blonde poker forum

I've noticed that the browser on my phone has an incognito setting for 'private' browsing.

How does this work, and why don't pedophiles, terrorists etc use it to avoid detection?

It's so you can shop for presents for Mrs Red without her seeing your browsing history should she accidentally try and look.

It just doesn't save any history etc on your device. I would think criminals could and do use it but I think certain sites would still be flagged and IP addresses tracked where necessary.

Welcome back Red, glad to see you're posting again.

As Graham said, private browsing stops tracking the obvious things such as history, cookis etc.mit actually only stops this on the device you are using. Your ISP still knows what you're doing. The only way of trully being undetected is by not going on the Internet at all. Even the so called Dark Web can be traced to a certain degree.

Thanks, but I'm curious now.

Why would sites that need to be flagged be allowed to remain open?

Why couldn't the baddies just drive down a street and use their phone to connect to the first unsecured network?

I don't think it's easy to just take down illegal sites, they are often hosted in countries where they can get away with it.  Also, when they take one down, another will spring up in it's place - take The Pirate Bay for example, it took a lot of planning to finally raid the offices and take the servers etc but within a few days it was back up and running.

I don't think it's as easy as going to imaterrorist.org, log on and find out all the secrets, these sites are hidden and the people that run them know how to cover their tracks.  

You could drive down the street and join an unsecured network. You could sit in Starbucks or a pub and do the same, people probably do but some of it they'd probably not want to do in a public area.  For 99.9999999% of people this isn't really an issue, for the small part that it is, someone is probably watching already.

It's basically so that porn doesn't show up in your history. CTRL+SHIFT+N is a handy command for Chrome, so they say.

All it does though is stop the history being recorded on your device. However, your ISP still knows all so you have no protection visiting illegal sites. There are certainly ways around this so that you are completely anonymous, but you are treading water here if you don't know what you're completely doing. I only recently heard of the dark web where tons of illegal content is available. I'm not just talking about pedophilia. We are talking sites to purchase weapons, propaganda sites. The lot. Whichever site I found that had a discussion or forum regards the dark web (I think it was 2+2 actually) had a few people dig deep into the dark web and it seemed it scarred a lot of innocent people with what they could research and look at. It certainly ended my curiosity reading peoples TR's visiting the dark web.

Don't read the next line if you want to retain faith in humanity

Apparently you can purchase videos of people being murdered, and for a higher price you can even select the murder weapon etc.

FWIW I never have and never will go into the dark web, I'd rather not be scarred with what I see. I find it hard enough watching a documentary about Fred West.

Like most here, I spend most of my days at the PC, but hadn't even heard about this 'deep web' until I watched Citizenfour, and only found out about 'Silk Road' when it was closed down.

Whilst the dark web does contain pretty bad stuff, you won't find it by logging on to it and just doing the equivalent of Googling "people being murdered" (for example, using Lucky's line) - it won't turn up anything, it's not that simple.  You'll need to know the url and even if you knew/know it once, it doesn't mean that it will be there next time you go to it.  Domain names aren't as simple as thew's.silkroad.com and they can shift around.    Silk Road (again, example) moved around a fair bit. 

The dark web also contains plenty of legit stuff, it's not all for illegal transactions.  I'm not saying that if you look hard you won't find anything, you will of course, but it's not as simple as the posts above make it sound and you wont be scarred for life just for logging on.  That said, you're probably only likely to log on either if you want something dodgy or are curious.

because the US hack everything ldo.


in reality actual criminals especially the ones they want to catch don't use modern communication methods as they are not secure.


the dark web is messed up, slow and scary.

Yes, but even though the US would know what you were looking at, they wouldn't kniw who was doing the looking.

that depends on how much they care....

So does my laptop / phone identify itself even if I connect from someone else's internet?

Going on the Snowden docu, they can do pretty much anything they want, and not much isn't possible.

I'm not taking the piss here Mark, but is that supposed to be an answer to this question cos it doesn't make sense to me.  ;sark;

in answer to your question yes there are individual identifiers in alot of things.

they also have the ability to monitor/use items that we would consider unusable ie because they are turned off or because we've never considered using an item for a different than designed use.

phone wise they have the sims hacked for everyone ever, they have full control of the phones they want, can for example turn on your webcam without you knowing its on and monitor you that way. there is a famous picture of one of the douschebags profiteering off of this and he does an interview in front of his laptop and you can see some of his high tech defenses, ie a square of paper over the webcam at all times to 'protect himself from that'.


so yeh what marky said, it really is bloody clever some of the things they have worked out, whilst at the same time given they are all so corrupted we're all under it!

