On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 08:05:40 GMT, DragonRider <NoSpam@NoJunkAtAll.com>
prounounced a fatwah thus:

>On 29 Jun 2003 00:01:07 -0700, yosponge@yahoo.com (sponge) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:42:19 -0400, DragonRider
>><NoSpam@NoJunkAtAll.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Spyware, etc., free.
>>>
>>>Tx
>>>
>>
>>There is no such thing as an IP Spoofing program; if your IP is
>>obscured, it is not physically possible for you to take part in any
>>meaningful communication or activity on the Internet since there is no
>>way for data to return to you.
>
>Then what does an anonymizer do, which is what I was told an IP spoof
>was?

Anonymizers strip your IP out of your headers and re-send your message
from a new server with a new IP. This is done several times in
succession using different servers. But each of these servers, in
order to send your message on, must identify itself to the next server
using a valid IP.

>I finally did find one since I couldn't wait and all I got here was
>negative responses. On recommendation from a friend, was told me to
>google for one.
>
>I ran a test yesterday afternoon at ShieldsUp and I aced each
>category. ShieldsUp returned a "can't see your computer at all" and
>that I was in "stealth" mode all the way (which is what I have this
>set to).

You can do the same thing with a firewall. Grc.com knows it can't see
your computer precisely because it cannot send data to it, which is
what Sponge is saying: without a valid IP, no data comes in.

>So I have conflicting information here. It seems to me that
>this is a good thing not a bad thing.

It's a good thing as long as you don't mind not being able to receive
any packets, which means, in effect, not being able to send any TCP
packets. You can still send UDP, ICMP, and IGMP, but their uses are
limited.