Bypass School And Work Filters www.classgetter.com

X-No-Archive: Yes

Keep pumping those PHP and CGI proxies out, buddy ;) Now that I am using a radio streaming service more compatable with those proxies, there is a good chance I may get back all the at-work listeners I lost last August when Live 365 mucked around with their system.

Someone has set up an encrypted proxy service in Hanoi, Vietnam I have seen connections from. So whoever was listening through that site would certainly have their network admins perplexed, wondering what someone is doing connecting to a strange machine in Vietnam.

Again, it's simple to see and catch, you keep thinking this is some kind of magic, finding people using an ENCRYPTED proxy is simple, even you could do it - maybe not you.

X-No-Archive: Yes

However, with the data encrypted, there is no way an admin is going to find out what is going in.

And there is now one EXPENSIVE VPN solution that uses a proprietary encryption scheme, that cannot be intercepted via man-in-the-middle attacks. This US$3200 VPN package is the BEST on the MARKET, IMO, if you really want to have your activities not be discovered. The proprietary

This program uses HEAVY encryption wih VPN. With this VPN server running, I KNOW that when I go to China, to broadcast a figure skating event, I can use Skype to run my talk show, despite Skype being illegal in China, and the Chinese authorities will NEVER know that I up to, because the proprietary encryption cannot be compromised with man-in-the-middle attacks, and cannot otherwise be cracked, analysed, monitored or sniffed.

Anyone on your network could have this software installed on their PC at home, have a broadband connection (with multiple IPs), and can do what they want on the Net, and you will not be able to monitor it.

We fired a few people for wasting bandwith!

X-No-Archive: Yes

Be careful. Unless you have the actual CONTENT of what was being downloaded, you had better NOT give ANY reference, one way or the other, if future employers call. Just say that they worked they worked there during a certain time period, but do NOT give any reference, good OR bad. Otherwise, they might SUE YOUR *ASS* OFF for defamation. This is why encryption can help youl. Sure they can still FIRE you, but WITHOUT the CONTENT of what was being downloaded, they do not DARE say anything to your future employer or employers

That is the one caveat of firing somoene for inappropriate Internet usage. Unless you have the actual CONTENT of that was being downloading, you do not DARE give ANY negative reference to future employers. ONLY say that they worked there during a certain time period, and end the conversation there.

X-No-Archive: Yes

Other people are runnig public Tor entry points now. I found one in Canada that is in one of the lists of open proxies. So anyone who wants to use Tor where the machine is locked down against new software installation can change the browser's proxy settings to use this proxy.

Of course, he is FAR more likely to be blocked, then I am. Becusae they did not change the port number to something other than 8118, it will be a DEAD GIVEWAY in the logs, when admins see connections to port 8118 on a strange computer in Canada, or to the Socks port on port 9050.

If you are going to run a pubilc Tor entry proxy, like I do, here is a nickels worth of free advice. Change the ports to something OTHER than 8118 (HTTP) or 9050(Socks), otherwise it will be a DEAD GIVEAWAY they corporate network admins start sesing a connetion to port 8118 for HTTP or 9050 for Socks.

This is why I set my Tor entry proxy to other ports, so it will not be so OBVIOUS to admins that someone is using a Tor entry proxy. All any admin would have to do is Google port 8118, and they would quickly find out that it is used by Tor and Privoxy.

Chilly8 wrote, On 19/04/08 01:37:

No, you don't need to know that. All you have to be able to do is prove that you have a policy preventing them from using proxies/VPNs/whatever and then show that they did, you don't need to show what they used it for only that they used it in breach of policy.

Even if that is true the mere fact that the employment was terminated and it was not redundancy will count against the person. If the person ends up with lots of short periods of employment it will look even worse even if the employers will not specify why the employment was terminated.

Most companies in the UK will only do that anyway. I used to work for a large company and that was the official policy even if the person was still employed and was a perfect employee.

