In article <blcs1c09a2@enews4.newsguy.com>, Josh Collins wrote:
> anonymous service. While no IP is listed in their email headers, there are
> numbers that anonymizer.com itself uses and the words anonymizer.com are
> clearly listed in the header.
>
> So what is the point of using anonymizer.com if your email can still be
> tracked back to the anonymous site? It is not really anonymous then, is it?

How does having anonymizer.com in the header make it not anonymous?

> Also, do any of you really believe that their "tunneling" service can keep
> your email and website activity shielded from your ISP? They claim their
> service can keep you ISP from reading your email and logging your internet
> activity. Any of you buy into this?

Why do you find this unbelievable? Hell, I can stop my ISP from reading my
mail, just using tools that came with my computer:

In an xterm:

ssh -L 110:mail.mydomain.net:110 -l myname -N mail.mydomain.net

mail.mydomain.net is the mail server at the company that hosts my
domain. myname is my account name there.

In my mail client:

tell it to read mail from localhost port 110

And if you go read their support pages, that's basically what they are
doing. You get a mail account on their servers, and they basically provide
a Windows implementation of ssh, and use ssh tunelling, just like my
example, to map the POP, SMTP, and HTTP ports (and others...I think I saw
FTP in there, too) on localhost to the corresponding services on their
server.

Of course, *they* can read you email, so all you've done is substitute them
for your ISP...

--
Evidence Eliminator is worthless. See evidence-eliminator-sucks.com
--Tim Smith