# Safe way to hide IP address?



## *Samantha*

You guys are gonna be so happy -- I bought a new laptop a month ago, the HP Pavilion dv5120. It's the greatest thing I've ever had my paws on, believe me. So, no more nagging problems w/ the old laptop anymore.

Here's my question: Is there software that will hide/change/scramble my IP address? It's gotta be safe -- I don't want to infect my baby.

Many thanks, you guys. YOU are the greatest, too!


----------



## WhitPhil

Why do you want to do that?
And, hide it from whom?


----------



## DoubleHelix

"Hiding" your IP address does not keep your baby safe. You need firewall, anti-virus, and anti-spyware software, and a good dose of common sense.


----------



## lister

If it's for Privacy, you could give TOR a try

http://tor.eff.org/

Probably not much use if the CIA are on your case though!


----------



## bearone2

running behind a router helps but isn't foolproof.


----------



## brendandonhu

How does a router hide your IP address?


----------



## JohnWill

Gee Brendan, you beat me to that question.


----------



## brendandonhu

Sometimes you know what you need to post before you even open the thread


----------



## kombat75

U are wasting everybody TIME


----------



## *Samantha*

Well, kombat75! I'm sorry for wasting everyone's time. IF IT'S ANYONE'S BUSINESS, I wanted to read my son's blog. He hasn't spoken to me since he received his Christmas gifts (we live several states apart) via FedEx last December because the New Girlfriend dislikes me. (She has now succeeded in separating him from every single member of his family at this writing.) His counter on his blog reports each and every visiting IP. I would like to be able to peek into my only child's life, and w/out him knowing it so he won't either shut down his blog or change the address. I thought you were the guys to ask as you'd been so very helpful in the past when I had problems w/ spyware, etc. I do indeed have the following: "firewall, anti-virus, and anti-spyware software, and a good dose of common sense," to say the least. My apologies for bothering you people w/ nothing quite as exciting as CIA or DOD business.


----------



## brendandonhu

This link that lister posted should do what you need: http://tor.eff.org/


----------



## Squashman

Tor or iPig will work. Basically they are proxy servers that bounce your connection around the internet before it gets to it intended destination. Your Internet Surfing will be slow with this as well.
http://www.iopus.com/ipig/

You could also set yourself up with a CosmoPod account and surf from that connection.
http://www.cosmopod.com/


----------



## chm3

There is a software called Hide IP, however I think it is a shareware.


----------



## *Samantha*

I appreciate your help. I'm just sorry I had to air my dirty laundry ... It embarrassed me.


----------



## *Samantha*

I forgot to mention I have a dial up connection -- and before anyone asks, I'll just tell you: I live seven miles outside a small town, and my ranch is bordered on three sides by a State Forest. Dial up is the only thing that's available, but I'm thankful I'm able to access the internet at all. My question is, do these work w/ dial up? I took a quick glance at iPig and it mentioned wireless.

Many thanks for your help.


----------



## hynesy

*Samantha*, nowadays firewalls come with a stealth mode option, this would also help hide yor IP from ur son, the reason behind the stealth mode is to hide your computer from hackers. This is a very useful tool if u believe someone is or attemping to hack you
cheers
hynesy


----------



## JohnWill

hynesy said:


> *Samantha*, nowadays firewalls come with a stealth mode option, this would also help hide yor IP from ur son, the reason behind the stealth mode is to hide your computer from hackers. This is a very useful tool if u believe someone is or attemping to hack you
> cheers
> hynesy


Actually, this is totally false. No firewall changes the public IP address or how it appears to remote sites. Stealth mode is something totally different, and is to prevent folks from being able to scan ports at your public IP address.


----------



## Cabbage42II

FWIW, I believe the reason people asked why you wanted to hide your IP address is because some people think that if somebody can see their IP address, then that is a huge security risk or something.

I believe they were just making sure you didn't go to all the trouble to hide it only to find out that it wasn't going to help you be more secure.

Or perhaps not...


----------



## brendandonhu

Cabbage42II said:


> I believe they were just making sure you didn't go to all the trouble to hide it only to find out that it wasn't going to help you be more secure.


That's correct, we see this question a lot.


----------



## bearone2

JohnWill said:


> Gee Brendan, you beat me to that question.


from the linksys site:

Network Security

Home »Learning Center » Network Security »Protecting Your Network » NAT

NAT

Network Address Translation (NAT) technology translates IP addresses of a local area network to a different IP address for the Internet. Each computer on your network has a local IP address. When the router gets the data transmission to forward out to the Internet, the router puts a different IP address on the transmission. This way, whoever receives the data transmission doesn't know what the actual IP address of the computer is. The computer is hidden, safe from prying eyes.

are they confused too?


