I never denied that, all that I am saying is that it's an extremely important aspect, that definitely is worth talking about.
I don't disagree. I'm just think this point has been beaten to death and basically goes without saying. Literally almost every single person in this thread has mentioned it. It's important, but that's really the most basic OpSec / NetSec principle out there.
I think trying to stay anonymous online and the steps to stay anonymous to commit a crime and not get caught would differ alot ..
I understand that I'm the new guy here and I see there's obviously a consensus forming, but I actually disagree with you and @proxx. At the end of the day, whether you're breaking the law or just trying to shop on amazon anonymously, you're going to be applying the same principles, using the same techniques, and relying on the same knowledge base of hardware, protocols, and computer science. Granted, Proxx is correct in saying that committing a crime "anonymously" ultimately comes down to not being worth the money that one would have to expenditure to catch you, but that's also true of remaining anonymous in general.
My greater point about crime was not to draw a distinction between remaining anonymous when breaking the law and remaining anonymous for privacy's sake. Rather, my point was that the finger wagging and eye-rolling impression I'm getting from certain individuals that "you're inevitably going to just volunteer personal information about yourself online because you're going to be that careless, and you're stupid to think you wouldn't" is absolute bollocks. This is to say that people engage in major crimes all the time and more often than not actually get away with it (3/5 of all major crimes are unsolved), and it's just as easy as keeping your mouth shut.
So maybe my rep will go down and I understand I'm disagreeing with the group, but I think the point still stands regardless.
[/size][/size][/size][size=78%]quote author=proxx link=topic=20584.msg108605#msg108605 date=1435768670][/size]ISP's tap because they are required to by the gov, at least here and I know more countries where this is the case.
As soon as there is a trail between you and the endpoint over which you send/receive data you could be fucked if someone wants to fuck you.
This is mostly true, but I it isn't that simple. The types of records that ISPs hold aren't as thorough as people would like to imagine for several reasons. Mainly, ISPs have no desire to store that much data because it's expensive and requires a lot of equipment. The government and NSA are getting ISPs to hold records and helping them with it, but it isn't like every website and every datagram is unencrypted and printscreened. Also, those records aren't there forever.
The greater point @proxx is making is correct. Basically if you give them reason to watch you, then you can expect that they will do so very closely. However, if you aren't a terrorist, costing some company a ton of money, uploading gigs of illegal content, or hacking government computers, they're not going to waste resources spying on your account and they're really not going to care.
As far as the intelligence community is concerned, Executive Order 12333 is pretty much where all the "We're going to spy on everything you do" mentality comes from.
