Mac address & hostname automatic randomizer freeware for Windows

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:10:28 -0800, " snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com" wrote in :

That's actually a waste of time -- your MAC address can't be seen remotely, and your hostname won't be seen either unless you "make it so"

-- only your public IP address will be seen. You can verify that at privacy checking sites. This is yet another security myth -- I should add it to the myth section of the wiki below. You're better off investing your time and energy on the security things that do work.

Hello John, Are you sure the MAC & hostname of the PC aren't available remotely?

I read that both MAC & hostname were seen in this court case, for example.

Apparently DNS logs proved "the MAC address for both the cable modem and the device connected to the cable modem were unchanged for the entire period in question" and the defendant lost the case (it's being appealed).

Even without a court case, isn't the hostname and current user often given out to malicious web pages when certain scripting languages are enabled in your browser in the first place?

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 09:29:40 -0800, Bill Davies wrote in :

Yes.

Your ISP can see your MAC address, but only your ISP, and your ISP knows who and where you are in any event, so randomizing your MAC address wouldn't do any good.

The only thing the remote site can see that might compromise your privacy is your IP address, which could be used to identify you through your ISP (no matter what you do to your MAC address and hostname). The only way to prevent that is to use an anonymous surfing service, ideally one that's outside of USA legal jurisdiction. You can find such services easily with Google.

Cookies are another privacy issue because they can be used to track you and pull bits of data together about you. To address that issue, get a cookie control add-in for your web browser.

There are a number of things reported by your browser to the remote host (assuming you haven't changed or blocked them), but hostname and username aren't among them. Check for yourself at:

Here's what that last gets for me at the moment.

Firefox:

Your computer is connecting to the internet at , , in the , with an ip of 98.97.49.102 Your UserAgent is being reported as: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008120122 Firefox/3.0.5 Your IP Address is 98.97.49.102 Your Host Name is nmd.sbx10219.sanfrca.wayport.net

Internet Explorer:

Your computer is connecting to the internet at , , in the , with an ip of 98.97.49.102 Your UserAgent is being reported as: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Your Referer is being reported as: Your IP Address is 98.97.49.102 Your Host Name is nmd.sbx10219.sanfrca.wayport.net

There's nothing there that compromises my privacy.

Yet another unsupported claim from a guy who love to send crap to usenet.

MAC can be seen on his wireless network, and his hostname too. Further more, his ISP can correlate MAC and hostname to a PC, if not randomized. ISP can correlate MAC and hostname to visited addresses. All though it's true that MAC does not travel the net, it does indeed travel between ISP and custommer. Layer 3 routers and bridges are costly and rarly used as an endpoint because it's not necessary. It doesn't matter if he run a router or a clean layer 2 bridge. Where ARPs and RARPs are going is by the protocol defined as a choice.

There are alots of confusion around this question and to whom it apply as a security risk, but calling it a myth is just as misleading as calling it relevant to everybody.

If he connects to wireless networks, and doesn't want others to correlate his different sessions to each other, then he should randomize both his MAC and his Host name. This is necessary, but not suficient. He should also make sure that his computer don't give away it's indentity by network fingerprint nor content in shared folders and traffic generated by installed programs. Not even this is good enough. He should also try to make his computer appear as the others on the same network so that it doesn't stand out. This means he should have shared files open if most ppl on that net, and he should use MAC ranges in the same company region as the most used adapters on the same network. If there is alots of *nix boxes on the net, he might need to install a new network core so that his machine doesn't stand out from the crowd as the only windoz. It's not easy to be a ghost on the net, but it's possible. On top of all he should use a anonymizer network so that his ISP and local network can only see his connection to the anonymizer network. But above all things he should do, is to lock his ears from clueless crackpots like you who got more love for writing than for right information and insight.

That's an interesting POV. Got one you would like to recommend?

LOL! Well spoken.

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:23:50 -0500, Ari wrote in :

• Anonymizer

• GoTrusted Both are solid, and while in the USA, that shouldn't be a concern unless you're going to attract the attention of law enforcement.

For a technical overview, see

Other options:

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:03:38 -0800 (PST), Chrisjoy wrote in :

With that insult you concede the debate. Thanks for saving me the time. And feel free to rant on without me -- I'm giving you the last word.

