Anonymity on the net is a topic that is discussed more and more frequently. We all know that many services on the net can be used anonymously. Or can they? The Internet is a giant data processing machine, and data about us users is getting more and more important. Anonymity on the net is to an increasing degree becoming a hallucination. Your access is logged, your surfing is tracked by cookies and the big data companies are even gathering info about your non-digital life. People are to an increasing degree doing things online thinking they are anonymous, but in reality they leave traces behind. These traces can lead back to their real identities, and in worst case put them in serious trouble.
I’m not going into the big picture about anonymity and privacy here. I’m going to present a tool that can be used to obfuscate your true identity. The anonymity network TOR. This is a tool and network that provides fairly strong protection against anyone who try to find out where a connection over the Internet really came from.
Let’s first debunk two myths.
So what’s the problem we are trying to tackle here? Practically all services on the net log all access. This log contains the so called IP-address that you are using, no matter if you have entered your real name at the site or not. The IP-address is a numeric code that is unique for all devices that connect to the net. Your ISP assigns one to your computer (or router, or modem) automatically when you connect to the net and you don’t have to worry about that. When you surf “anonymously” on a site, the site owner will know this IP-address but not who it has been assigned to. That information remains in the ISP’s log and is typically revealed only to authorities when investigating crimes. (Depends on local laws.) So you can under normal circumstances be traced back to your ISP, but the trace stops there.
So you have a certain level of privacy when surfing from home. But what about your computer at work? Here the company is in the ISP’s position. All traffic you generate can easily be traced to the company, but not to your workstation. The company’s administrators may be able to trace further, but that depends on how the internal network is managed.
Here’s some examples of situations where the default protection may be insufficient:
TOR is a privacy network that routes your traffic through a chain of several randomly picked servers before it goes to the site you are accessing. The traffic is encrypted all the way from your computer to the last relay machine. The protocol is also designed so that the relaying machines never know more than they need to know. The first server knows who you are but not what you are doing or what site you are accessing. The last server can see your traffic in plaintext and knows where it is going, but do not know who you are. None of this is however logged by the TOR relays as their purpose is to ensure your privacy. Even if someone with malicious intent would get hold of one of these servers, they would not be able to reveal your secret.
The simplest way to use TOR is to download and install the browser bundle. It consists of two parts that work together seamlessly. “Vidalia” is the control center that sets up the chain of secure servers and handles communication. “TorBrowser” is a Firefox-based web browser that is preconfigured to communicate through TOR. It makes it easy to start using TOR, no nerdy settings needed. A separate browser is also really necessary to guard your privacy as your normal browser is full of cookies that can identify you.
Installing TOR is easy, but that alone does not guard your identity. If you want to be truly anonymous at some certain site, you need to follow some additional guidelines.
Disclaimer. I hope you never truly need this kind of protection. But if you are in doubt, play safe and cover your tracks. Also keep in mind that it is tricky to be truly anonymous on the net. That is especially true if you are wanted by the authorities. Do not rely solely on this article if you are in a situation where your personal safety depends on anonymity, like for high-end whistle-blowers or opposition activists in non-democratic countries. What’s said above is a good start in these situations too, but you should get a more comprehensive understanding of on-line anonymity before putting yourself at risk.
Check what your surfing looks like from the site owners’ perspective. This site reveals the info. If using several connections, like home and work, check all of them. If you install TOR, visit the site from the TorBrowser to see how the address has changed.
PS. Another way to see the need for anonymity. The law protects our property against thieves, but still we use locks. The law protects our privacy on-line (to some extent), but most people do not enforce that in any way. TOR is for privacy what a lock is for theft. Why not play safe and lock it?
Photo by zigazou76 @ Flickr
Yet another high-profile vulnerability in the headlines, Shellshock. This one could be a big issue. The crap could really hit the fan big time if someone creates a worm that infects servers, and that is possible. But the situation seems to be brighter for us ordinary users. The affected component is the Unix/Linux command shell Bash, which is only used by nerdy admins. It is present in Macs as well, but they seem to be unaffected. Linux-based Android does not use Bash and Windows is a totally different world. So we ordinary users can relax and forget about this one. We are not affected. Right? WRONG! Where is your cloud content stored? What kind of software is used to protect your login and password, credit card number, your mail correspondence, your social media updates and all other personal info you store in web-based systems? Exactly. A significant part of that may be on systems that are vulnerable to Shellshock, and that makes you vulnerable. The best protection against vulnerabilities on your own devices is to make sure the automatic update services are enabled and working. That is like outsourcing the worries to professionals, they will create and distribute fixes when vulnerabilities are found. But what about the servers? You have no way to affect how they are managed, and you don’t even know if the services you use are affected. Is there anything you can do? Yes, but only indirectly. This issue is an excellent reminder of some very basic security principles. We have repeated them over and over, but they deserve to be repeated once again now. You can’t control how your web service providers manage their servers, but you can choose which providers you trust. Prefer services that are managed professionally. Remember that you always can, and should, demand more from services you pay for. Never reuse your password on different services. This will not prevent intrusions, but it will limit the damage when someone breaks into the system. You may still be hurt by a Shellshock-based intrusion even if you do this, but the risk should be small and the damage limited. Anyway, you know you have done your part, and its bad luck if an incident hurts you despite that. Safe surfing, Micke PS. The best way to evaluate a service provider’s security practices is to see how they deal with security incidents. It tells a lot about their attitude, which is crucial in all security work. An incident is bad, but a swift, accurate and open response is very good. Addition on September 30th. Contrary to what's stated above, Mac computers seem to be affected and Apple has released a patch. It's of course important to keep your device patched, but this does not really affect the main point of this article. Your cloud content is valuable and part of that may be on vulnerable servers.