Tit is correct as long as they know the IMEI of a SIM card they can pretty do whatever they like with a phone as long as it's got a battery in it (with power obv.). There are a lot of people who worry about shit like this but the truth is unless they have a reason to monitor you then they won't.

One of the coolest things I saw in a previous life was a Bluetooth rifle. At a range of 100-200 yds it could latch on to a phone conversation.

What if you take the sim out?

That would work too I think. But I think you can make emergency calls on a phone without a sim so there may still be a way.

in several ways. one of which is broadly described by the term 'device fingerprinting'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_fingerprint

there really is though, that's the issue. the system is so corrupted and biased that giving this much power to people so incapable of using it 'well' is going to lead us to bigger and bigger problems.

we're even now seeing computer manufacturers themselves installing abhorrent spyware you'd be trying to get rid of for ages if you accidentally installed it yourself yet then claiming it's for the good of the customer when found out.  The US is working to undermine the security of everything we do on the basis that they will know best whilst at the same putting us in a worse and worse position vs those who wish any kind of harm done ie china, bad people, criminals whatever word you use to describe the things that you fear.

the argument that if you're not doing anything wrong (remembering wrong is defined by the people who are spying on you) means you have nothing to fear, is utterly two faced and undefendable. watch this for a better presented reasoning.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcSlowAhvUk

I'd never heard of the dark web. There's a few documentaries about it on youtube, and it's scary how available certain things are!

meh, it's all a bit overblown by some people. Pretty much the majority of what has been done is just a natural extension of what the security agencies were doing on the telephone system. The reason why it seems vastly more pervasive and insidious is just because the internet and world wide web is vastly more pervasive and insidious.

There might have been some elements which were over done on the way - but it's a new technology, in the same way the law had to be tightened so you couldn't just bug anyone's phone without a good legal process to allow it they've had to (or will have to) look at what the appropriate safeguards are for online.

Almost all of the spying done is going to be done by a set of computer algorithms anyway - so not only will most of most people's information never be looked at, but most of what is will never be seen by human eyes. It's only if something gets flagged as suspicious (and probably passed to another set of computer alogrithms - and then passed on to actual human analysts) that anyone's privacy could be intruded on in any meaningful way.

By that point - they probably would be trying to hide doing something wrong anyway.

NB: obviously that doesn't include the private companies putting in secret spyware - that's a different issue

the same people who make the corrupt/selfish decisions that govern us will also be the ones deciding if you've ever done anything wrong, with a backlog of everything you've ever done.


combine this with the fact that they 'leak' information (which will hopefully influence the general public in their favour or at least scare them) daily to their friends in the biased sections of media with no repercussions or problems, yet someone leaks a swathe of wrong doing showing the government up for breaking the law, lying etc etc and they must die they are a traitor. but yes ofc we should probably 'have a talk' about how the law means nothing to rich/powerful people but people really must get in trouble for showing them up. there are ridiculous double standards all in place to keep power/influence/wealth where it currently is.


the government line is that all this is 100% to stop terrorism (OMG TERRORISM ARE YOU SCARED YET), we must fear it, yet with what has been leaked we are shown that not only has nothing terrorist related been in any way stopped by the highly invasive and wide ranging spying, that the bulk of the 'benefits' have been regarding economic policy and gaining a leg up vs enemies and even allies.

Do you really think you know everything the security forces does? And do you really think they have not stopped any acts of terrorism in this country?

1st question no and i'd hope not.

2nd comment is unrelated to anything I said. They justify their use of wide ranging over surveillance with terrorism, then when the facts are released and they are held to account in court rooms, nothing related to terrorism emerges. OBL wasn't chilling on skype in his cave, we regularly (yes this is scary) stop things from happening, but they are NOT via these 'newer' methods they are through good old school human intelligence, working sources etc. Yet the bulk of the money spent on surveillance is put to use in terms of economic advantage, and consolidating their positions. That is not cool.

