Maybe it’s the "I am doing this for free so I can be myself"
All personal option below, Friday afternoon ramble
Example when starting a new job, most people purposely hold back expressing themselves, they just want to fit in and keep people happy. There is a fear of over stepping boundaries, saying something that someone might take offensive all contribute to this “shut up and do your job”. The issue is that it’s hard to get a job, and people don’t want to rock the boat so heads down and work because the job is tied to their ability to live.
The People at the games have nothing to lose, no expectations, they are free to enjoy and present themselves as they wish. Someone in a job at a desk in a call centre for a bank does not get that freedom and never will. The bank needs that person answering phones as quickly as possible to make their wall board stats look good so their managers can get bonuses.
This whole article was interesting from the point of a small company and how a smaller company could empower its staff to enjoy their roles more and in turn the new hire staff they bring in would follow the same patterns. For main street corporates this is the last thing they want, cutting away efficiency for what? Staff that enjoy their jobs, ha-ha don’t be foolish drones are easier to control, also the people attracted to upper management jobs are generally in it for the money more than the “lets make a warm and happy team and all live happily ever after”
The guy writing this bit was getting excited over the idea of an energized work force for free, everyone likes the personal touch however in customer service roles they are given scripts and told what to say and how they should say it and told that if they step out of line or say something that is wrong they could lose their incoming and in turn the ability to live their life (who has savings anymore?) until they get another hard to find job.
If you do something for free you can do what you like, worse case you get sent home, in a job you can lose your job over expressing an option or spending too much time trying to help a single customer and in turn you lose your incoming (ability to live). No wonder people are more held back and reserved in their paying jobs than when they offer to do something for free.
Because its all doublespeak, protect and serve, while attacking and exploiting, just word games, trying to spin the NSA in to a good light. The Defcon talk by the NSA head guy was pretty much the same, doublespeak all the way. In the UK we have GHCQ trying to do the same things their advert was a little more interactive http://www.canyoucrackit.co.uk/
This method of fingerprinting bypasses "elite" anon proxies and gives away IP addresses and OS of the host. Google currently employs a number of tricks to get real IP addresses, you can run a connection via a proxy and 99% of websites you visit will only get the Proxy IP, Google has a way of getting IP from User_Agent (not sure how but I was building my own proxy last week and found this out).
Will check the tor bundle later (as they are better configured) but I believe they will be harden against this, I dont know how I could make firefox in a default configuration stop leaking this information without cripping my install, anyideas?
Aside from SNI (which the article mentions HAS to be submitted in plaintext) you might be able to randomize the supported ciphers. Just like faking the User Agent String, you might be able to randomly select a cipher suite equal to that of another browser (and that your browser supports as well).
Randomizing the ciphers is not a good idea. First, their order is significant - in theory the server should pick up the first it knows. Second, limiting supported ciphers inevitably may lead to incompatibility with some websites (as they may support only ciphers that were omitted).
I'm curious to see how you tested this... the user-agent should only ever emit the browser (product) and a comment after this. It should never show the IP address of your machine!
Were you doing the test on all browsers, or was it only Chrome? I'm curious as to what's going on here, because if Google have worked out how to get your IP address even when going through an SSL-capable proxy (not something I'd normally recommend, btw...) then I'd suggest they are sending something else over the wire.
Mind you, if you have not disabled the X-Forward-For header on your proxy, then this may be how Google knows your originating IP address. You should be able to tell by running a packet trace between the proxy and the Google site you are accessing.
Perhaps they're just probabilistically getting your IP address by clustering your user agent+browsing habits+etc against the set of IPs it's seen that cluster come from via AdSense embedding on other sites?
Now I was setting up my proxy as I was doing these said tests so it was work in progress, First checked it all
out with no changes to the headers. Then I started stripping the headers a few at a time to see the differences
between the above websites and a few others. Now my IP changed as soon as I did an x-forward no change in the
proxy configration. At this stage 99% of websites get the IP of the proxy, I was happy. however Google still
was giving me my real IP. More header striping later and pinned it down to the user_agent. I know the user agent
does not contain any IP information but I think google must be using it as part of the IDing of the broswer profile
My main point today was that this SSL handshaking leaks lots of information that appears to be able to see
real IP behind a proxy. The bad man in side of myself now wonders if I could knock up a script like
https://p0f.popcnt.org/ that can see passed a proxy to get real IP addresse not that I would have anywhere
interesting to put it, guess it is just the fun of doing it.
Now I completely believe that my proxy could be just badly setup, so I also tested the p0f page on a number of
elite proxies (public not private or paid) and the p0f page gives up the real IP every time.
As i said, I will try the tor broswers to night (sidenote I only really test firefox because Chrome and IE lift
proxy settings from the local system where as firefox is customizable
Oh i used your header page, very nice http://my-addr.com/ip (thank you), all headers are empty and it has the correct IP (proxyed)
Sorry for spelling, :/ notepad lacks a spell:checker
Are you sure your browser or proxy is configured to use https? In my case, HTTP://p0f.popcnt.org is correctly anonymised, while HTTPS://p0f.popcnt.org is not and leaks my originating IP address.
I was concerned, so I tried a bit of troubleshooting before realising I configured Firefox to use no proxy for HTTPS traffic (because I don't want my banking to go through the proxy). So really, there was no problem.
Bizarre! Try finding an extension to change the default user agent in Firefox (there are quite a few) and try it again... I'm curious to see if it still works! What happens if you try a few different browsers? Same issue?
You can't hide your IP address from the proxy, but assuming the proxy is not passing it along in an X-Forwarded-For or similar header, your browser will not pass the IP address along in the HTTP request (and never in the User Agent). You do need to disable all 3rd-party plugins and prevent cookies from being passed as they may separately reveal the IP address.
