NationStates Jolt Archive

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blog/editors_corner/article/570/

Microsoft officials have confirmed that the company is to introduce a way for users to surf the Web anonymously.
As part of the upcoming Internet Explorer 8 release, Microsoft is incorporating 'inPrivate' - a mode that will not record visits to the user's history and will not allow sites to place cookies on the user's system. Apple currently offers a similar service with its Safari browser.

Many industry pundits haven't wasted any time in pointing out one of the most obvious uses of the feature, nicknaming it 'porn mode,' highlighting the ability to view adult sites without leaving a trail for employers or family members to follow.

There have also been questions raised over the helpfulness of the latest release, which could make it harder for police to track Internet users that are viewing harmful or illegal websites.

On a recent posting to the official IE blog though, Microsoft officials put forward some more innocent uses of the new release:

"Have you ever wanted to take your web browsing 'off the record'? Perhaps you're using someone else's computer and you don't want them to know which sites you visited. Maybe you need to buy a gift for a loved one without ruining the surprise. Maybe you're at an Internet kiosk and don't want the next person using it to know at which website you bank."

Obviously the new Internet Explorer will have pros and cons but my question to you is: Should the Internet be completely private or should our movements be traceable?

So, could this enable people to look at child porn, or visit terrorist websites? What are your thoughts on this?

So, could this enable people to look at child porn, or visit terrorist websites? What are your thoughts on this?Business as usual, save Microsoft is getting some of the business:
Apple currently offers a similar service with its Safari browser.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blog/editors_corner/article/570/



So, could this enable people to look at child porn, or visit terrorist websites? What are your thoughts on this?

Not any more then you have the ability to now ... there are plenty of alternative browsers that do not store a lot of personal information or there are plenty of ways of clearing that information

The trick is that it still does not reduce the ability of investigators from tracking you from the OTHER side of the wire

So, could this enable people to look at child porn, or visit terrorist websites? What are your thoughts on this?

an unfounded concern. While your computer might not record what websites you visit, your ISP does.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blog/editors_corner/article/570/



So, could this enable people to look at child porn, or visit terrorist websites? What are your thoughts on this?

I welcome this. The onus should not be stopping people from looking at child porn or terrorist websites, it should be put on shutting them down. The distributor is a much more serious offender at any rate.

an unfounded concern. While your computer might not record what websites you visit, your ISP does.

They tend to not record that information (not that they could not)... it is USUALLY someone detecting a request on the far side then making your ISP tell them who had the IP address they detected the request from.

They may not record the traffic but they do record who has what IP address (if even simply for auditing and to reduce conflicts)

You could already do this in IE6 and IE7 - you just had to know how (and it isn't hard).

And this is assuming Microsoft isn't secretly tracking the browsing history through the program, keeping it ready for in case Homeland Security comes knocking.

You could already do this in IE6 and IE7 - you just had to know how (and it isn't hard).

I bet you would miss a few locations ... a users history is stored in some locations that are a bit non standard sometimes.

Sure you can clear cookies and history but there are a few more places it puts it that are much harder to clear without whipping everything out and giving it away

I feel like if somebody wanted to visit child porn sites or terrorist web pages without it being known, they could already do it.

So this just means horny thirteen year olds can go on their parents computers and look at porn without anybody knowing.

Can't you basically do this in Firefox already by clearing all private data?

And this is assuming Microsoft isn't secretly tracking the browsing history through the program, keeping it ready for in case Homeland Security comes knocking.
I had thought of that. Just because Microsoft says they're doing something doesn't mean they are.
I bet you would miss a few locations ... a users history is stored in some locations that are a bit non standard sometimes.

Sure you can clear cookies and history but there are a few more places it puts it that are much harder to clear without whipping everything out and giving it away
Cookies and History are the easy parts (really, you should know how to edit your history selectively so it's not obvious you emptied it). The cache is where the real evidence lies.

I had thought of that. Just because Microsoft says they're doing something doesn't mean they are.

Cookies and History are the easy parts (really, you should know how to edit your history selectively so it's not obvious you emptied it). The cache is where the real evidence lies.

I do know ... but I was also not talking about cache, there are up to 3 .dat (normally 2) files that store whole or parts of your history and cookie history despite any clearing of the front end one in the browser

These .dat files are almost impossible to edit without simply blowing away the entire file which usually makes it pretty obvious to anyone looking.

