Comments on: Competition in privacy policies finally starting

By: My Browser Information

My Browser Information — Thu, 13 May 2010 02:52:26 +0000

Interesting blog post, thanks for sharing it with us.

By: patrickholm

patrickholm — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 08:13:25 +0000

I have switched to http://www.vpnmessenger.com, because of this issue, this offers full IP address change

By: lance

lance — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:05:13 +0000

That is interesting. I know my team has already seen your post and is looking in to this. Each IM protocol needs to be handled by Total Net Shield in a different way. We will be coming out with a completely new version of our services soon which bypasses this issue.

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:53:42 +0000

I’ve noticed in IE Lan Settings in Proxy Settings; Advanced, under Servers, the “Socks” area is blank. Despite having checked “Use the same proxy server for all protocols.”, an IM service reports its connections are through normal or rather direct connections without a proxy. But when say a program called HTTP-Proxy is configured, the socks is sucessful and thus the IM service says so. Could this mean Total NetShield doesnt protect Live Messenger, except Yahoo..

By: lance

lance — Thu, 21 May 2009 13:39:35 +0000

We are doing a re-design on all of our products, which will include improvements to the encryption.

I think you might be confusing the public key lengths with symmetric key length. 128 bits is quite good for symmetric keys. 256 bits is the longest symmetric key used in standard encryption systems.

Public keys need to be much longer to get the same level of security. 1024 bits is the minimum. 4096 bits is much better but rarely used.

By: Rob

Rob — Mon, 04 May 2009 23:28:03 +0000

Would it be possible in the future to increase the Total Net Shield SSH tunneling from 128-bit (correct me if I’m wrong) to 384-bit or 512-bit?

By: lance

lance — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:51:24 +0000

G: It is good to be able to search without them keeping your IP, but you are vulnerable again as soon as you click on any of the search results and leave the search engine sight. That is why I think that privacy tools need to be separated from the sites that are being visited. It also eliminates some conflicts of interest.

Hydraulic Jacks: Thanks. Our web design team did the template internally.

By: G

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:28:41 +0000

I found a very private Search engine called ixquick.com They do not even save your IP address. and there is a SSL option available for sensitive searching.

By: hydraulic jacks

hydraulic jacks — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 12:15:48 +0000

It’s the first time I comment here and I must say you share genuine, and quality information for other bloggers! Great job.
p.s. You have an awesome template . Where have you got it from?

By: lance

lance — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:25:52 +0000

Rob, the full time SSL in the anonymous surfing is already 1024 bit RSA for the public key side. Were you thinking of a different part of the application?