Re: Anonymizer employees need killing
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 01:32:43AM -0500, An Metet wrote:
"To download the online picture, he used the Anonymizer.com service, believing the companys privacy policy would protect him. Not so. Dutch
The article got it wrong. He used Surfola. They've since corrected it.
On Mar 26, 2004, at 9:13, petard wrote:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 01:32:43AM -0500, An Metet wrote:
"To download the online picture, he used the Anonymizer.com service, believing the companys privacy policy would protect him. Not so. Dutch
The article got it wrong. He used Surfola. They've since corrected it.
Of course, anyone trusting their lives & liberty to these commercial ip addx obfuscators are incredibly stupid anyway. Anonymizer states plainly that they store usage logs "usually for 48 hours" and will use them to combat spam or other "abuses of netiquette". Even if they didn't state it, how can you stake your life on them not doing so? Any company that /can/ comply with a court order to reveal your identity, probably won't need a court order to be convinced to do so. Just as a point of curiosity (because I think it's irrelevant, for the reason above), An Metet, how are you sure there was no subpoena or court order involved? --bgt
participants (2)
-
bgt -
petard