MultiProxy public forum
| From | Message |
Mithridates
1/19/2001
18:11:16 |
 Subject: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
204.196.123.2--->
Message:
I have been monitoring people on this board speak about the need for better anonymous surfing options for a while now. I will attempt to provide a better alternative than simply surfing through one "non-transparent" HTTP proxy. I am assuming that all who will use the proceeding methods outlined are using a Windows OS.
Surfing through 3 or 4 anonymous HTTP proxies does indeed provide adequate security for most average everyday web activities, however, the need for better security may indeed arise for the enlightened top 1% of web users. There are a couple of methods for chaining HTTP proxies, but to do so is usually futile if your activities MUST be kept anonymous. If someone really wanted to spend the time to trace you through a chain of HTTP proxies, it would not be difficult. Most proxies that utilize port 80, 8080 etc.. do keep log files of all activity on the server, so therefore even though the website you are visiting may not know who you are, the proxy administrator does. The best way to overcome this problem is to not use HTTP proxies at all, but rather use socks located on port 1080.
To utilize the socks method, one must first find the proxies (usually this means using a proxy hunting utility.) One should search on port 23 for what is known as a wingate server. Wingates are known to be one of the best methods for anonymity because they are ran on a windows platfrom, usually from a Joe or Jill Sixpack's living room. Many individuals who run them simply do not keep log files, nor do they care to. This is in contrast to HTTP proxies which can and will watch your every move, and if you aggravate them enough with illegal activity, they will turn in your real IP address to the right people.
The wingates that do keep and archive logs should be of little concern if you chain 4 or 5 of them together. Statistically it is very likely that at least one of the wingate's will not be logging, therefore making a trace very costly and next to impossible.
To use this method, one must first have a list of working proxies operating on port 23. Then one must download a prog for tunneling all Winsock internet activity through a socks proxy. SocksCap is perfect and very reliable for this task. With Sockscap, you can set it to tunnel any regular HTTP, FTP, GOPHER or other internet protocols to work utilizing a socks connection on port 1080. Once you have socksCap installed, simply program it to open IE, Netscape or Opera with a socks proxy (remember, after you find a wingate on port 23, you need to use it on port 1080, not port 23!) Then once you have the browser open, you may begin surfing (through one wingate) or you may use HTTP proxies with the socks proxy.
The way to string several socks proxies is to download a utility called "SocksChain" and use it with SocksCap. This program is self-explanitory and you should be able to string up to 13 proxies together with it.
I hope this helps a few of you who thought chaining was impossible. Remember, if you want to do the real stuff, get a copy of Linux.
It is unlikely that anyone will ever need to use these methods for simply surfing the internet. I don't even use them myself for most of my HTTP activity. It is usually overkill. Socks proxies come in most handy when doing other things not related to merely surfing porn or warez sites. Remember, it is possible for a wingate owner to log files, its just that wingate's usually aren't set up to do so. If a wingate operator gets a call from the authorities complaining about how they have traced hack attempts to the wingate owner, that person will start logging and in all probobility, turn you in! Be crafty and use your head.
P.S., if you are still confused about what I said, or if you simply cannot figure it out, then you do not deserve to use the aforementioned methods of anonymous internet surfing. A hacker wants to figure out problems for himself. Happy hunting!
|
DubYa
1/20/2001
23:12:30 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
195.70.174.20--->
Message:
Dear Mithy,
Have a heart, willya?
Some of us are liberals who need everything spoon fed to us.
We think were doing great when, as script kiddies, we run Multiproxy for a day or two without getting arrested.
Remember, Floriduh liberals can't even work a paper punch ballot, let alone be expected to program a VCR!!
And you expect us to figure out LINUX????!!!! Get real.
My biggest achievement in life has been cutting and pasting George W's quotes to this forum to put down those heartless capitalistic swine whenever they write something that goes over my head. I figure that by showing them that W talks as clumsy as us liberals think, they will realize how stupid freedom is and start worshipping Big Government, just like us in the master race.
|
DubYa
1/20/2001
23:31:07 | Re: DubYa
63.124.140.16--->
Message:
George W. Bush responding to Linda Chavez controversy:
"I haven't had the chance to ask the questioners the question they've been questioning."
Hail to the thief!
|
yeah
1/21/2001
00:00:19 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
203.101.37.249--->
Message:
Mithridates explanation for proxy tunnelling seamed quite transparent compared with the W.Bush quote, what...?
"I haven't had the chance to ask the questioners the question they've been questioning."
The quote had me stumped for 3minutes:)
|
216.115.108.243
1/21/2001
00:26:32 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
4.54.200.114--->
Message:
It was only a matter of time, now the linuxconf forum will form, netbios lights will be flashing and nmap questions will run more rampant than this rant.
Xwindows doesn't run multiproxy btw, u have to learn a little Johan Sebastion Hach in C++ minor for that.
Anyone for a little superscan 3.0 in the deep end?
Take off your Winsocks. hehe
Quidvis recte factum, Quamvis humile praeclaerum.
Wopida Iceciya Mithridates.
101
|
Mithridates
1/21/2001
01:36:05 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
216.168.96.25--->
Message:
How about translating the latin?
|
\\172.145.122.36
1/21/2001
02:13:03 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
4.54.200.114--->
Message:
That which is rightly done, however humble is noble:)
Many thanks* Mithridates.
*P.S. not all of it is Latin,
and no it's not Navaho code talk, but close.
|
freieRede
1/21/2001
21:34:11 | RE: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
209.167.160.150--->
Message:
xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx = Stierscheiße!
Können Sie das im Latein sagen?
|
poe
1/21/2001
21:49:07 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
208.230.252.2--->
Message:
You said the socks proxy is unlikely to log files... but not impossible. You can get caught that way too. But you are right, 'statisticaly' it is the safest way. Nice post very informative.
|
S
1/21/2001
22:28:51 | RE: Chaining Socks Proxies For HTTP use
203.77.126.62--->
Message:
Why Linux?
And now for DubYa: HAIL! Er, I mean . . . HEIL!
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|
|
