Lance Cottrell’s Techdirt Profile

lokitm

About Lance Cottrell




Lance Cottrell’s Comments comment rss

  • Apr 10th, 2013 @ 12:37pm

    Re: Re:

    In general europe and most other countries have much worse data retention laws than the US.

    The reality is that US providers are not forced to retain data. My lawyers tell me that we can not be forced to do so.

  • Apr 4th, 2013 @ 12:47pm

    Re: Re: Reality of subpoenas

    A good privacy oriented VPN is a good start. Obviously I am partial to Anonymizer.com. TOR can work well, but I worry that many node operators may be sniffing any and all traffic in the clear.

    I suggest using virtualization. VMWare or Virtual Box can give you a disposable environment that you can reset after each use. That provides a lot of protection, in conjunction with the VPN.

    As to trustworthy, it is hard to say. One can't really prove a negative. Look at the privacy policies to see that they at least SAY they don't keep logs. Then look for cases where users have been compromised. That almost always gets out. Hide My Ass was shown to keep logs when it lead to the arrest of a member of LulzSec.

    I have written quite a bit about this on my blog http://www.theprivacyblog.com

  • Apr 4th, 2013 @ 10:09am

    Reality of subpoenas

    Having founded anonymizer.com in 1995 and being actively involved with it to the present day, I have some first hand experience with this issue. Our business and servers are all located in the US, so this may not apply in other countries.

    Over the years the number of subpoenas we have received has varied significantly, but has never really been less than several per month. As we have no logging that would connect our users to their actions, we can't be responsive to that kind of request. As a subscription service, we could be (and have been) asked if a given person is a customer, but that would not say anything about what they had done.
    We have been asked to set up ongoing monitoring that would allow us to capture this kind of information, but we have declined, and no legal force has been brought to bear that could force us to do so.
    The real problem is that your computer and browser are probably so well profiled, and full of tracking elements, that you are likely to be identified even while using a privacy VPN, unless you take significant additional steps.

  • Apr 22nd, 2012 @ 5:59pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.

    Very simple. They are different domains. I could not create another kitchen appliance called Mixmaster, but there is no issue with privacy software, or a car, or a medical device.

    That is how US trademark law works.

  • Apr 21st, 2012 @ 8:33am

    Re: Me?

    Actually, even a real time intercept would not work. Mixmaster is designed with multiple hop relays, with message mixing and cover traffic.

    I would guess that this guy will get caught with old school policing techniques. Clearly this person has a major axe to grind, it is unlikely that manifests only in these email threats.

  • Apr 21st, 2012 @ 8:30am

    Re: Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.

    Not a "generic trademark" it is a registered trademark and has been for over a decade.

  • Apr 21st, 2012 @ 8:30am

    Re: Re: Not an "Anonymizer" server.

    Since I wrote Mixmaster and founded Anonymizer Inc., I am a bit sensitive to this issue. :)

  • Apr 20th, 2012 @ 12:12pm

    Not an "Anonymizer" server.

    Anonymizer (R) is a company, and none of their servers were involved.
    What was seized was a server running a Mixmaster anonymous remailer.