----------



## brendandonhu

No, I think you misunderstand what they are saying. Running NAT within your own network has nothing to do with hiding your IP address. Your private IP (which is meaningless outside your network) would be hidden but your public IP is still sent with the packets the same way it would be without NAT. That would not accomplish what the thread starter is trying to do.


----------



## bearone2

well thanks for clarifying that.

i wondered how grc/symantec security checks had the ip address.


----------



## Squashman

iPig will work with Wireless or Wired connections. Doesn't matter. If you use Tor or iPig on a Dialup connection it is going to be painfully slow. So will using a CosmoPod account. You can try all of them and see which one you like.


----------



## *Samantha*

I appreciate y'alls help, I really do. I've downloaded iPig already, and am now working on Tor which of course takes forever because of the freaking dial up. Sigh. I thought it would probably slow down my already slow-as-molasses connection but I plan to use it only occasionally ... Just to check up on my son, you know? So ... Just wanted to thank you.


----------



## hynesy

JohnWill said:


> Actually, this is totally false. No firewall changes the public IP address or how it appears to remote sites. Stealth mode is something totally different, and is to prevent folks from being able to scan ports at your public IP address.


Thank You for correcting me JohnWill, I had someone in a PC store to explain about stealth mode in firewalls, oviously wrong


----------



## JohnWill

Never listen to technical explanations from $6/hr store clerks.


----------



## Squashman

JohnWill said:


> Never listen to technical explanations from $6/hr store clerks.


Or Cats wielding guns.


----------



## JohnWill

Watch it, that cat can hit targets a long ways off.  You have to be careful when dealing with sniper cats.


----------



## cga1982

If you are using dial up, doesn't your IP address change each time you make a connection? Wouldn't the IP address change each time you connect?


----------



## *Samantha*

Funny you should ask that cga! I was told the same thing! However, every time I check it, it's the same IP address. Go figure.


----------



## StumpedTechy

Even then you can find out the general scope and who it belongs to and probably find a general location. Then if you find a general location and you know your family lives there... hrmmm


----------



## Maestro99

Hi JohnWill,

_Avatar cat - and they accused Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin._



JohnWill said:


> No firewall changes the public IP address or how it appears to remote sites.


True....Perhaps the reason behind why some individuals associate hiding an IP address with firewalls is because of ZoneAlarm's communication feature.

ZoneAlarm gives the user the option to hide his/her IP address when contacting Zone Labs/Check Point.

*Overview > Preferences*

*Contact with Zone Labs*

Whenever I request info from Zone Labs: [Options]
Hide my IP address when applicable.
Hide the last octet of my IP address when applicable.

ZoneAlarm's help file:

*Setting product preferences > Setting contact preferences*

Hide my IP address when applicable: 
Prevents your computer from being identified when you contact Zone Labs, Inc.

Hide the last octet of my IP address when applicable: 
Omits the last section of your IP address (for example, 123.456.789.XXX) when you contact Zone Labs, Inc.


----------



## JohnWill

I notice it only claims to hide the IP address from Zone Alarm, because they can't hide it from other sites. If your IP address is hidden, you can't communicate, it's as simple as that.  You can redirect your communications through a proxy site, but there is still an identifiable IP address involved, that of the proxy site. If you could access the records of the connections to the proxy site, you'd find the IP address of the original poster in it's entirety.


----------



## Maestro99

In other words, Internet protocol. 

In order for one to partially hide their IP address (hiding the last section of the IP address), Microsoft would have to drastically alter/incorporate new Internet protocols within Windows to allow communication between two points. That is, flipping back (< edit added the word back) the last section of the IP address when data is being sent back.


----------



## brendandonhu

Er, if they flipped an octet of the IP, the data would end up at the wrong destination (and Microsoft can not assign IP addresses.)


----------



## pugmug

John, the point is that if you pay the money to a proxy site I do not think they would give or sell that ip info as that would kill their business very quick. Bounce your ip around the internet correctly and no one will know where it came from unless you have a lot of money as in goverments or Bill M$ Gates to track you down. I don't, do you?


----------



## JohnWill

No argument, but law enforcement can still have access to proxy servers, so using them for illegal activities is still a bad idea.


----------



## wacor

Just my opinion 

If your son somehow finds out you were trying to snoop in such a sneaky way might you risk losing credibility, etc. and make your situation worse?

If it is public blog he is posting and he knew you were interested enough to check on him with your not trying to hide that fact would that not be a better way to go??


