the internet defence league, major sites signing on, will this protect ats?

i would like to start a debate about weather the idea of an "internet defence league" to alert high profile web sites,
of very troubling internet legislation would work, to avert major bone headed laws from being instigated.

what i wonder is do we have to do something proactive to protect our ability to use a free and fair web,
consider a law is drafted that says any sight that believes in spaghetti monsters is bad and must be not return search results on large search engines.

or that conspiracy theorists are dangerous and so are the sights they post on and laws are written to out law conspiracy sights.

would the idea of a quick response, internet defence league work, in co-operation with other important web sights acually work to bring a quick public response,
and
would the network of concerned web sight owners have enough leverage to proactivly make law makers think twice before attempting to pass bone headed legislation?

do we need a quick response / internet lobby to keep law makers from dumb laws that could outlaw ATS?

looking for opinions on weather this would/could work

i will now blend into the back round,


and listen to some music


edit to add
this league is for websight owners not members
but i would like to hear from members and mods alike

xploder

I reckon a more effective approach would be a technical one, which would give people a more solid protection of their rights on the Internet. A 'defence league' is only useful where it could maintain the availability of the sites it's defending and also the security of communications.
Ideally such a 'defence league' will have a network that's designed to be secure and resilient from the start, before whatever legislations are passed.

reply to post by XeroOne


what would happen if the new laws had an anti circumvention law embedded in it?
and criminalised any network offering access?

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


They couldn't, as the Internet itself doesn't make the distinction between governments and criminals. Without data and communications security, e-commerce would be impossible. Firms would go out of business. The economy would go under. E-Crime would skyrocket.

This is why China won't outaw VPNs, IPsec or encryption.

reply to post by XeroOne


ok what happens in the example where conspiracy web sights are outlawed due to dangerous thinking,
and ATS is blocked from my country and circumvention would be a crime.

i am not prepaired to break the law but still require access to ats

what could i do AFTER the new laws had passed,
and would it not be better to be vigil against such laws?

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by XeroOne

 

ok what happens in the example where conspiracy web sights are outlawed due to dangerous thinking,
and ATS is blocked from my country and circumvention would be a crime.

i am not prepaired to break the law but still require access to ats

what could i do AFTER the new laws had passed,
and would it not be better to be vigil against such laws?

xploder

Well, first off you'd be in a similar position to a Chinese citizen attempting to access subversive content outside your country. Your government would in that case use several methods to block your access to the ATS server and you don't want them to know you were accessing it anyway.
What you'd need in that case is to use a proxy the government doesn't know about to relay traffic between your computer and the ATS server.

This is mainly how they get around censorship in China.

By the way, implementing this level of censorship would be extremely difficult for the US government, technically speaking.

reply to post by XeroOne


a VPN to a relay server?

ok that makes sense.

would it be more effective to pre-empt the need to spend $40 dollars a month on a proxie service?

i realise there are free proxies to use but how can you check they are safe and not a honey pot?

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by XeroOne

 

a VPN to a relay server?

ok that makes sense.

would it be more effective to pre-empt the need to spend $40 dollars a month on a proxie service?

i realise there are free proxies to use but how can you check they are safe and not a honey pot?

xploder

That's one of the £64 million questions. Personally I read the privacy statements very carefully before signing up. If a service will pass on usage data for any reason, avoid them. Try to find a service that doesn't keep logs in the first place.
If you were living in a repressive nation, you'd want a proxy server located outside the country, and you'd use traceroute and InfoSniper to make sure it is. Always know where your traffic is being routed.
From there, it's a matter of trust.

Just in case any three-letter (or four-letter) agencies are reading, this information is for enhancing the security of Internet communications, and for the prevention of crime related to unlawful interception.

reply to post by XeroOne

That's one of the £64 million questions. Personally I read the privacy statements very carefully before signing up. If a service will pass on usage data for any reason, avoid them. Try to find a service that doesn't keep logs in the first place.

good tip

If you were living in a repressive nation, you'd want a proxy server located outside the country, and you'd use traceroute and InfoSniper to make sure it is. Always know where your traffic is being routed.
From there, it's a matter of trust.

thank you investigating infosniper and tracert now

Just in case any three-letter (or four-letter) agencies are reading, this information is for enhancing the security of Internet communications, not for committing any criminal offences.

as previously stated this is for circumvention of theoretical laws not implemented laws.
dont worry i dont break the law

does the country you choose your proxie in matter?
is it better to use say
bolgeria or romaina?

is there a country where your rights are better protected?
like sweeden?

ps thanks for the education

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by XeroOne

 

That's one of the £64 million questions. Personally I read the privacy statements very carefully before signing up. If a service will pass on usage data for any reason, avoid them. Try to find a service that doesn't keep logs in the first place.

good tip

If you were living in a repressive nation, you'd want a proxy server located outside the country, and you'd use traceroute and InfoSniper to make sure it is. Always know where your traffic is being routed.
From there, it's a matter of trust.

thank you investigating infosniper and tracert now

Just in case any three-letter (or four-letter) agencies are reading, this information is for enhancing the security of Internet communications, not for committing any criminal offences.

as previously stated this is for circumvention of theoretical laws not implemented laws.
dont worry i dont break the law

does the country you choose your proxie in matter?
is it better to use say
bolgeria or romaina?

is there a country where your rights are better protected?
like sweeden?

ps thanks for the education

xploder

No probs. It's the reason I'm in the security business

As for the country it's hosted in, it does matter but it's not easy to say which one is the best. On the surface, you'd think the service provider is governed by the laws of whatever country. Today there are various international agreements, usually involving the US and European Union. I believe Russia has signed up to one in 2010, but I can't remember which.
Bulgaria, Romania and Russia are generally pretty lawless in terms of Internet crime, but that also means there's a strong chance the proxy services there are run by criminal groups, and those groups are highly dangerous. They're actually a much bigger threat than any government agency.

one word should explain a great way to circumvent any such blockages: Tor


works for me, for secure traffic.

Originally posted by moonweed
one word should explain a great way to circumvent any such blockages: Tor


works for me, for secure traffic.

Definitely good for old-fashioned messaging. I've had problems getting JavaScript working with it though, and it adds a huge amount of latency to your traffic.

reply to post by XeroOne


_javascript is disabled, by default, in tor.....unless you don't care about security....go ahead, and enable it....but...everything you do, can be tracked