Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Sending large amounts of data anonymously

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 12:46

Hello fellow /prog/riders.
I am in need of help.

How do I send large amounts of data (around 700 MB or so, can be larger) totally anonymous to its destination?

I'll be using Tor for two way communications.
But Tor is slow, I do not care that much for packet loss since it's a multimedia stream.
I do require speeds higher than 250 kb/s though.

So, how can I stream my anus porn data while staying Anonymous?

In a few years, IP spoofing will be impossible, I want a long term solution.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 12:56

Use steganography on your data, write it to a large hard-disk, then send it by mail.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:04

send it by mail
This is the part of your statement I agree with most.  The rest I have nits to pick at.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:12

>>1
maybe you should send spoofed UDP packets, seems for me to be the most anonymous way.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:24

>>4
In a few years, IP spoofing will be impossible, I want a long term solution.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:28

>>5
Make it possible again.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:34

>>5
the other alternative is crack some net gateway and send it from there once you have a local address.

or you could use a botnet which is a incredible amount of work and time(or money).

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:48

>>2 has the right idea, but can be improved.
Write it to magnetic tape, send it by air mail. If it takes two days to get to a given location and you send 10 1-TB tapes per package, you'll have a throughput of nearly 500 Mb/sec.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:51

>>8
Not to mention that it's probably cheaper than sending it over the Internet if your audience is elsewhere in the US, and there are laws protecting the secrecy of your data.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 13:53

>>7
I don't see how using a botnet would be more secure than Tor, because it wouldn't be. It might be faster, but certainly not more secure than using a simple proxy server. As for the amount of work, I believe one could compromise a few dozen servers in a few hours by googling for vulnerable PHP scripts (thank PHP web developers for their trivially exploitable bugs!).

As for my answer:
>>1
You can't have all the best of 3  world - realtime speed, anonymity and security. I2P or Tor might be good choices for what you need. You might be able to tweak these services to lower their security for speed gains, but they're usually aimed at preserving data. If you want something UDP-based, you'll have to make it yourself or search the internet, maybe someone else did it before you.

Name: >>10 2010-05-23 13:58

I've also forgotten about Anonymous P2P. If it's something meant for more than one person, you could try something like Japanese P2P's like Perfect Dark. The peers there are very high-speed and the most common files there are 2-4gb archives of BDs and .ts HDTV captures.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:07

>>9
laws protecting the secrecy of your data
HAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHHHAHAHHAHHHHHAHAHHAAHAHHAHAHAHA

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:12

Sending it physically through postage sounds interesting.  I suppose it depends on what those 700mb of data are.  If it's indeed pornography or some form of copyright media, you'd be fine uploading it to any filesharing site or even uploading directly to your destination.  Just remember to encrypt the contents.  Also security through obscurity, name your 700mb of porn something like: "family_photos_07."

For more anonymity, use anonymous proxies.  Go wardriving and piggyback some poor saps wireless router.

If it's something vitally important that you don't want anyone else viewing, physical mail sounds like a plan.  Just hope no one deems it necessary to examine the parcel:  "OH GOSH THIS MAN'S SENDING TERRORIST PLANS/ CHILD PORNOGRAPHY/ COPYRIGHT MEDIA."  Don't use a return address (duh!). 

The most secure way is to transport yourself or a physical proxy (friend) and deliver the contents by hand.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:14

>>12
agreed... you're awfully naive if you believe there are corporate/ government laws protecting your secrecy.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:22

>>13
Also security through obscurity, name your 700mb of porn something like: "family_photos_07."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography
IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:23

>>1
if you want to send files to without anyone but the receiver knowing the contents then use steganography. but if you dont want anyone to know that you were the one who sent the files then wardriving(wlan hijacking) is the answer.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:25

Burn it on the fucking CD and deliver the CD personally.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:25

>>12,14
And Reddit isn't even down. Fucking children.

Regardless of whether you can physically stop people from opening your mail and looking at the contents of the tapes (and you're naïve if you think even the US government has the resources to open every parcel and have tape readers ready on the off chance someone is still mailing magnetic tape), the contents of the tape wouldn't be admissible as evidence in a court of law because post secret laws exist.
Regardless of how you look at it, sending information by postal mail is much safer than sending it over the Internet.