----------



## JohnWill

Very good post wacorsaut, and right on the money. :up:


----------



## brendandonhu

JohnWill said:


> No argument, but law enforcement can still have access to proxy servers, so using them for illegal activities is still a bad idea.


That's what Tor is for


----------



## Maestro99

brendandonhu said:


> Er, if they flipped an octet of the IP, the data would end up at the wrong destination (and Microsoft can not assign IP addresses.)


Hi brendandonhu/Brendan,



In more detail......

First of all, we're getting into something that has to be changed/modified - different from what is being done today so computers can communicate. *"Microsoft would have to drastically alter/incorporate.." *

Your IP address is a special number that is assigned to your computer.

As in the ZoneAlarm example, but slightly different, the last section of your IP address is hidden with probably other numbers and/or with some special identifiers (numbers) indicating that the user has selected the option to partially hide his or her IP address - > part of the OS.

_Again, and let me reiterate, Microsoft would have to alter/incorporate a new protocol within the OS. Importantly, and to some extent, computers would be communicating slightly different in this scenario than what we're use to. New technology, new things....etc._

When the site sends data back to you, it knows that your IP address has a special identifier attached to it that tells the requested site that your IP address is partially hidden - that is, the last section with fake numbers. As data is being sent back to you, your last section of the IP address would flip back to your *correct IP address*. [The numbers in front always remain the same.] The new protocol.

In other words, the requested site doesn't know your exact IP address, but the identifiers attached to your IP address would automatically correct your IP address when data is being sent back to you. Sort of like an attachment on your IP address. Again, new technology here.

Anyways, hiding your IP address would invite criminal activity. The above scenario is a sure no.


----------



## brendandonhu

> As in the ZoneAlarm example, but slightly different, the last section of your IP address is hidden with probably other numbers and/or with some special identifiers (numbers) indicating that the user has selected the option to partially hide his or her IP address - > part of the OS.


I think you don't understand how ZoneAlarm works...the option simply tells ZoneAlarm that you don't want them to store your full IP address. Your normal (only) IP is still sent with the TCP packets the same as always. You can not change an IP address around and magically expect the packet to end up at the right destination. If you can randomly change around the digits of an IP, the protocol has no way of knowing who it is supposed to be routed to (and ARIN wouldn't be very happy if you started messing with their assigned IPs either.)


----------



## Maestro99

brendandonhu said:


> I think you don't understand how ZoneAlarm works...the option simply tells ZoneAlarm that you don't want them to store your full IP address.





> No, that's not how ZoneAlarm works and its not part of the OS. The option simply tells ZoneAlarm that you don't want them to store your full IP address. Your normal (only) IP is still sent with the TCP packets the same as always. You can not change an IP address around and magically expect the packet to end up at the right destination. That's just not how ARIN assigns IP addresses.


Not sure if you edited the post becasue it suddendly changed.

"No, that's not how ZoneAlarm works and its not part of the OS."

Nobody said it was part of the OS.

I was using XXX as an example, "omits the last section of your IP address (for example, 123.456.789.XXX) when you contact Zone Labs, Inc.," but there would be numbers 'identifiers' attached to it. _The new protocol. The new technology, different than what we have today._

ZoneAlarm doesn't exchange dialogue between you and them with hidden IP address. I know that.


----------



## Maestro99

> As in the ZoneAlarm example, but slightly different, the last section of your IP address is hidden with probably other numbers and/or with some special identifiers (numbers) indicating that the user has selected the option to partially hide his or her IP address - > part of the OS.


An option within the OS - this new protocol. Nothing to do with ZoneAlarm.


----------



## brendandonhu

This still doesn't make sense...if you start chopping numbers off the IP address, the packet doesn't know who the proper recipient is. If you just replace the numbers with another "identifier" for your IP, then you've hidden nothing. The identifier would still have to refer to your specific IP, its not adding any level of anonymity since its still a unique identifier.


----------



## Maestro99

*^*
That's what we have today.

Edit:

Everything is changing so fast when I post, and at the same time responding to you.

Give me a minute.

Edit:

"..if you start chopping numbers off the IP address, the packet doesn't know who the proper recipient is."

You're not chopping numbers.

"If you just replace the numbers with another "identifier" for your IP, then you've hidden nothing. The identifier would still have to refer to your specific IP, its not adding any level of anonymity since its still a unique identifier."

The last section of your IP address is hidden with a unique identifier that is attached to your IP address. It's a unique code (number) that converts your IP address back to your correct IP address. You're not changing the entire IP address. You're not chopping. It's, let see, like the way codes are deciphered by software.


----------



## Maestro99

Everybody freeze! 

Okay! I think it's time for grade 5 material.

