Re: Ah Yes.... in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19784859 en Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:59:12 EDT Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:59:12 EDT Re: Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19784859 elvey : Exactly.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19784859 Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:59:17 EDT Re: Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411958 anon : No organizations are sniffing packets to catch file sharers. Encryption is to get around traffic shaping, nothing else. Your IP is just as visible as always.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411958 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:10:25 EDT Re: Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411782 Skippy25 : I don't want to rain on anyone's parade here, but the whole point in using encryption is to hide what is being transmitted: Legal or Not.

Obviously when they start taking measures to limit P2P and encryptions is increased as a result it is a pretty good bet that it is the P2P people that have begun encrypting to "hide" their data and get around the limits.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411782 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:39:45 EDT Re: Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411068 Rexter : That's my motto. If you don't want to get strip searched, go naked. :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411068 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:17:41 EDT oops http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411065 Rexter : Duplicate post.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411065 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:17:19 EDT Re: Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19409821 karlmarx : Agreed, there is nothing wrong with encrypting your traffic. If you have nothing to hide, why do you wear clothes? Sure, I have an idea what's behind your clothes, but it's none of my damn business.

Encrypting traffic is like sending a letter instead of a postcard. I don't know about you, but I would never send a bank deposit on a postcard, I would put it in an envelope. All YOU know, is that I'm sending something, not WHAT I am sending? Why? Because it's none of your f'ing business WHAT I am sending. If I want to subscribe to 'barely 18', then I get it in a brown wrapper. No-one knows what's in the brown wrapper except ME and the person who sent it to me. Why should internet traffic be anything different? When companies use something like sandvine, they are effectively telling the post office to stamp 'return to sender', when I am expecting something in the mail. If the USPS started doing that crap, there would be holy hell to pay. Why is it any different when an ISP does the same thing? It's NOT.

Bottom line, it's no-ones business WHAT I am using the internet for.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19409821 Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:37:17 EDT Re: Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19408413 MrMoody : Yes, this logic is based on the wrong assumption that law enforcement are the only ones we need to conceal anything from.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19408413 Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:33:17 EDT Ah Yes.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19407989 travelguy :
When encryption is used to cloak torrent traffic it tends to be to hide something, and attracts greater attention for that reason.


Ah yes... The old "If you don't have anything to hide, you shouldn't be encrypting" argument. Seems like that argument was pretty much destroyed back in the early PGP days. Ask the person trying to make that argument if they send all their personal correspondence on postcards or with the envelope unsealed...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19407989 Thu, 08 Nov 2007 17:17:53 EDT