And this is assuming Microsoft isn't secretly tracking the browsing history through the program, keeping it ready for in case Homeland Security comes knocking.I had thought of that. Just because Microsoft says they're doing something doesn't mean they are.
I see a lot of this sort of commentary all over the Internet, and it confuses me a little. What kind of tracking are you talking about? Records of the sites you've visited, files you've downloaded and applications you've run are already kept by Windows to various degrees but they can be removed if you're the sort of person who's paranoid that way.

I have no real worries about what Microsoft does in this vein. The distrust and vitriol that they provoke in parts of the IT community mean that all of their applications, operating systems or other, are subjected to endless and extreme levels of scrutiny by the "OMGMicro$haftARETEHEBIL" brigade, who are desperate to find evidence of the evil that they believe is being done to them. As a consequence, any potentially privacy violating characteristics of Windows that are discovered get shouted from the rooftops early and often.

Cookies and History are the easy parts (really, you should know how to edit your history selectively so it's not obvious you emptied it). The cache is where the real evidence lies.
And all of the caches within Windows can be deleted, too, if you're care to.

---

As far as the article in the OP goes, I see nothing being reported there that's not already possible in Safari, Opera, Firefox or earlier versions of IE. I'm put in mind of an advert I remember from the late 70s, where a TV was being talked up because the 'On' and 'Off' functions were called by separate buttons, and I'm sitting here trying to work out why this story was even written.

is there an argument for the position that microsoft MUST keep track of what sites you are visiting? that sites MUST be able to put cookies on your computer?

if not, then it doesnt matter why you dont want them to keep track of you.

Damn. Wish I had had that "porn mode" back when I was a teenager. Would have made my life much easier covering my tracks.

Everyone knows teenagers look at porn on the web already. Most learn how to cover their tracks and/or their parents are too computer illiterate to figure out what's going on.

This brings nothing new, really. We all know internet is for porn anyway.

I see a lot of this sort of commentary all over the Internet, and it confuses me a little. What kind of tracking are you talking about? Records of the sites you've visited, files you've downloaded and applications you've run are already kept by Windows to various degrees but they can be removed if you're the sort of person who's paranoid that way.

I have no real worries about what Microsoft does in this vein. The distrust and vitriol that they provoke in parts of the IT community mean that all of their applications, operating systems or other, are subjected to endless and extreme levels of scrutiny by the "OMGMicro$haftARETEHEBIL" brigade, who are desperate to find evidence of the evil that they believe is being done to them. As a consequence, any potentially privacy violating characteristics of Windows that are discovered get shouted from the rooftops early and often.


And all of the caches within Windows can be deleted, too, if you're care to.

---

As far as the article in the OP goes, I see nothing being reported there that's not already possible in Safari, Opera, Firefox or earlier versions of IE. I'm put in mind of an advert I remember from the late 70s, where a TV was being talked up because the 'On' and 'Off' functions were called by separate buttons, and I'm sitting here trying to work out why this story was even written.

I would agree (as my first post states) but in the end to clear all traces of browsing activity it is sometimes a pain in the ass (example index.dat files locked when logged in so user swapping)

I agree it is a so what sort of proposition by and large ,but it removes enough of the annoyances of clearing things out completely in IE that it could be handy (along with all the other browsers that do it)

Damn. Wish I had had that "porn mode" back when I was a teenager. Would have made my life much easier covering my tracks.

Everyone knows teenagers look at porn on the web already. Most learn how to cover their tracks and/or their parents are too computer illiterate to figure out what's going on.

This brings nothing new, really. We all know internet is for porn anyway.
I in some ways feel sorry for my future kids :)

I in some ways feel sorry for my future kids :)

Why? Everyone does it. I don't think I know a single guy my age who hasn't sneaked on the computer to watch some porn before being legally able to. Didn't make any of us turn into monsters or scar us for life.

Why? Everyone does it. I don't think I know a single guy my age who hasn't sneaked on the computer to watch some porn before being legally able to. Didn't make any of us turn into monsters or scar us for life.

No meant more for having a network/server administrator for a parent ... way less easy to get away with things if I choose not to allow it to happen.

I wonder how PJ will be affected by this...

I need Firefox to get one of these...:D

Every competing browser, for the past several years, has had more advanced privacy measures. 7-8 years ago, I was using a lightweight zero record browser called OffByOne and a tabbed browser (Opera).

