Piracy Starter Pack

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context

122 comments

...specifics about WHY IP addresses and multi-hop don't matter.
...you would have removed 1 identifier...
So it can matter.
- barely, efectively meaningless
  
  Yeah, multi-hop is pointless for tracking. The logic to it is crazy too. People think VPNs make them anonymous (they don't), but they also think multi-hop makes them MORE anonymous. So anonymity is kind of an absolute concept. Either you are or you are not anonymous. You can't be more anonymous than anonymous. There is no +1.
  
  Yeah, multi-hop is pointless for tracking.
  The logic to it is crazy too. People think VPNs make them anonymous (they don't), but they also think multi-hop makes them MORE anonymous.
  Whether multi-hop matters to tracking is far and away a different discussion than whether multi-hop "makes you anonymous".
  I too disagree with the original comment, but also believe the pendulum swung too far the other direction in your replies.
  Situations differ. Threat models differ. More hops can, from direct personal experience, make the difference in tracking. Your claim of "...multi-hop is pointless for tracking." has too broad of a scope to be correct.
  
  What specifically about multi-hop makes you think it improves your security? Be specific. What is your "direct personal experience"?
  
  What specifically about multi-hop makes you think it improves your security?
  I haven't mentioned security.
  
  if your security breaks, so does your privacy alongside it
  
  I'm sorry, that isn't evidence.
  
  I'm unsure what evidence you are referring to.
- So it can matter.
  Remember to read the rest of that sentence:
  1 identifier out of a hundred (one that isn't really used anyway given SSAI is so popular).
  So, no. Not really.
  
  Remember to read the rest of that sentence:
  It doesn't change the contradiction.
  
  You almost had the rest of the sentence there:
  one that isn't really used anyway given SSAI is so popular
  
  You almost had the rest of the sentence there:
  That doesn't change the contradiction.
  
  You're trying to argue without evidence (like I had provided). To summarize these exchange so far its:
  You giving some marketing crap you read from a VPN provider site on their multi-hop service.
  Someone pointing out that it is incorrect with evidence.
  You get mad and basically come back with "Nuh-uh!"
  Is there some evidence you'd like to provide or is it going to be another "nuh-uh!"?
  
  You giving some marketing crap you read from a VPN provider site on their multi-hop service.
  I'm sorry, but that isn't correct.
  
  I'm sorry, but that isn't evidence.
  
  I'm unsure what evidence you are referring to.
  
  Threat models differ. More hops can, from direct personal experience, make the difference in tracking
  Evidence, or it isn't true.
  
  Evidence, or it isn't true.
  Unrelated, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
  Anyways, your own statement:
  Adtech relies on the OpenRTB 2.5/2.6 spec for tracking, you would have removed 1 identifier out of a hundred (one that isn't really used anyway given SSAI is so popular).
  Removing an identifier that is used. (1/100 = matters, "isn't really used" != unused). This contradicts your other statements:
  Yeah, multi-hop is pointless for tracking.
  ...IP addresses and multi-hop don't matter...
  Broad statements that don't take into consideration the threat model of other users. Servers you connect to might not be using source IP in any way to track. You might be leaking so many other identifiers, that its completely useless to worry about multi-hop. But this is not true for everyone in every situation.
  If its worth anything to you, the Tor Project seems to think multi-hop and IP addresses matter.

122 comments