) in which case B
would become irelevent.

If you wanted B to be relevent, and still communicate from A to C
through B then you would require two handshakes AB then BC and B would
then be working with unencrypted data.
***

 

[RayLopez99]

When you have time, feel free to lookup the word "encryption". Your the
student here.

"Your" the student here? "Your"? You're really are dumb to be acting
as a grammarian. Dumbass.

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

Ray, Do you understand the structure of the compiled EXE you can
distribute? Are you able to isolate the individual sections of it? If
you answer no to either question, you are *not* an advanced programmer.

Nope. That stuff is transparent for a reason--no need to get into
MASM and assembly and IL to figure out what you are doing. That's the
point of having a "higher language". Do you still code in assembly?
Then good: there's a market for elevator and traffic light OSes just
waiting for your skill set (though even those now are increasingly
being programmed in higher languages).

Your using a very high level language that does all the real work
behind the scenes for you. I suspect you don't even know which API is
used for what, although at the end of the day, your c#, vb, c++, asm
, all use the same ones.

Right. They all use Visual Studio API.

As you use such a later 21stcentury paint a gui then write the code
style language, you probably have no clue what's actually going on
between the various pieces of hardware in the machine; and that's what
you really want to program, after all.

Nor is there a need to have a clue about what is happening at the
hardware level. Get a clue.

<snip pointless driven about auto/vs stickshift> I too can drive a
stick, it's what I learned to drive on. Why? because if you can drive a
stick, you can drive anything. Sticks have atleast one advantage over
an automatic; And that's a system wide brake failure. In a stick shift,
you can gear her down and keep riding the gears to bring her to a full
stop; with or without the ebreak; and you won't tear the engine or
trans up doing it.

Yes, I could stop my car to a crawl using the engine only. Engine
braking. Illegal in certain parts of California though (local
ordinances, for noise control).

You *cannot* do that with an auto. Another
advantage, you can roll start a stick shift thats got a bad battery or
a spent starter.

Yes, but BMW recommends against doing that, don't know why, but that's
what I've read. There is a guy down the street from here though that
starts his car with a dead batter even morning this way. Been doing
that for years.

You won't be doing that with an auto unless you can
get it rolling upto highway speed (atleast 45mph); and you risk serious
damage roll starting an automatic in that manner; whereas the stick
shift does no harm to the drive train or the engine roll starting.

Not what Bimmer Co. says. Those Nazis know about cars.

A third advantage; you have more actual control over the vehicle in a
stick shift; *you* decide when/if it changes gears and into which gear;
which gives you actual greater control over the driveline to avoid a
spinout scenario.

Right. But with computer controlled traction, even automatics now
have better than stick performance for anti-skid, cornering, etc.
Formula One cars had automatics (before they were banned) along with
computer controlled wheels. You've seen the advert how you can go
down a 45 degree incline with a Toyota computer controlled 4-wheel
drive.

That's three advantages off the top of my head for the stick shift. Oh,
one more; a stick shift transmission uses less horsepower (IE: less is
lost) than an automatic transmission.

Right. But in stop and go traffic not as much as highway driving I
would imagine.

Go then.

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

User's computer is "A". ISP / gateway that user's computer uses to
connect to internet is "B"  Steganos Anonym server is "C".  Endpoint
user wants to connect to is "D".

Using Steganos Anonym you get a guaranteed HTTPS handshake between
points:  A,B,C guaranteed.

***
Wrong, you could get a handshake between A and C (AC) in which case B
would become irelevent.

If you wanted B to be relevent, and still communicate from A to C
through B then you would require two handshakes AB then BC and B would
then be working with unencrypted data.
***

Wait we have a disconnect here, literally and figuratively. All data
must pass through B's servers, do you agree? All data. Whether
encrypted or not.

What you are saying is that if B needs to take a peek at the data, say
it's a web method that needs input from B, obviously B has to decrypt
it. But how can A and C do a handshake unless A's data passes through
B? A is a customer of B. A uses a DSL modem to communicate with B's
servers (here, OTENET, the national carrier of Greece), then B
forwards any data from A to the world wide web. Am I missing
something?

RL

 

[Dustin]

"Your" the student here? "Your"? You're really are dumb to be
acting as a grammarian. Dumbass.

I didn't claim to be an english professor. However, I do clearly
understand encryption; I've written several crypto freeware programs.
It's something i've always been interested in. For example, I understand
what's going on with SSL; and I've been writing code far longer than
yourself; as I didn't start with a windows GUI language. <G>

 

[Dustin]

Nope. That stuff is transparent for a reason--no need to get into
MASM and assembly and IL to figure out what you are doing. That's
the point of having a "higher language". Do you still code in
assembly? Then good: there's a market for elevator and traffic light
OSes just waiting for your skill set (though even those now are
increasingly being programmed in higher languages).

Is there something wrong with coding in assembly? I find it's a nice
way of talking to the hardware and making the computer do exactly what
I want it to do. I don't have to play games and "ask".

Anyways, It's unlikely that you're an advanced programmer.

Right. They all use Visual Studio API.

Uhh, no; no they don't. I'll let you figure it out. It may improve your
programming knowledge.

Nor is there a need to have a clue about what is happening at the
hardware level. Get a clue.

I have one. I can lend you mine.

Yes, I could stop my car to a crawl using the engine only. Engine
braking. Illegal in certain parts of California though (local
ordinances, for noise control).

