A few VPN questions

Hey all,

I have a few VPN questions. I recently purchased VPN4all and I am
extremely happy with it. I did have a few questions, however.

1.) I really enjoy the Chrome Browser, but am concerned about privacy.
As Google is said to have removed the Unique ID, do I have to be
concerned about privacy using this browser- in particular when file
sharing? What is the safest browser to use?

2.) The VPN software is currently on my laptop. I have a wireless
connection to my desktop, which is a DSL (comcast) connection without
a VPN. Is this a privacy concern?

Thank you very much,

Tom Giarmo

On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:15:13 -0500, rwalker wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I have a few VPN questions. I recently purchased VPN4all and I am
> extremely happy with it. I did have a few questions, however.

Something to note is that when you visit VPN4All with a US IP the
price is $9.99 when you visit it with a EU IP the price becomes ¤9.99,
but the dollar and the Euro exchange rate is not 1/1, Europeans end up
paying more, couldn't they bill everyone with the same currency
(dollars or anything else) like all others VPN do pricing isn't too
fair for people in the EU so I call ripofff and wouldn't use them but
that is up to you I may be wrong but I doubt it.

> 1.) I really enjoy the Chrome Browser, but am concerned about privacy.
> As Google is said to have removed the Unique ID, do I have to be
> concerned about privacy using this browser- in particular when file
> sharing? What is the safest browser to use?

I like the Opera browser, but for a Chrome user I would say Comodo
Dragon is safer, it is meant to be an improved Chrome browser with
extra privacy features like no unique ID and other privacy stuff but
since I don't use it I cannot recommend it but I wouldn't use Chrome
since I use Opera which is a far superior browser with or without Tor
the anonymity network of choice you might want to think about.

> 2.) The VPN software is currently on my laptop. I have a wireless
> connection to my desktop, which is a DSL (comcast) connection without
> a VPN. Is this a privacy concern?
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> Tom Giarmo

What matters is your router, the Internet gate, just make sure that
your Wifi router is using encryption like WPA2 or WPA and regarding
the ad-hoc wireless connection to your desktop you will need to be
careful not to transfer confidential files inadvertently to the
desktop but other than that I think it is OK however I would check
with an expert in these matters as I am not only not an expert but I
refuse to use wireless in the first place.
--
Hacker10: http://www.hacker10.com
I am in no way affiliated with Frank Merlott

box750 wrote on [Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:26:07 -0500]:
>
> I like the Opera browser

So, you're the one!

rwalker wrote:

> I really enjoy the Chrome Browser, but am concerned about privacy. As
> Google is said to have removed the Unique ID, do I have to be
> concerned about privacy using this browser- in particular when file
> sharing? What is the safest browser to use?

SRware Iron http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php

Google Chrome is a derivative of Chromium. There are several
derivatives of Chromium. SRWare Iron is a derivative. It disables the
security breaches of Chrome.

Iron versus Chrome
http://www.srware.net/en/software_sr...me_vs_iron.php

Google likes to circumvent account security. Rather than install their
software under the \Program Files path, they dump their files under
%userprofile% where users have read, write, AND execute permissions.
This pollutes your *document* path with executables. Some shops have
avoided this security loophole by setting permissions on the documents
folder and all child objects to remove any write execute. That means
any program trying to dump its executables under %userprofile% won't
run from there. SRware Iron is polite in asking to where you want to
install the program. Google doesn't ask. Their default is under the
%programfiles% path. This is where Google dumps their software, like
Chrome and Earth. It allows any user, even those under limited
accounts, to "install" software by dumping it under %userprofile%.

I saw mention of Comodo's Dragon. That's another Chromium derivative.
Alas, they usually stick a few versions behind. I don't know if this
is because they don't have the manpower or resources to keep up to date
or it is a deliberate choice to lag behind. It's been a couple months
since I last checked but Dragon wasn't going to support the new
hardware acceleration afforded in the latest (then beta) version of
Chromium but SRware Iron would.

While there are some advantages to Chromium and its derivatives, I grew
weary of deciphering which chrome.exe or iron.exe process was for which
tab and having a huge list of these processes. Yes, there are 2 or 3
initial instances for the "chrome" and initial tab, but there is yet
another instance for every plug-in you install. Just like with tabs,
the idea was to isolate the plug-in so it crashing didn't necessarily
take down a tab (but I found it did and required a recovery of the
tab). After using either Chrome or Iron for awhile, I found that I
needed several plug-ins to get back functionality that was lost from
the more robust web browsers. Chromium was designed to be lean but it
is too learn regarding many features that I expect in other web
browsers. So I added plug-ins (extensions) to alter behavior or add
missing behavior. By the time I got through and came up with a minimal
set (for my liking) of plug-ins, just loading Chrome or Iron with a
single blank tab ended up with loading 13 instances of chrome.exe or
iron.exe. That's ridiculous. If they wanted to isolate the plug-in
then it should be isolated within the same process or as a thread to
the tab's process. Each added chrome.exe or iron.exe process that was
just for the plug-in was huge. I forget the size know but it was huge
when compared against the tiny size of the plug-in. Not that these are
the sizes, but you'd get something like 6MB of memory consumed for a
plug-in that only needed 15KB, or smaller. Just loading Chrome or Iron
with my selected set of plug-ins had the total memory consumption over
something like 70MB (I think it was higher and am being conservative
here). Memory conservation is not what this web browser is about once
you decide to fatten it up with behaviors it should've had or added
behaviors that you wish to have.