Chilly8 wrote, On 19/04/08 01:58:

Not if the admin knows what he is doing. Machines should be locked down so that people cannot change the proxy setting (or any other important and sometimes unimportant setting).

Or I could just block everything not known to be allowed. Or I could filter on the actual content (Linux kernels have had this ability for a while) rather than on what the port is blocking encrypted connections of any kind on ports or to places I don't know to be allowed.

But you don't understand the point - they have no school requirement for External VPN's - so they get busted for an easy to spot infraction.

Wrong again, since the BANDWITH IS A COMPANY RESOURCE they are known to have been improperly useing company resources, effectively stealing.

You could say that were fired for network abuse and leave it at that.

"Those who're supposing, bandwidth is for free, are thinkin' money is growin' on directory tree" ;-)

SCNR, VB.

X-No-Archive: Yes

That sitll might keep you form getting you ass sued off. It is best just to say they worked there between a certain set of dates, and end it there. The best policy is to not say ANYTHING, other than that they worked between certain set of dates, and say NOTHING beyond that.

X-No-Archive: Yes

Well, with the EXTREME rules that Bob Jones University has, I canont blame them for looking for every POSSIBLE way to hide their activities. The no-tv-in-the-dorms rule is really tight, so I can cannot blame BJU students for using my VPN service to watch NCAA March Madness through my encrypted VPN service. KPIX, the CBS affliate in San Francisco, can be watched through TVU, and if they used an encrypted VPN service, such as mine, the admins will NEVER know that students were watching broadcast TV, in violation of college rules against watching broadcast TV in the dorms, specifically the NCAA post season basketball tournament.

And I was NOT breaking ANY laws, by allowing BJU students to watch the NCAA playoffs and finals throuigh MY server. In other words, Bob Jones University CANNOT prosecute me, for allowing any BJU students to bypass the school filters and watch the NCAA basketball tournament. Since I GAVE them logins and passwords to my machine, they, in fact, had PERMISSION to access my machine, so neither, they, or I, could be prosecuted, either under federal law, or South Carolina state law (BJU is in South Carolina).

X-No-Archive: Yes

However, Firefox cannot be locked down against proxy setting changes. I know of some people who use Firefox from work, to circumvent the fact that IE was locked down against proxy setting changes.

This is why I had to change my radio station's streaming service to something that would be Firefox compatable. A lot of people were listening from work using this one "no-install" version of Firefox that apparently exists. Just download and use without installing.

This is why a lot of businesses will continue to use Internet Explorer, is Firefox has the one flaw of NOT being able to lock down the proxy settings.

However, WINDOWS is a MUST for business. When I was in college in a business major, it was DRUMMED INTO US, that Windows is a MUST for computing existence, in business, and that Bill Gates is GOD, when it comes to business computing.

There is no POSSIBLE way a business can go totally Windows-free. Windows is a MUST for computing existence.

Chilly8 wrote, On 20/04/08 04:07:

So how will you use firefox when the PC is licked down so you can't install or run unapproved SW?

Some companies don't lock things down, that does not mean it isn't easy to do.

Complete rubbish. In any case, I was referring to what you use as a firewall, and any sensible organisation will not be using Windows as a firewall. They often won't use Linux either, but commercial firewalls have all sorts of useful tricks like this as well.

All the errors in this have already been pointed out.

Apart from the fact that this is wrong it is also irrelevant. Filtering like this would not be done on the users PC it is done on whatever you use as a firewall. I had assumed this was obvious (and I'm sure it is to everyone here apart from you).

There is no need to "lockdown" a browser to control outgoing traffic.

Not really.

And, you seem to be missing the point, they would have still been fired or punished for unauthorized traffic, still caught easily, still screwed for following your directions.

Except they are not HIDING their activities, they are forming a connection to an unauthorized end-point.

Guess what, we use a HTTP Proxy rule in our firewalls, it filters out anything we want and it doesn't matter what browser you use since IT filters the content and even access.