Bypass School And Work Filters www.classgetter.com

Wow, that is a new level of incompetence. Any settings inside the global preferences can be overridden by user.js and prefs.js, not to mention chrome.rdf and every XUL script you include there.

As for the fools, this is why one should implement a transparent proxy at the network boundary.

X-No-Archive: Yes

Well, with some of the draconian rules that they have at BJU, I have no problem with allowing BJU students watching online TV through my server.

BJU is an institution that even "sneers" Catholics (many of the radical evangelicals don't like Catholics), and I had some connections from BJU, this past week, connecting to online coverage of the Pope's visit in New York. I do NOT see ANYTHING unethical about allowing Bob Jones University (BJU) students to watch the Pope's masses, via my proxy, to avoid detection by the University, this past week.

And I am NOT committing any CRIME, under either US federal law, or South Carolina state law, by allowing BJU students to access off-limits content, such as coverage of the Pope's visit, through my proxy.

We ran our own broadcast of the Pope's mass in Washington, on Thursday, and the listener slots filled up in a hurry with LOTS of people listening from work, particularly from Amreican cities with HEAVY Catholic populations, such as Boston, NYC, and Miami (where the workday had already started). People were able to listen to the Pope's mass, via my radio station, and my proxy, and the boss will NEVER KNOW someone was tuned in to Pope's mass for two hours.on Thursday.

Chilly, they are only "Draconian" if you don't believe in them, and they are put in place and agreed to in signature by the students when they join the school.

You alway advocate breaking company policy, rules, ethicas, stealing of company resources that impact normal function, and you claim it can't be detected or caught - we all know that it's easy to catch a person using a proxy, using a VPN, and connecting to sites that are not approved.... You are going to get hauled into court one day for your part in getting a network compromised or a person fired.

Well, I think the fact that they "sneer" Catholics is not right, and I do NOT think that allowing people at BJU to watch the Papal masses from Washington and New York, this past week, was unethical. There was NOTHING unethical abuot letting people people watch this Pope's masses in Washington, and New York this week. I believe that ANY school or corporation blocking the Papal masses were INFRINGING upon users REIGIOUS FREEDOMS, and I allowed people to use my server to watch and/or listen to the Pope's Washington and New York masses to RIGHT that wrong. And with their encrypted VPN tunnel to my machine, there is no POSSIBLE way they are going to find out someone watched the Pope's masses despite the policies of the evangelists who run BJU.

And since NONE of my servers are in America, they are NOT SUBJECT to ANY American laws, and what I do is LEGAL in the countries where my servers are.

That's the point, it doesn't matter WHAT YOU THINK.

They MUST abide by the rules of the network owner, end of discussion, period, nothing more, that's ALL THAT MATTERS.

X-No-Archive: Yes

I am gearing up to broadcast both political conventions from America, in August, and I expect all the listener slots to fill up, especially for the Democratic convention, because the nomination probably will not be decided until then.

Given the huge listener response I had during one of the presidential debates, I expect the listenership to go way up during the political conventions. During one Presidential debates, there were connections from office networks in Hawaii, as well as in many Asian countries.

Remember, too, that I have my RDNS trick, which causes the current IP assigned to me, for my station, to resolve to something under MY domain, instead of either live365.com or loudcity.net, which means that if a user plugs in the IP number, they will get my station, no matter what the software from major filtering vendors (Websense, SurfControl, Bess, Sentian, etc.) is set to filter. I have, in effect, as I have said, found a way to undermine the filters, which I don't think the filtering vendors are going to catch up with any time soon. And since I am PAYING GoDaddy for the rights to that domain name, and I OWN the server where the DNS server doing this is housed, undermining the filters, the way I do it, is LEGAL.

causes you to appear like a person that knows what they are doing is wrong, makes you look like a dishonest person.

X-No-Archive: Yes

It is NOT illegal to change the DNS server settings on the server that I *OWN*. I OWN that server, and I am PAYING GoDaddy for the rights to that domain name. Since I OWN the server and an PAYING for the domain name, that gives me the right to have the RDNS settings ANY way I CHOOSE to have them. If I want to muck with the RDNS settings on my machine, so that filters will fail to block part of my site, that is LEGAL, since I OWN the servers where the RNDS is being hosted, and I am PAYING GoDaddy for the rights to that domain.

Basically not. You're intentionally introducing inconsistency into the DNS system, even claiming authority over totally different domains.

Actually it's GoDaddy's fault for not simply shutting you off.

I suspect that you are wasting your time with him, Leythos. Isn't this the same guy making the same claims about the figure skating a while back? And something else even before that one? Apparently no one in the past couple of years has been able to get the point through to him.

JD