Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Hy Matej,I'm just curious about how Slovenian Goverment (technical issue) had blocked the gambling site. I'm asking this because in Italy the law enforcement blocked the site only reconfiguring the original site on all public DNS where consumer (ADSL and dial/up) are authenticate itself (so: the DNS specified by DHCP from AAA to CPE). So, the site www.foo-bar.com (supposing gambling site) are 1.2.3.4 IP resolved by DNS and every DNS in the world are resolved correctly. In Italy that name are resolved instead in 11.22.33.44 that is a anti/gambling site directly on lawenforcement facility.I see two big issue about this solution:1) when a computer authenticate on internet (dial in from ADSL or dial/up) the DNS address cam be other one, only specified it by manual configuration (on my computer I've a DNS server that use all root server around the world). In special case, with easy configuration, can be a foreign DNS. 2) the gambling site can be rename the site name (transforming from www.foo-bar.com in www.f00-bar.com).I agree with your comment about that, internally in Europe, gambling site is legal. The same about buy a car, make a insurance, using a bank. But Im see that there are many interest about making this only on a paper... :) CesareOn 9/16/06, Matej Kovacic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,I would just like to let you know that Slovenian government (Slovenia isa member of European Union since last year) a week ago decided to blocktwo on-line gambling sites, because they do not have a licence to operate in Slovenia.There are several problems with this, the major is that Office forGaming Supervision sent a simple letter (not an official order!) toISP's to block the site (what about mere conduit doctrine???) and major ISP's just did it. It is also funny, that European Court ofJustice ruled in 2003 that across-border gambling like that is legal,because EU has free movement of services enacted (see case Gambelli). My personal opinion is that this cenzorship is illegal in many ways, butthe problem is that ISP's dont want to oppose governemnt and they simplydon't care about their users's rights.But this also opened a great possibilities to inform people about Tor as an anti-cenzorship tool, and of course I did it. :-))So I just wanted to let you know that illegal cenzorship is not justsomething which is happening in China. And I hope a lot of people inSlovenia know about Tor now and see it as good anti-cenzorship tool. BTW, we had similar example of cenzorship before (seehttp://matej.owca.info/privacy/PHR04_slovenia.pdf, page 7 - udba.net case).bye, Matej
Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Matej Kovacic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would just like to let you know that Slovenian government (Slovenia is a member of European Union since last year) a week ago decided to block two on-line gambling sites, because they do not have a licence to operate in Slovenia. There are several problems with this, the major is that Office for Gaming Supervision sent a simple letter (not an official order!) to ISP's to block the site (what about mere conduit doctrine???) and major ISP's just did it. It is also funny, that European Court of Justice ruled in 2003 that across-border gambling like that is legal, because EU has free movement of services enacted (see case Gambelli). My personal opinion is that this cenzorship is illegal in many ways, but the problem is that ISP's dont want to oppose governemnt and they simply don't care about their users's rights. What is illegal about asking some providers to block some sites? By the way, older members of the EU are (or were?) fond of DNS blocks as well. NRW, Germany for example. Also my impression is that the European Court didn't rule that across-border gambling is legal in the whole EU, but that restrictions are only allowed if they happen in the public interest: |If a member state introduces restrictions on private games |of chance, these must have the purpose of reducing the |opportunities for gaming. | |In particular, this purpose is not achieved – reasoned the ECJ – |if on the one hand a state prohibited private games of chance |whilst on the other promoting state lotteries and games of chance |in order to generate additional revenues for the Treasury. http://www.bwin.ag/2004/default.aspx?lang=enid=5 (I'm aware what bwin Interactive Entertainment AG does, but the description makes sense to me.) So I just wanted to let you know that illegal cenzorship is not just something which is happening in China. And I hope a lot of people in Slovenia know about Tor now and see it as good anti-cenzorship tool. The Chinese government's censorship is done without breaking Chinese law isn't it? Of course it still sucks, but I don't see why it should be called illegal. Fabian -- http://www.fabiankeil.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: information about cenzorship in Slovenia
Fabian Keil wrote: Matej Kovacic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would just like to let you know that Slovenian government (Slovenia is a member of European Union since last year) a week ago decided to block two on-line gambling sites, because they do not have a licence to operate in Slovenia. There are several problems with this, the major is that Office for Gaming Supervision sent a simple letter (not an official order!) to ISP's to block the site (what about mere conduit doctrine???) and major ISP's just did it. It is also funny, that European Court of Justice ruled in 2003 that across-border gambling like that is legal, because EU has free movement of services enacted (see case Gambelli). My personal opinion is that this cenzorship is illegal in many ways, but the problem is that ISP's dont want to oppose governemnt and they simply don't care about their users's rights. What is illegal about asking some providers to block some sites? By the way, older members of the EU are (or were?) fond of DNS blocks as well. NRW, Germany for example. Also my impression is that the European Court didn't rule that across-border gambling is legal in the whole EU, but that restrictions are only allowed if they happen in the public interest: |If a member state introduces restrictions on private games |of chance, these must have the purpose of reducing the |opportunities for gaming. | |In particular, this purpose is not achieved – reasoned the ECJ – |if on the one hand a state prohibited private games of chance |whilst on the other promoting state lotteries and games of chance |in order to generate additional revenues for the Treasury. http://www.bwin.ag/2004/default.aspx?lang=enid=5 (I'm aware what bwin Interactive Entertainment AG does, but the description makes sense to me.) So I just wanted to let you know that illegal cenzorship is not just something which is happening in China. And I hope a lot of people in Slovenia know about Tor now and see it as good anti-cenzorship tool. The Chinese government's censorship is done without breaking Chinese law isn't it? Of course it still sucks, but I don't see why it should be called illegal. Fabian Because it violates the Chinese Constitution. The Chinese Constitution is really just a 'goddammed piece of paper' in that it is completely ignored. But on paper the censorship is illegal. In reality, the guns are owned by the government. -- They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security --Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Privoxy alternatives
