Page 3 of 3

Re: Alert of filtered website

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:18 am
by Tom T.
GµårÐïåñ wrote: Some freedom that you have to work to get is better than having NONE at all I guess.
"The price of freedom (or "liberty") is eternal vigilance" -- attributed to several authors, in various wording. Add "effort" to "vigilance".
Key to beating the "filter" is to not have a domain that is obviously named with terms identifying it as a proxy and using servers that ideally IP only with no real recursive DNS entries. Or at least misleading entries that makes them look benign.
You mean, like www.disney.com?
in CHINA, I have heard they can end up getting the firing squad for some instances but I think they have to consider it extreme political opposition even then.
In any totalitarian environment, anyone can be killed on a whim, without trial, grounds, or public knowledge.
GµårÐïåñ wrote:
Tom T. wrote:My full moral support to those who labor to bring freedom of speech, press, and Internet to those who don't have it.
I figure, if being a hacker is good for anything, it has to be now. I can't remember who said it, I will rely on your wealth of knowledge to provide the citation, but basically for evil to triumph, it takes good men doing nothing (heavily paraphrased of course).
I knew that one off the top of my head, without even having to look it up. Edmund Burke:

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
GµårÐïåñ wrote:so even if you are in the right for suppressing them, you are in the wrong for doing it without transparency.
Suppression of opposing viewpoints is never in the right, sorry - I won't compromise on that. If the American Nazi Party wants to dress up in Halloween costumes and march through Skokie, Illinois, let them -- so long as they commit no actual criminal acts. Then everyone can see what idiots they are. Look up that case in Wikipedia, know that the neo-Nazis were represented by a Jewish lawyer from the ACLU, defending the free speech rights of the Nazis, and that the ACLU lost a ton of members for supporting the free speech rights of people with whose views they -- and I -- so strongly disagree. If you can shut anyone up, you can shut everyone up.
... I mean free speech is a great "concept" but in practice it doesn't exist and has been mitigated by "chill speech" and fear of being labeled, so basically censorship without outright doing it.
Therefore, good men (and women) have to keep doing something, as Mr. Burke so wisely pointed out. Namely, fighting every intrusion and suppression.

Re: Alert of filtered website

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:27 am
by GµårÐïåñ
You got it buddy. Ditto on all of it.

Re: Alert of filtered website

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:38 am
by Tom T.
GµårÐïåñ wrote:
Saad wrote:i tested a Sock 5 Proxy. facebook.com not opens, and for other filtered websites loads filter message. Proxy can't open filtered websites. unfiltered websites opens.
Interesting, that means they likely have that proxy on the list. Ok, here it goes, I will send you the workaround through PM as to preserve its integrity and you can try it. @TOM, I will include you just so you know how it is done.
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if the default blocking would allow Saad to use hush.com ? Prevents reading the packets, if the Java encryption applet is loaded, for encryption before hitting the wire.

@ Saad:
موفقیت خوب

صلح می به تمام یک روزی می آید

Re: Alert of filtered website

Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:06 pm
by GµårÐïåñ
Chances are good that yes, hush would be blocked. If not outright on its own, certainly with the java encryption invocation. Although given the servers are located in the UK space, chances are lower they would be targeted directly, although given the BBC signals being jammed off/on, they might, who knows.

Re: Alert of filtered website

Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 1:59 am
by Tom T.
GµårÐïåñ wrote:... Although given the servers are located in the UK space, chances are lower they would be targeted directly, although given the BBC signals being jammed off/on, they might, who knows.
Hush was located in Canada, which might not be so affected. It minds its own business, mostly, and so hasn't had the terrorist attacks that the UK has. So maybe they wouldn't block Canada.

IIRC, they were going to relocate to Anguila (Caribbean), either the company, or the servers, or both, to get away from US/Canadian LE "mutual aid" pacts. Might be even better for OP and a lot of others.