At this point, Internet Explorer has been losing market share for a while. Like with tabbed browsing, IE is simply behind the rest of the market in terms of user privacy management and finally trying to catch up in order to slow the steady loss of browser share.

There is a God, pr0n for all :D

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blog/editors_corner/article/570/



So, could this enable people to look at child porn, or visit terrorist websites? What are your thoughts on this?
Why not take down and prosecute the owners of illegal sites rather than worry about having Big Brother on everyone's hard drive?

Why not take down and prosecute the owners of illegal sites rather than worry about having Big Brother on everyone's hard drive?

There really isn't such thing as a child porn site. Most illegal material is shared between individual computers, which can be done anonymously.

If only I had this 5 years ago...*sigh*...

Uhu... your ISP will still record this stuff. All this does is basically delete your history and temp 'net files as you get them...

There really isn't such thing as a child porn site. Most illegal material is shared between individual computers, which can be done anonymously.
That's torrents and emule, it's not related to browsers.
BTW, I could easily find a few links to CP sites, but that's illegal and against the rules - so if you're interested, use google w/o safesearch and you'll discover there is such a thing as a CP site, thousands of them at the very least, paid and "free" (trojan-planting, likely).


And anyway, the only real culprits are child porn producers. The consumers are sick, they need medical correction, their prosecution is merely attacking the symptoms.

Uhu... your ISP will still record this stuff. All this does is basically delete your history and temp 'net files as you get them...
This is intended to protect you against parents and employers, not the man.

However, there's already a number of specialized high-privacy browsers and even specialized porn browsers (from the popular and amateurish Lolifox - yes, it is for what you think - to much more obscure ones).

If it's implemented so it's easy to use, this is a good thing. The ickiest thing about using a public computer is accidentally finding out about the previous user's tastes in porn. (Aggressive autocomplete features make such knowledge harder to avoid than before.) With an easy-to-use private mode, at least you'll know that if you see some kinky history that the previous user is a passive-aggressive douchebag who wants you to know about his porn habits, and you can feel free to be righteously pissed off. Right now, it's confusing: should you let your uncle know that you're aware of his fetish and that he should clear the cache, or keep silent and pray grandma doesn't see anything when she checks her email?

In short, inPrivate is like curtains; a great option for people who don't want their neighbor to know about their nude baking habits, but don't want to go to the bother of pinning butcher paper over the front windows.

Like with tabbed browsing, IE is simply behind the rest of the market.
Except tabbed browsing sucks.

Except tabbed browsing sucks.

Multitasking too, you should switch to MS-DOS.

Multitasking too, you should switch to MS-DOS.

I LOVE MS-DOS! :p

I LOVE MS-DOS! :p

*nods* Windows 3.1 was the best version of Windows MS released.

Multitasking too, you should switch to MS-DOS.

I can multi task better without the tabbed browsing.

*nods* Windows 3.1 was the best version of Windows MS released.

Original 3.1 did not have Ethernet capability which was a major failure on their part. It also had horrible CPU management (at the time did not matter in reference to the applications of the time) but just because they lucked out does not make it a good product

For me XP pro Server2000 and Server2003 have been solid products that I have extensive experience with

Uhu... your ISP will still record this stuff. All this does is basically delete your history and temp 'net files as you get them...

No they wont ... like I said they could if they chose, possibly with warrant but they do not record this sort of information as Standard Operating procedure

Multitasking too, you should switch to MS-DOS.

A friend of mine has a 468DX laptop with DOS 6.22 on it, he bought it on eBay for the express purpose of playing games like X-COM. The man is a hero.

A friend of mine has a 468DX laptop with DOS 6.22 on it, he bought it on eBay for the express purpose of playing games like X-COM. The man is a hero.

I just emulated or used apps like dosbox myself ...

I just emulated or used apps like dosbox myself ...

He bought it a few years ago when emulators and dosbox still had trouble with some older games.

He bought it a few years ago when emulators and dosbox still had trouble with some older games.

Hmmm been using it for years and years ... either way no big deal sometimes cool to just own practically collectors stuff like that

These .dat files are almost impossible to edit without simply blowing away the entire file which usually makes it pretty obvious to anyone looking.