I think you're confused with engine/tranny and jake brakes on big rigs.
My workvan has braking, but it's done via the transmission; no noise;
it just doesn't understand coast. If I'm not pressing the gas pedal it
assumes I don't want to be moving. A jake brake makes the sometimes
annoying noise and is most often found on big rigs; not your everyday
driver.

Not what Bimmer Co. says. Those Nazis know about cars.

Could be something unique about their transmissions. IE: perhaps it's
not as sturdy inside as you think and will easily strip teeth off a
gear? Not all fancy cars are built that well in so far as long term
goes.

Right. But in stop and go traffic not as much as highway driving I
would imagine.

Either case, a stick will do better and achieve slightly better fuel
economy for the simple reason that it's basically geared direct drive;
whereas an automatic requires a torque converter already spinning at
certain rpms to push hydralic fluid around to engage/disengage gears.
It's simple math; the more parts you have to move, the more energy your
going to use doing it.

 

[FromTheRafters]

User's computer is "A". ISP / gateway that user's computer uses to
connect to internet is "B" Steganos Anonym server is "C". Endpoint
user wants to connect to is "D".

Using Steganos Anonym you get a guaranteed HTTPS handshake between
points: A,B,C guaranteed.

***
Wrong, you could get a handshake between A and C (AC) in which case B
would become irelevent.

If you wanted B to be relevent, and still communicate from A to C
through B then you would require two handshakes AB then BC and B would
then be working with unencrypted data.
***

Wait we have a disconnect here, literally and figuratively. All data
must pass through B's servers, do you agree? All data. Whether
encrypted or not.

***
Yes, but it is irrelevent to the TLS/SSL that was implemented for the
HTTPS session. To them, packets with encrypted data are the same as
packets with non-encrypted data. If the deal (handshake) was between A
and Z and passes through all of the other letters of the alphabet (I can
list them for you if you need), they may all handle the packets but only
the Z server will be able to decrypt them (and *must* decrypt them)
before being passed to the next layer.
***

What you are saying is that if B needs to take a peek at the data, say
it's a web method that needs input from B, obviously B has to decrypt
it.

***
Yes, in which case you would have to have a AB handshake followed by a
BC handshake if the final destination is C.
***

But how can A and C do a handshake unless A's data passes through
B? A is a customer of B.

***
A requests that C use HTTPS, that request goes through B like any other
packet would. C gives A (through B) the necessary items (C Public key
and random#) to set up the encrypted session, they share secrets
(assymetric key encrypted) and calculate a common symmetric key to use
against the data.
***

A uses a DSL modem to communicate with B's
servers (here, OTENET, the national carrier of Greece), then B
forwards any data from A to the world wide web. Am I missing
something?

***
No, that's about it.

Think of it like this. If you want to conceal (cover) your data
documents from prying eyes you can encrypt your data, if you want to
conceal your communications session from prying eyes use TLS - for
instance TruCrypt covers your data (like your documents) and TLS covers
your session (like telling your anon server your password so you can log
on). After logging on, you may want to send data to the police
department server without allowing the anon server admin to view
plaintext (uncovered) documents - in which case you will want to cover
the documents as well. The anon service will forward your packets to the
police server while modifying the IP address so that you can't be traced
back without the cooperation of the anon server admin. The police server
may or may not support HTTPS which means that your traffic can be
sniffed (the IP is already essentially bogus) but at least your data
(documents) are still covered. You would have had to give the police a
TruCrypt key to decipher the documents.

It's confusing, but this scenario comes about because you might trust
the police with the information (give them a key) while you don't trust
them with your true identity or the way your identity could be deduced
from you *real* IP and account information *and* you don't trust the
anon service's admin with the documents. These things all operate
independently of each other.
***

 

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Ant" <[email protected]>


| Well, yes, if you're writing malware. VB6 and VB.NET are popular
| choices for writing or packaging lame password stealers. I call it
| "script-kiddy malware". C# is more similar in appearance to C++ or
| Java, so the skiddies tend to avoid that.

| High level languages like those in the .NET framework are fine for
| building complex and nice looking GUIs with a minimum amount of hassle
| but you can't use them to write kernel-mode drivers! In some sense
| these HLLs are "advanced" - another level up from the Win32 API (which
| itself is a level up from the native API) - but you don't need to be
| an advanced programmer to use them. In fact the opposite is true; the
| lower you go in the API hierarchy, the more you need to understand how
| the OS and its subsystems actually work.


Amen brother.

 

[FromTheRafters]

Ray, Do you understand the structure of the compiled EXE you can
distribute? Are you able to isolate the individual sections of it? If
you answer no to either question, you are *not* an advanced
programmer.

Nope. That stuff is transparent for a reason--no need to get into
MASM and assembly and IL to figure out what you are doing. That's the
point of having a "higher language".

***
You have a point there. Higher levels take the onus of coding away from
the programmer and allow him to concentrate on what he wants to do
rather than on how to do it. Machine language is written in ones and
zeroes, assembly is written in mnemonics, HLLs in words and concepts,
and 4GL and above in crayon. Brings to light the difference between
coding and programming - programmers whom are also coders make better
programmers.
***

[...]

 

[JozefTanir]

I downloaded anonymous vpn software from mozilla and started for installation. The installation have been completed successfully but mozilla left to support the vpn networking. What will be the main issue of stoppage of vpn work.