gabrix [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to be honest : i hate privoxy and his content filtering. i have commented user.action file and default-action but navigation stops anyway very often .I'm an adult person so babes or porno are allright for me . What does navigation stops anyway mean exactly? Which operating system do you use? Anyway, if you already disabled filtering and if you are using socks4a, it's unlikely that Privoxy is the cause of your problem. I don't need content filtering but fast browsing instead. Using Tor isn't going to make your browsing faster. I never understood why squid never gets on playing unless in congiunction with privoxy.Squid is the father of anonymous proxism. Squid isn't an anonymous proxy at all (and neither is Privoxy). it makes top http header cleaning , powerfull caching and this is what makes browsing fast,also in a way it makes content/website cleaning too but around i have not found one guide saying how i can make tor , squid parent. How is Squid's cache going to make your browsing faster? Doesn't have your browser its own cache already? Well i know tor is not a http proxy and here it is my question: How can i configure squid to work with tor without privoxy You could replace Privoxy with another proxy that supports socks. Check the archive for a recent discussion about Polipo http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~jch/software/polipo/, it seems to be the current recommendation of at least one of the Tor developers. Polipo is a caching proxy with limited header filtering capabilities, if you don't need content filtering, you probably can remove Squid from your proxy chain as well. Fabian -- http://www.fabiankeil.de/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Tor crashes ZoneAlarm
On 9/17/06, Ringo Kamens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I think it is important to correct the problem of tor-zonealarm incompatibility I don't think anybody who uses tor should use zonealarm. Tor is an anonymity and privacy tool and zone-alarm doesn't respect either of these fundementals. When installed+run, zone-alarm phones-home (check for yourself with a packet sniffer) even if you tell it not to access anything. In other words, it breaks it's own rules and I wouldn't trust my privacy/anonymity to it. -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 i think i can happily dis-agree with you. after following the instructions on the zonealarm forum for dis-abling automatic updates, etc. one must also add C:\Program Files\Zone Labs\ZoneAlarm\zlclient.exe and C:\WINDOWS\system32\ZoneLabs\UpdClient.exe to the program control list and block all their access. now, after you start windows before connecting to the internet, start the packet sniffer like ethereal. zonealarm should already have started also. after connecting to the internet, you will see the only thing zonealarm does is try to resolve zonelabs.com, which can be directed through Tor with something like TorDNS. after that, you will see there is no direct communication between your PC and ZoneLabs. can anyone agree? :) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA+AwUBRQ2/x14XwiTbvfKgEQLMWgCYjEFA5gJRksE+ykXsCYi52Q66VgCdH45i 5tkmXEJHRScy2Jsx/ilN35Y= =4NLM -END PGP SIGNATURE-
unsubscribe
Re: Tor crashes ZoneAlarm
There is the problem that even if one were to verify that ZoneAlarm was not connecting on startup with a sniffer such as ethereal, it does not rule out the possibility of this occuring at other times say at 12:00 am each day, or at the first of the month. It is really hard to rule this sort of thing out unless the application is open source. I think people should at least be aware of that risk and know that if the results of such a test came back negative, it does nto necessarily mean there is no phoning home occuring with the Zone alarm application. end ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
Re: unsubscribe
Laurel Fitzhugh wrote: When you subscribed you were told how to unsubscribe: - Welcome to the or-talk mailing list! Please save this message for future reference. Thank you. If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, you can send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following command in the body of your email message: unsubscribe or-talk
Re: Tor crashes ZoneAlarm
Kees Vonk wrote: I am aware of this, but have yet to find a opensource personal firewall, if you know of one I would be very interested. You mean, besides buying a cheapo router and flashing Linux onto the firmware? - Tim
Re: Earthlink's broken DNS affecting Tor nodes?
Just wanted to let the person with the Earthlink DNS issue know that apparently they set up some servers not doing the redirection: http://blogs.earthlink.net/2006/09/more_info_on_dead_domain_handl.php As Dave mentioned last week, we've been working to tune the configuration of dead domain handling to address the issues some EarthLink customers have been experiencing during the rollout. We've been able to mitigate a number of issues, but we've also recognized that some of them such as certain problems with VPN access are not easily addressed through configuration changes in our dead domain system. For customers who are still experiencing issues, we've set aside a pair of servers that will remain outside of our standard DNS system. If you have a need to stay clear of our dead domain handling, just point your DNS servers to: 207.69.188.171 (west coast) 207.69.188.172 (east coast) If you're west of the Mississippi, use the west coast DNS server as your primary and the east coast as secondary. And vice-versa for those of you in the eastern U.S. This is a self-service solution, and it creates a mechanism for those users who choose to opt out to do so. These servers have been set aside to resolve problems you may be having, but this isn't something that you'll be able to get customer support help with. Also, my appologies for some apparent format issues (and the sig problem) using excite on the list. I will likely switch email accounts. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