Which is why creating a safe cache of bland sites and replacing the incriminating one with them is recommended. Even better if you can mess with the time stamps. *nods*

Which is why creating a safe cache of bland sites and replacing the incriminating one with them is recommended. Even better if you can mess with the time stamps. *nods*

Its fairly easy to parse out the .dat to something human readable but not so much to put it into .dat form there is a lot of data that does not come out the first direction

So modifying the timestamps almost impossible to do and get it BACK to .dat form.

Either way, more work then never having it stored in the first place even if theoretically possible. It may not be the biggest feature when you consider other browsers but it is hardly negligible if you are forced to use IE (like I am) and if you care about such tracking on your computer (Im not)

firstly this comes form a UK news paper. is there any confirmation on a microsoft web site. Im sure they would advertize a product.

I doubt they would just because of the chance of being sued. They will increase security which enables child porn surfers but they arnt going to run an add saying "buy this if you like watching porn and dont want to be caught by the authorities."

They main reason they will increase security is to protect company and personal privacy. It is an ongoing battle on the internet that will never end.

I welcome this. The onus should not be stopping people from looking at child porn or terrorist websites, it should be put on shutting them down. The distributor is a much more serious offender at any rate.

^this.

Besides, it puts a thorn in the side of websites who want to shove advertising down your throat by looking at your cookies or recording your IP. That tickles me.

yay,now i can watch porn without anynone knowing.(not that i watch it)

yay,now i can watch porn without anynone knowing.(not that i watch it)
You still can. It's called going to an adult store, and paying cash for a DVD. ;)

You still can. It's called going to an adult store, and paying cash for a DVD. ;)But then the cashier will know... unless you play Wilhelm Tell for keeps with them.

You still can. It's called going to an adult store, and paying cash for a DVD. ;)

there's the one thing,that stops me from doing that.i'm thirteen.so my age pretty much closes that option.

BTW, is it legal for a 13 y.o. to watch CP with 13-15 y.o. "actors"?

BTW, is it legal for a 13 y.o. to watch CP with 13-15 y.o. "actors"?

how did you come up with that question?

^this.

Besides, it puts a thorn in the side of websites who want to shove advertising down your throat by looking at your cookies or recording your IP. That tickles me.

How will this stop a webserver from recording your IP?

BTW, is it legal for a 13 y.o. to watch CP with 13-15 y.o. "actors"?For the 13 year old or for their guardians?

BTW, is it legal for a 13 y.o. to watch CP with 13-15 y.o. "actors"?

posession of child pornography is a crime, regardless of the age of the possessor.

how did you come up with that question?
Well, that's what "internet privacy" is often for.


For the 13 year old or for their guardians?
The former. After all, AFAIK it's not a crime for a 13 y.o. to watch porn.


posession of child pornography is a crime, regardless of the age of the possessor.
That puts an interesting question of having CP of themselves... Amateur production, i.e. photos.

posession of child pornography is a crime, regardless of the age of the possessor.Not in Germany. Age is quite decisive here.
The former. After all, AFAIK it's not a crime for a 13 y.o. to watch porn.Depends on your location. It's not a crime for 13 year olds to watch child porn for the same reason it's not a crime for 13 year olds to rape, murder, or pillage. Until an individual turns 14, they are considered incapable of comitting crimes or signing (limited) contracts, in Germany.

Not in Germany. Age is quite decisive here.

Let me clarify. There is no age exception in the statute. There may be general age principles in application (for example, can't be tried as an adult if you're under 14 etc.) but that is a matte rof punishment, not criminality.

The former. After all, AFAIK it's not a crime for a 13 y.o. to watch porn.

But it might be a crime to let them watch it. Besides, child porn is another story all together.

Not in Germany. Age is quite decisive here.Let me clarify. There is no age exception in the statute. There may be general age principles in application (for example, can't be tried as an adult if you're under 14 etc.) but that is a matte rof punishment, not criminality.No, this is actually a matter of criminality in this case.

No, this is actually a matter of criminality in this case.

hrm, interesting. To my knowledge there's no age exception for criminality in the states, but I could be wrong. My general impression is there is no exception.

It'd be awesome if Microsoft did actually call it "porn mode", and when initiated it would automatically start playing stereotypical old-style porno film seedy backing music at full volume, which couldn't be turned off.

hrm, interesting. To my knowledge there's no age exception for criminality in the states, but I could be wrong. My general impression is there is no exception.I'd assume that as well. Though what relevance that would have on Germany eludes me =P