Sorry I took it that you were saying that nothing terrorist related has been stopped by highly invasive and wide ranging spying.

Don't you think that there is a reason why OBL wasn't on Skype? Why do terrorist groups refrain from using technology? Could it be because they know they can be monitored? Surely that in itself makes it harder for terrorist groups?

There are a number of issues - but one thing is, I don't think it's necessarily clear that you don't really (unless you're really lucky) stop terrorist activity by just reading an email from saying they're going to bomb something.

Hypothetically it would be more likely to involve something like an increase in internet traffic between a region of Pakistan and an area in Birmingham would lead to an increased amount of surveillance in Birmingham which would lead to a handful of extra people being brought in for questioning leading to a couple of arrests.

The internet is essential but it's a long way from the idea a lot of people seem to have that the security forces are reading your emails and looking at your browsing history (unless they pretty much know you're a terrorist anyway).

also

I really don't think that is the government line. The security forces are there to defend the country which happens to contain an element of fighting terrorism - but they've spent 100 years spying on our allies and enemies - it's not like we're going to stop now

YES I agree with you. but monitoring 1 trillion phones when you're searching for a couple of thousand guys is like building your own absolutely massive and every growing haystack and then going i'll be damned if there's not a needle in there, lets spend lots finding it (oh look my friend Bill owns this hay removal firm, and my other buddy Randy runs a needle picker upper service). Since the introduction of wide spread monitoring we have seen more terrorism...... (technology is definitely helping people spread their words whether they are saying good or appalling stuff). I'd be interested to know how they are letting children under 18 slip out of the country to Syria even though they likely only know mobile phones, wattsapp, skype etc and will likely have had to travel through border checkpoints where all their information has to be checked and stored.


We wont catch mr and mrs super high powered criminal/terrorist etc BECAUSE they arent stupid enough to have been using commercial and easily available stuff. so where is the terrorism value (other than in stupid twitter posters, or mentally unstable people) of monitoring everyone to the n-th degree. yet that word, that very scary and oft repeated word is the supposed deciding factor as to why we should lose all privacy/liberties whatever you want to refer to it as.


I personally feel in some situations carte blanche access is important and that our super techiest groups at gchq 'should' be able to do it, however giving this power with no oversight that isn't done by themselves leads us down awful pathways. If those in charge deem it necessary to lie, and force our hand to allow them to do this then continually use it to advantage themselves economically it needs to be stopped.

We the UK are pretty complicit in these wide spread technology issues, then we (we being the West, the rich, the powerful again whichever phrase you prefer) bypass our law system in petty and piss taking ways, ie we break the US laws, the US break the UK laws then we 'swap' data and oh look neither of us has technically, by the definition of some very highly paid US DOJ lawyers 'broken any law'.  Ofc then at any point that a court case comes up they do it behind closed doors generally with a selection of people presiding over it that they know will respond as they wish. That's some sick lawlessness camouflaged as 'a just and fair law system'.


What frustrates me the most is the fact that all of this is so intertwined with the US, and people are so happy to defend them when they are so appalling in so many ways. Not small things, or even things that really directly impinge on me, but utter basics that they go around the world killing people in the name of, like freedom, democracy, free press, racism.  They have an awful awful record in terms of the press with a stupidly overtly biased set of networks that are in favour with the administration, a consistent disregard for the legal process when trying to punish people. When you try and leak information about the US, and all they do is file court documents stating you are a pedophile and refusing you the rights they supposedly fight to defend its a farce (search Matt Dehart if that's a new one to you). Similarly if you have kept up with the Kim Dotcom situation over the years their most recent ruling is just utterly pathetic and shows they don't even care for how they are perceived by the rest of the world.  Patreous has just finally admitted to 'mishandling confidential info' not to leaking or w/e the bad people who make the US gov look bad do but he def did something awful, as a forum based on gambling, what odds do we think that a rich old white man with friends in government is going to get a prison sentence, compared to say Chelsea Manning, Snowden or any black person found with any kind of paraphernalia? Their system stinks and is corrupt from top down yet we are using their models and their techniques and letting them spread like a cancer. it sucks.