If you really think you're the center of the universe and The Man is just champing at the bit for an opportunity to snoop through your loli animay archives, you can always encrypt it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:26

>>16
Steganography without encryption is always terrible advice. And if you have encryption, you might as well drop the steganography, because encrypted data is so common on the Internet that it's not going to attract any attention.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:45

>>18
PATRIOT Act you bleating moron. And he didn't specify the nature of the data he wants to send (if it's anus porn, he wouldn't bother posting on /prog/ about it).

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:46

>>19
Internet
I do require speeds higher than 250 kb/s though.
Contradiction!

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:49

>>20
You mean the act that doesn't actually say what you Redditor conspiracy theorists want it to say? Take your fact-free whining back to your social news aggregator.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:53

>>22
I'm not from any social news aggregator you fucking idiot. Why don't you take your fact-free objections back to Wikipedia discussion pages?

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:55

>>23
EXPERT PLAYGROUND DEBATER

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 14:58

>>24
EXPERT PLAYGROUND DEBATER

Name: >>23 2010-05-23 15:01

Fine then, we'll see who's right in a few years. When you'll end up being forced to disclose your encryption key to your data even without the necessity of a warrant on their side, remember me. I will be laughing.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 15:07

>>26
Why would I remember you? This discussion was about something completely different.
You looked up what the PATRIOT act actually says and discovered you were wrong, so now you're trying to move the goalposts? It must be nice when your opponents exist entirely in your head and you can just pretend you win every debate regardless of how incredibly wrong you are.

Name: 26 2010-05-23 15:53

>>27
You looked up what the PATRIOT act actually says and discovered you were wrong
Not at all, I'm sorry if I gave off the impression of backing off on that claim. Legal, unlimited wiretapping is certainly a nice step in the right direction, don't you think so? You can almost see a next step that would be to give the ordinary police forces the same authority. Just look at the nice laws they've put up in the UK relative to encryption. It can only go one way in the future, so it's just a matter of time. If you think there are no private interests wanting to get such a nice control on information, you're an idiot. If you think the population is going to do as much as lift a finger against whatever measures are taken, you're an idiot. It must feel nice to think your opponents don't exist and you can just pretend you win every debate regardless of how incredibly wrong you are.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 15:54

>>28
Keep on railing against the specters in your head. Nobody was even talking about wiretapping.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 15:56

>>29
See the post that sparked the entire discussionshitstorm >>9:
Not to mention that it's probably cheaper than sending it over the Internet if your audience is elsewhere in the US, and there are laws protecting the secrecy of your data.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 16:16

Jesus Fucking Christ.
OP Here.
It will be Warez, lots of it.
All I want is the end point not to know where it's coming from.

I just feel IP spoofing is "wrong".

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 16:18

Sure is summer in here

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 16:23

All I want is the end point not to know where it's coming from.
≖ ͜ ≖

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 16:37

>>30
Learn to read, for fuck's sake. That's referring to laws protecting post secret, not Internet traffic.
Goddamn moron.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 18:14

>>31
I just feel IP spoofing is "wrong".
Why?

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 18:14

>>31
Okay, now I don't trust your intentions anymore.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 18:40

>>32
We don't do summer trolling here on /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 18:51

>>37
Someone doesn't remember last summer.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 18:52

>>31
Hax the recipient's anus and make the porn come out of there.  They will be sufficiently confused.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 20:43

>>38
I know what you trolled last summer

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 23:18

>>39
Hax the recipient's anus and make the porn come out of there.  They will be sufficiently aroused.
ftfy

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-23 23:48

>>41
ftfy
Back to the imageboards, please

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-24 1:46

>>42
Don't you mean "back to the internet"?

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-24 4:08

>>43
No, not at all.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-24 11:36

>>35
Standards man.
See, I gotta stick to the standards!

Name: Jane 2010-05-24 11:39

>>42
Hi Bob,

I need you to stop being an insufferable faggot. I need that by tomorrow.

Thanks

Name: Bob 2010-05-24 17:38

>>46
Hi Jane. You've got nothing on me anyway, as I saw you sucking the boss's cock in the break room. Enjoy trying to find work in this economy, you little slut! Bye.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-24 18:02

>>45
It breaks the ``standards'' to a lesser extent than, say, NAT. Most people would disagree that it breaks them at all.

Name: Jane 2010-05-24 19:07

>>47
Hi Bob. You've got nothing on me anyway, as I saw you sucking the boss's cock in the break room. Enjoy trying to find work in this economy, you little slut! Bye.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-06 9:42

Back to /b/, ``GNAA Faggot''

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-17 1:37

Erika once told me that Xarn is a bad boyfriend

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 7:07

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-17 19:51

check 'em
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List