This page will display the proxy headers which might be passing your IP, but more likely it's flash or java or something else sending it: http://my-addr.com/ip
I dont consider myself any form of hacker, I dont think i do anything illegal on the interweb. However i am very for privacy on the internet and against goverment monitoring.
When SOPA and CISPA etc all came about my first port of call was to get off gmail and on to my own webserver on a VPS. 2 weeks ago i deicded it was time to create my own elite anon proxy using squid. Took a few days of tinkering (sidenote did you know that google can get your IP via user_agent header? took me ages to work out why all the sites but google were getting my VPS IP and yet google could see right passed it and get my orignal IP)
now I am posting to this topic using said proxy. I can bet that once all these systems go live I will be one of the first pulled up as a terroist. I have VPNs to 2 countries, and 2 machines route out over those, i have very little standard traffic going via my ISP, and i use external DNS (currently in the process of setting up my own bind server).
I am even in the process of setting up my own jabber server (what did google rename it to xxmp?) and using that as a replacement for MSN/Skype interaction thing with my friends.
All of the above will classify me as a terroist under the UKs ever watchful eyes, I think now I am going to route my proxy in to tor for extra funz
User agent headers don't include IP addresses. Are you sure Squid isn't setting the X_FORWARDED_FOR header and revealing your IP to every site you visit which is clever enough to look?
Sorry but this is a null issue, I have Text message APIs that allow me to specify the sender ID. I understand your app is sexy in that it works off the phone but anyone with a few pounds can do this.
Text message spoofing is easy, CLI spoofing is the "cool" thing todo, and if you can spoof the Passert ID then you are gold
Called o2 support, stating I believe this is a breach of contract and wish to cancel my contract. The guy on the phone was not really sure how to handle this. Does anyone had any luck forcing o2 to cancel their contract based on this information? I kinda like Orange, no headers, and orange wednesdays
I got a nan, 96, walks to town 3 times a week, still rides her bike, been smoking 60 a day for 40 years, and recently cut back to 40. If i compare her to my other nan 86 frail and pretty much falling apart, now guess which one has had the better lifestyle? the second, very well off always comfortable.
At 96 i think she gets up to keep smoking, and if that keeps her alive then keep doing it.
This is like saying the dangerousness of Russian roulette "depends on the person," because you have a grandmother who's played a bunch of times and didn't die.
Unfortunately you have to live your whole life to discover whether you're an exception or a statistic. I'll go with the statistics for my personal choices.
But most smokers will be exceptions. Most smokers will not get cancer. They get cancer significantly more often than non-smokers, but that's not scary sounding enough, I guess.
Which backs up what I said. It's really unusual to see anyone talk about the actual lifetime risk. It's not as scary as saying "your chances are X times greater"... greater than what?
If those numbers are accurate, and entirely due to the effects of smoking (not just other lifestyle behaviors more common with smokers, like drinking) that's easily reason enough to quit. But even in the worst case, the fact remains, most smokers will not get cancer.
"X times greater risk" refers to the likelihood ratio over the Bayesian prior, assuming that this bit of evidence (smoking/not) is independent of other known evidence. Usually the prior is "all people" or "people of <X> ethnotype" or something like that.
You can compute the lifetime risk if you have a prior for the lifetime risk of lung cancer (1% in above example), just by multiplying.
I'm not sure where your argument leads. Are you justifying smoking as a choice, based on the numbers? Are you attempting to explain why people choose to smoke, based on the likelihood of cancer? Something else?
Regardless, smoking increases your overall risk pressure along with all of the other risky choices you can make. It's cumulative with the rest of life's choices.
Yes, but I'm talking about cancer. The fact still remains that the statement "Most smokers will not get lung cancer" is a controversial statement for some reason, even though it is demonstrably true.
I work with gamma as a UK telephone operator. The divsion of gamma that was involed with this was gamma international. Where as Gamma for UK is a pretty much a seperate company. One of those things where the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing.
looking at their website, they dont seem linked in anyway :/ https://www.gammagroup.com/Default.aspx maybe they are not part of each other but just share a name.
All personal option below, Friday afternoon ramble Example when starting a new job, most people purposely hold back expressing themselves, they just want to fit in and keep people happy. There is a fear of over stepping boundaries, saying something that someone might take offensive all contribute to this “shut up and do your job”. The issue is that it’s hard to get a job, and people don’t want to rock the boat so heads down and work because the job is tied to their ability to live.
The People at the games have nothing to lose, no expectations, they are free to enjoy and present themselves as they wish. Someone in a job at a desk in a call centre for a bank does not get that freedom and never will. The bank needs that person answering phones as quickly as possible to make their wall board stats look good so their managers can get bonuses.
This whole article was interesting from the point of a small company and how a smaller company could empower its staff to enjoy their roles more and in turn the new hire staff they bring in would follow the same patterns. For main street corporates this is the last thing they want, cutting away efficiency for what? Staff that enjoy their jobs, ha-ha don’t be foolish drones are easier to control, also the people attracted to upper management jobs are generally in it for the money more than the “lets make a warm and happy team and all live happily ever after”
The guy writing this bit was getting excited over the idea of an energized work force for free, everyone likes the personal touch however in customer service roles they are given scripts and told what to say and how they should say it and told that if they step out of line or say something that is wrong they could lose their incoming and in turn the ability to live their life (who has savings anymore?) until they get another hard to find job.
If you do something for free you can do what you like, worse case you get sent home, in a job you can lose your job over expressing an option or spending too much time trying to help a single customer and in turn you lose your incoming (ability to live). No wonder people are more held back and reserved in their paying jobs than when they offer to do something for free.
/ramble