Class

How do you know they are solid?

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:50:19 -0500, Ari wrote in :

They both have a track record, reputation, and enterprise credentials, although of course it's impossible to know for certain. There's always a risk that a bad employee could still compromise you, just as there is with any other organization, the bigger risk probably being your ISP.

With Tor so easily, freely configured for web browsing, why in the world would you hand off your anonymity to a bunch of goofs trying to make a buck?

Dontcha just luv it when someone is about ready to get his ass reamed, he claims "VICTORY" and scoots off into the Usenet sunset?

Hmmm, who else does that.

Head Of COKE, freeware scientist, Bear Bottoms?

*No Log Files* For the security of our subscribers, AnonymousSpeech does not backup any log files. We store logfiles for a maximum of five days. This protects our servers from being compromised by abusive users.

So they logfile, but they don't keep a BUP (idiots, great system ownership there), but they have no log files...but they do.

Got it, where can I signup? lol

"GoTrusted is very inexpensive and unlike alot of other anonymous surfing software, it actually works."

May I? The morons can't do a simple spell check on their site?

"Uses industrial strength encryption"

Aw, yes, the Clorox algorithm. I looked all over their two page website, not a dman thing about how, what anything cryptology. I did keep running into their sales cart every other mouse click. What a joke.

"We fill the need for privacy, security and availability to end-users who connect to the Internet by using a third-party's wireless 'hot-spot' (such as airports and cafes) or wired connection (such as hotels). We do this without encumbering the customer with the complexities of the back-end database, authentication, networking and encryption infrastructure".

LOL! They encumber my credit card, I bet.

Naval, you called these guys "solid", are you shilling for them? Or was it the fancy green website that got you all hot n sweaty over their "solidness". Hell, frozen turds are solid, should we pay frozen turds to "anonymize" us?

Yeah, sure. More likely, you've been blocked by some ISP or hotspot by your MAC address and need a way around the block.

My guess is that you're trying to change the MAC address while connected via wireless. That won't work. The basic MAC address spoofers work by changing the Windoze registry key that contains the wireless MAC address. The problem is that the wireless driver reads the key when it starts up. Some of them read it when initiating a connection, but most do not. However, you can force reloading the MAC address by stopping the WZC (wireless zero config) service, and then restarting it. I'm sure the improved wireless privacy and security will be worth the exercise.

On some of my systems, I have ARPwatch setup to detect multiple MAC addresses attempting to secure a sigle DHCP assigned address. That's a sure sign of spoofing a MAC address. I don't disconnect or block the user, but merely slow them down to a crawl. The problem is not the user or whatever they're doing. It's filling up the ARP table in the router that bothers me.

Oh, that's easy. I thought you wanted to change it multiple times without rebooting. No need to do it just on boot. Just insert a script in the Windoze Statup folder, with:

1. Stop WZC
2. change the MAC address
3. restart WZC You can also create a shortcut to the script to make it change MAC addresses on command. Of course, you'll be disconnected when you run it. Hopefully, this will allow you to share copyright violations, play peer-to-peer, or spam furiously, with improved privacy and security.

Actually yes. However, it's proprietary to a client that uses it to test the number of associations a wireless router can handle. It's quite capable of crashing many commodity routers.

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:13:16 -0500, Ari wrote in :

3 strikes, and you're out! Into the twit filter you go.

Why? This smells of an attempt to hide some online activity or circumvent some security.

On Mon 22 Dec08 18:54, John Navas wrote

If an organisation wanted to obtain data its subscribers thought was anonymous, then it wouldn't be very clever to run an operation with a poor reputation.

On the other hand, if an organisation wanted to see data its subscribers thought was anonymous, then it would be a smart move to run a quality service and keep very schtum about what it leaked. anonymizer.com may be such an organization.

In other words, in order to get data which is provided only to trusted sources, you need to work in a way to gain trust. But that does not mean there is not abuse. The greatest abusers of other people and their rights are too often those who have risen to a level where their reputation is their defense.

For example, Bernard Madoff chair of NASDAQ or UN staff systematically abusing refugees.

Reputations are important but I am cautious about trusting them entirely.