I agree with your post, and I agree that my acerbic ranting may skew us away from the point slightly, but I think my point still stands. We currently use media/governments to fear monger us about certain minorities, the US are professionals at this, and yet cause and effect doesn't line up. They use terrorism to defend these policies, whilst these policies dont have a particularly great effect. We didnt stop 9/11 (information subsequently came up that we had some leads to follow up but didn't act upon, even if it hadn't lead to us stopping it, why wasnt it followed up, did we have too many people searching databases to gain economic advantage vs germany, brazil all the friendly nations etc), we didnt stop Boston, Paris, Madrid, London........ yet those events are lumped on the fire to fuel more spending, more fear and more poorly made decisions that are in no way designed to benefit us. It just pushes more money into the areas that our leaders unsurprisingly have financial interest in whilst also increasing their grip on power. Fear is the most amazing driver, we are naturally attuned to react overwhelmingly to fear, it's how a human survives.


I most certainly don't suppose to have any kind of answer for these large scale issues, but I most definitely find many faults with the logic and reasoning and the rationale and personal bias' that go into our current decision making process. You just have to watch the recent BBC program about the commons to realise that we have a bunch of jumped up petty children not in any way working for the best interests of their constituents or country, merely trying to gain and hold onto 'power and position' and win favours for when they leave that line of work.

I would love for the decision making processes that go into affecting millions of lives had to be justified properly rather than there is currently. We currently as a prime example, have David Tredinnick as being on the health select committee and now part of the science and technology committee whilst being a completely idiotic prick. We actually have someone whos role it is to be knowledgeable about science and affect how that knowledge can help and improve society and yet this bellend thinks homeopathy and astrology will make us all better. He should be fking shot. In a similar vein we can have Jacqui Smith who had previously been doing roles related to Women and schools, then come into office, and having never even met her top scientific advisor in person presided over the reclassification of cannabis against all scientific recommendations based on what, her own opinion of a topic and the concept that she thinks that she and her party may benefit by holding voters they already had and potentially winning a few other voters who are also against something they likely know little about.  It's obviously very important to look at a persons personal bias when questioning their decision making process and yet for our very  most important decisions we leave it up to individuals who are out for themselves, then dont hold them accountable.




These are the underlying issues that frustrate me, poor decision making and no accountability. This week i've just read two interesting articles, one of which is on the BBC pro government website ( :p ) I say that tongue in cheek though there are some recent articles and issues highlighting how bad that issue has become. One was from Tim Cook the CEO of Apple regarding privacy and the other just went up on BBC interviewing a long time double agent for Mi6 who was in with OBL and Al Qaeda. They are both interesting and both cover the issues that have been mentioned so i've put them below.   Sometimes being a very fast typer isn't the most helpful thing, brevity titbeam brevity  :o :dontask:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/11441265/Terrorists-should-be-eliminated-says-Apples-Tim-Cook.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-31700894

Great well thought rant there Tit, I admire your prose.

Personally I think greater controls need to be put in place for all this monitoring but unfortunately I can't see that happening anytime soon.

One thing that actually does piss me off is the likes of Google, Facebook etc. that profit vastly from all the information they have on us. The sad thing is we, including me, are hugely complicit in allowing it to happen.

Knowledge is Power innit.

I think anyone who is unaware to mass surveillance really needs to watch the Edward Snowden documentary.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/citizenfour/on-demand

Good post.

Another insecure message I know Boshi   ;whistle;

18 minutes in is gold.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2tOp7OxyQ8

this article is also pretty frustrating, murica fk yeh


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/antonio-moore/jodi-arias-and-a-nation-t_b_6810490.html?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016

Found your post quite interesting as I had never heard of the dark web before, interesting how quickly and readily the information is and how easy it is to access the dark web. Found this article quite interesting

http://www.sickchirpse.com/deep-web-guide/

Although the dark webs seems to be a section of the deep web.

Interesting, and disturbing read.

Posted earlier in the thread, saying that I never even heard of Silk Road until they took it down.

0.03% thoooooooo!

Been getting into the Joe Rogan podcasts lately, but it generally takes me a week to get through each one, as I put them on when I go to bed.

This one with Alex Winter is pretty interesting.

He has made a couple documentaries 'Downloaded', which talks about the Napster era, and 'Deep Web', which goes into Silk Road, and Bitcoin.

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJMjGLcdtOA

A long way from Bill & Ted ;D