Net anonymity service back-doored

[GAspnes]

Just in case you use JAP....

The popular Java Anonymous Proxy (JAP), used to anonymise one's comings and goings across the Internet, has been back-doored by court order. The service is currently logging access attempts to a particular, and unnamed, Web site and reporting the IP addys of those who attempt to contact it to the German police.

We know this because the JAP operators immediately warned users that their IP traffic might be going straight to Big Brother, right? Wrong. After taking the service down for a few days with the explanation that the interruption was "due to a hardware failure", the operators then required users to install an "upgraded version" (ie. a back-doored version) of the app to continue using the service.

http://theregister.co.uk/content/55/32450.html

[Occulus]

1. If I were going to write

an application that ended up being truly anon, I'd compile, upload, and immediately destroy ALL the code, then transfer the binary around like mad.

Reverse-engineering, which any government (namely, ours) would have to do to understand how the program works, violates the DMCA. The program itself would not be malicious- simply an anonymizer. Hence, no loophole (IF I'm reading the DMCA right).

Thoughts?

[GAspnes]

3. you are assuming

that our government will obey the law. A laughable assumption.

[uberotto]

5. Why wouldn't you just release it as Open Source...

That way anyone who wanted to could download the source code, remove any back doors that might have been placed in the code, compile and use to their hearts content... If the (any) government tried to shut you down, someone else would be able to continue development...

As for myself, if it has anything to do with the internet, if it aint open source, it aint being run on my computer.

[GAspnes]

6. the point of this is

that the service operator lied to its' users. Open source wouldn't have changed a thing -- they could have had one version of source for perusal, and another compiled into the executing binary.

The moral of this story: trust NO one.

[uberotto]

10. it seems that you missed the point...

if you have the source, why would you run someone elses precompiled binary?

As a matter of fact, most open source projects don't even supply any precompiled binaries. Instead you download the code, then run the commands "./config; make; make install". That's how you get your executable...

Also, just so you know, I do agree with you. When it comes to protecting your privacy, Trust NO one.

[GAspnes]

11. so you compile all your own binaries?

that makes you 1 in about 300,000.

More to the point, if you use someone else's service, you can, perhaps, compare their binary to your compiled binary -- but who is going to go to that effort all day, every day?

[uberotto]

12. hopefully...

Anyone who thinks that they need anonymity while perusing the internet...

[GAspnes]

13. you run your own anonymizer?

that's gotta be tricky. and costly.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Sorry a bit of a tech dummy here but is this also in keeping with

articles I believe I read a while back that indicated they were trying to make firewalls such as Norton illegal and render them useless to the consumer as well (presumably for security reasons to the state the PERSON cannot be anonymous)?

[GAspnes]

4. doubtful

Firewalls don't make you anonymous.

[uberotto]

7. Something completely off topic...

I'm surprised that you say you are "a tech dummy". Just out of curiousity, did you know that your demon icon is the mascot of the FreeBSD OS, which is considered by most tech people to be even more "techie" than linux?

check it out http://www.freebsd.org

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. nope...that's just more evidence that i am a tech dummy

thanks!

[GAspnes]

9. that would be the only thing you're a dummy about

no text. No. Wait. There is text. Look. Here it is.