On Tuesday Apple announced its latest iPhone models and a new piece of wearable technology some have been anxiously waiting for -- Apple Watch. TechRadar describes the latest innovation from Cupertino as "An iOS 8-friendly watch that plays nice with your iPhone." And if it works like your iPhone, you can expect that it will free of all mobile malware threats, unless you decide to "jailbreak" it. The latest F-Secure Labs Threat Report clears up one big misconception about iOS malware: It does exist, barely. In the first half of 2014, 295 new families and variants or mobile malware were discovered – 294 on Android and one on iOS. iPhone users can face phishing scams and Wi-Fi hijacking, which is why we created our Freedome VPN, but the threat of getting a bad app on your iOS device is almost non-existent. "Unlike Android, malware on iOS have so far only been effective against jailbroken devices, making the jailbreak tools created by various hacker outfits (and which usually work by exploiting undocumented bugs in the platform) of interest to security researchers," the report explains. The iOS threat that was found earlier this year, Unflod Baby Panda, was designed to listen to outgoing SSL connections in order to steal the device’s Apple ID and password details. Apple ID and passwords have been in the news recently as they may have played a role in a series of hacks of celebrity iCloud accounts that led to the posting of dozens of private photos. Our Mikko Hypponen explained in our latest Threat Report Webinar that many users have been using these accounts for years, mostly to purchase items in the iTunes store, without realizing how much data they were actually protecting. But Unflod Baby Panda is very unlikely to have played any role in the celebrity hacks, as "jailbreaking" a device is still very rare. Few users know about the hack that gives up the protection of the "closed garden" approach of the iOS app store, which has been incredibly successful in keeping malware off the platform, especially compared to the more open Android landscape. The official Play store has seen some infiltration by bad apps, adware and spamware -- as has the iOS app store to a far lesser degree -- but the majority of Android threats come from third-party marketplaces, which is why F-Secure Labs recommends you avoid them. The vast majority of iPhone owners have never had to worry about malware -- and if the Apple Watch employs the some tight restrictions on apps, the device will likely be free of security concerns. However, having a watch with the power of a smartphone attached to your body nearly twenty-four hours a day promises to introduce privacy questions few have ever considered.
Everybody probably agree that the net has developed a discussion culture very different from what we are used to in real life. The used adjectives vary form inspiring, free and unrestricted to crazy, sick and shocking. The (apparent) anonymity when discussing on-line leads to more open and frank opinions, which is both good and bad. It becomes especially bad when it turns into libel and hate speech. What do you think about this? Read on and let us know in the poll below. We do have laws to protect us against defamation. But the police still has a very varying ability to deal with crimes on the net. And the global nature of Internet makes investigations harder. Most cases are international, at least here in Europe where we to a large extent rely on US-based services. This is in the headlines right now here in Finland because of a recent case. The original coverage is in Finnish so I will give you a short summary in English. A journalist named Sari Helin blogged about equal rights for sexual minorities, and how children are very natural and doesn’t react anyway if a friend has two mothers, for example. This is a sensitive topic and, hardly surprising, she got a lot of negative feedback. Part of the feedback was clear defamation. Calling her a whore, among other nasty things. She considered it for a while and finally decided to report the case to the police, mainly because of Facebook comments. This is where the really interesting part begins. Recently the prosecutor released the decision about the case. They simply decided to drop it and not even try to investigate. The reason? Facebook is in US and it would be too much work contacting the authorities over there for this rather small crime. A separately interviewed police officer also stated that many of the requests that are sent abroad remain unanswered, probably for the same reason. This reflects the situation in Finland, but I guess there are a lot of other countries where the same could have happened. Is this OK? The resourcing argument is understandable. The authorities have plenty of more severe crimes to deal with. But accepting this means that law and reality drift even further apart. Something is illegal but everybody knows you will get away with the crime. That’s not good. Should we increase resourcing and work hard to make international investigations smoother? That’s really the only way to make the current laws enforceable. The other possible path is to alter our mindset about Internet discussions. If I write something pro-gay on the net, I know there’s a lot of people who dislike it and think bad things about me. Does it really change anything if some of these people write down their thoughts and comment on my writings? No, not really. But most people still feel insulted in cases like this. I think we slowly are getting used to the different discussion climate on the net. We realize that some kinds of writing will get negative feedback. We are prepared for that and can ignore libel without factual content. We value feedback from reputable persons, and anonymous submissions naturally have less significance. Pure emotional venting without factual content can just be ignored and is more shameful for the writer than for the object. Well, we are still far from that mindset, even if we are moving towards it. But which way should we go? Should we work hard to enforce the current law and prosecute anonymous defamers? Or should we adopt our mindset to the new discussion culture? The world is never black & white and there will naturally be development on both these fronts. But in which direction would you steer the development if you could decide? Now you have to pick the one you think is more important. [polldaddy poll=8293148] Looking forward to see what you think. The poll will be open for a while and is closed when we have enough data. Safe surfing, Micke