On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:53:07 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:

> X-MOTD: It is wiser to remain silent and let others ponder your ignorance than to speak and remove all doubt

<sniped ego manicial BS>...

Dude...TAKE your own advice...that was a RAMBLING load of hogwarts...

THANKS
--
Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter
http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/re...-stick/big.jpg
https://ari.jottit.com/ YOU want to be next...? Fuck with 'FOX then...
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.ph...9&postcount=25
Anybody with an internet connection, 5 grand, an iq above room
temperature and basic literacy can grow outstanding cannabis.

On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:15:13 -0500, rwalker <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>I have a wireless connection to my desktop, which is a DSL
>(comcast) connection without a VPN.

Not that it matters in this case, but just so you know, Comcast is a
cable provider. They don't sell DSL connections.

If you have Comcast, you have a cable connection.
If you have DSL, you didn't get it from Comcast.

On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:46:30 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:15:13 -0500, rwalker <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>I have a wireless connection to my desktop, which is a DSL
>>(comcast) connection without a VPN.
>
> Not that it matters in this case, but just so you know, Comcast is a
> cable provider. They don't sell DSL connections.
>
> If you have Comcast, you have a cable connection.
> If you have DSL, you didn't get it from Comcast.

Would you write to Comcast and explain that to them? They may not be
happy with you considering the enormous amount of expense that have
assumed advertising it
--
(E-Mail Removed)
http://heremypants.weebly.com/

heirophant wrote on [Thu, 3 Feb 2011 16:02:54 -0500]:
> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:46:30 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:15:13 -0500, rwalker <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I have a wireless connection to my desktop, which is a DSL
>>>(comcast) connection without a VPN.
>>
>> Not that it matters in this case, but just so you know, Comcast is a
>> cable provider. They don't sell DSL connections.
>>
>> If you have Comcast, you have a cable connection.
>> If you have DSL, you didn't get it from Comcast.
>
> Would you write to Comcast and explain that to them? They may not be
> happy with you considering the enormous amount of expense that have
> assumed advertising it

Where is Comcast advertising a DSL connection?

On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 21:11:53 +0000 (UTC), Justin <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>heirophant wrote on [Thu, 3 Feb 2011 16:02:54 -0500]:
>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:46:30 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:15:13 -0500, rwalker <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have a wireless connection to my desktop, which is a DSL
>>>>(comcast) connection without a VPN.
>>>
>>> Not that it matters in this case, but just so you know, Comcast is a
>>> cable provider. They don't sell DSL connections.
>>>
>>> If you have Comcast, you have a cable connection.
>>> If you have DSL, you didn't get it from Comcast.
>>
>> Would you write to Comcast and explain that to them? They may not be
>> happy with you considering the enormous amount of expense that have
>> assumed advertising it
>
>Where is Comcast advertising a DSL connection?

I'm guessing it's similar to the way Ford advertises Toyota vehicles,
as in, "we're much better than them, so buy ours instead of theirs."

To Mr. Tom Giarmo,

I see that your thread recieved a rude reply from DasFox.

I haven't see you post in these groups before so allow me to try
to explain DasFox:

DF is an insecure adolescent (12-14yo) who proclaims himself a
'tech'.

The reality is that he knows as much tech as a box of gerbils.

DF tries to cover up his ignorance with a constant smokescreen
of vulgarity & misdirection.

There are many knowledgeable people in this group, please accept
our apologies for DF.

// The management

In article <iif1i2$pg7$(E-Mail Removed)>, DasFox
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:53:07 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
>
> > X-MOTD: It is wiser to remain silent and let others ponder
> > your ignorance than to speak and remove all doubt
>
> <sniped ego manicial BS>...
>
> Dude...TAKE your own advice...that was a RAMBLING load of
> hogwarts...
>
> THANKS -- Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter
> http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/re...-stick/big.jpg
> https://ari.jottit.com/ YOU want to be next...? Fuck with 'FOX
> then...
> https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.ph...9&postcount=25
> Anybody with an internet connection, 5 grand, an iq above room
> temperature and basic literacy can grow outstanding cannabis.