Web Security for the Masses?

pixie writes: "A new press release from Zero Knowledge announces a new service that offers protection against invasive tracking and other security threats called WebSecure. The basic difference between this service and the Freedom Network is, that instead of bouncing the request to a number of different servers to obfuscate the original request, WebSecure makes a single pass through servers at Zero-Knowledge." This Internet Explorer-only, not-really-private-at-all service is a big step down from the services they used to provide.

crap ...

[NWT]

This Internet Explorer-only, not-really-private-at-all service

Well this brings it to the point ... i liked the idea with the multiple-random servers more, and it seems a lot more secure than this because you acctually don't know which route your packets will follow.

Great deal

[Violet Null]

WebSecure protects against invasive programs and websites that log and track users' online activities, surfing habits, and personal information, while neutralizing potential privacy and security threats from IP tracking, malicious scripts or codes, active content, cookies, and online advertisements.

For only $49.95 / yr, you too can get a proxy server, many of which are available for free all over.

Re:Great deal

[gartogg]

I'm happy that there are people who are not technically savvy enough to set up their own firewalls that still want security. It tells you that people have a realistic expectation about how secure their surfing is.

Better security solution

[J'raxis]

% export http_proxy=proxy01.nsa.gov

It's too bad ...

[pbryan]

... that Zero Knowledge couldn't make a go (financially, as well as politically, especially post-911) with their Freedom service. It was really great. The good news is there are open networks opening up to fill the gap they left.

KN is focusing on a business model that at least has a hope of succeeding financially, because an "Internet Explorer-only, not-really-private-at-all service" is designed for the masses (moo), which at least has the possibility of capturing enough users to generate enough revenue to be profitable.

They are definitely not targeting techno-geeks, which while k3w1, evidently won't generate the necessary d0ugh to pay people's $a1ari3$ so they can feed their chi1dr3n and pay off their n3w c0mp4ct f3u1 3ffici3nt c4r5.

The original Freedom is in open-source now

[willdye]

Zero Knowledge Systems released the source code to their original Freedom network, with the exception of the Windows client. I've set up a Source Forge project to get it up and running again, at http://tweakdom.sourceforge.net [sourceforge.net].

Right now the holdup is just figuring out if I can fire up the network again without getting into a legal fight. Export laws apparently let you publish the raw source code, but offering an anonymity service that uses weapons-grade encryption may be another matter.

I'm trying to make sense of the laws, but at least for me, "legalese" seems worse than Perl as a "write-only" language. Since my objective is just research, I don't mind complying with the laws. The problem is just figuring out what the law requires. Uff-da...

--Will

Orangatango -- another internet privacy option

[bruckie]

Orangatango [orangatango.com] is one of the few internet privacy companies left, with ZeroKnowledge fading and SafeWeb focusing on VPNs now.

They offer many cool features, including location- and browser-independent bookmarks, e-mail anonymity and spam prevention that really works, and IP address hiding. Check them out if you're interested.

Disclaimer: I used to work for Orangatango

--Bruce

Re:Orangatango -- another internet privacy option

[sedimentary_rock]

Is SSL really that secure? Microsoft provides a back door key to their browser encryption to the US gov't. It seems that only an open-source browser like Netscape or Mozilla would stand a chance of being secure.