JohnWill posted ....



> JohnWill
> No firewall changes the public IP address or how it appears to remote sites.


My response #32 is in agreement with JohnWill's statement....



> Maestro99
> True....


My response is followed by the misconception and reasoning behind why some individuals here (not me), and those whom I've encountered, believe firewalls are capable of hiding (your) an IP address....these individuals had to associate the two somehow...



> Maestro99
> Perhaps the reason....


perhaps = not sure = speculating as to why individuals conceive wrongly.

JohnWill posted #33 ....



> JohnWill
> ...because they can't hide it from other sites. If your IP address is hidden, you can't communicate, it's as simple as that.


My response is in agreement with JohnWill, and posted differently #34 (see ^ V the two winks....



> Maestro99
> In other words, Internet protocol.


Then I throw out a hypothetical situation. Nothing to do with ZoneAlarm but using ZoneAlarm's example of, "hiding the last section of your IP address." .....Drastically alter, and there's the word *"NEW"*  post #34

Okay, that should clear up some of the misunderstanding.


----------



## brendandonhu

That still doesn't explain how you can become more anonymous by replacing one unique identifier with another unique identifier. All nodes on the network must be able to decipher the code or they will not be able to route the packet.


----------



## pugmug

If it's that important just pay for an offshore proxy account in a country that has no treaties,extradition or laws governed by the country you live in and do what you want with an I.P. lol


----------



## Maestro99

brendandonhu,

I don't think we're on the same page.

Importantly, and to some extent, computers would be communicating slightly different in this scenario than what we're use to. New technology, new things....etc. Post #41


----------



## brendandonhu

Right, I'm just still wondering how it would be any more anonymous.


----------



## Et Al

I think some other factors are being missed.

What does the target computer see (is anyone even looking for an IP address?)
What is the computer knowledge of whoever controls the target computer?
* IF * a trace route is used, is it cursory or more sophisicated?
Doesn't Microsoft have to comply with Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) the same as all others? (see http://www.iana.org)
If the child is posting a blog publically, just how many hits is that blog getting? Does anyone really look for that?
If the blog is publically posted on a host site (i.e., myspace.com) I seriously don't believe the targe computer can trace any IP address that came and viewed that web page.

As for credibility as a parent, if I was the one separated from my kid(s) like that and agonized over their well being/how they're doing, I'd probably be grateful that I can at least see/know of some of their indepedent activity, even if it's from the shadows. There is a comfort for the child if they know a parent cared enough to be interested in their life. Children are hurt worst if they believe a parent couldn't care less about them. I spent over two years pulling one of mine out of a suicidal depression because the other 'parent' threw our children out like garbage and refused futher contact. The most important thing is that the children's best interest is the upmost concern.

Okay, I'm off my soapbox now.


----------



## Maestro99

Information on Internet Protocol:

Internet Protocol defined:



> The network layer protocol known as the Internet Protocol (IP) can be described as the common thread that holds the entire Internet together. It is responsible for moving data from one host to another, using various cost-based techniques (or 'routing' algorithms). Layers above the network layer take a datastream and break it into chunks of a predetermined size known as packets or datagrams. These datagrams are then sequentially passed to the network layer, whose job is to route these chunks to the desired destination. Prior to transmitting data, the network layer might subdivide or fragment it into smaller packets for ease of transmission. When all the pieces finally reach the destination, they are reassembled by the network layer into the original datagram......
> 
> http://www.acm.org/crossroads/columns/connector/july2000.html





> Definition
> 
> http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci214031,00.html


Today's protocol IPv4 is being replaced by Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) also called "Next Generation Internet Protocol".



> IPv6 for Microsoft Windows: Frequently Asked Questions
> 
> Q. What versions of Windows provide support for IPv6?
> 
> A. Microsoft provides supported IPv6 implementations for Windows Server 2003, Windows XP with Service Pack 1 (SP1), Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2), and Windows CE .NET 4.1 and later.
> 
> Windows Vista (now in beta testing) and Windows Server "Longhorn" (now in beta testing) support an integrated IPv4 and IPv6 implementation known as the Next Generation TCP/IP stack. For more information, see Next Generation TCP/IP Stack in Windows Vista and Windows Server "Longhorn".
> 
> Q. Will IPv6 be supported for older versions of Windows?
> 
> A. There are currently no plans to provide supported IPv6 protocol implementations for older versions of Windows.
> 
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/network/ipv6/ipv6faq.mspx


----------------------



brendandonhu said:


> Right, I'm just still wondering how it would be any more anonymous.


brendandonhu,

Since this is a hypothetical situation/scenario (different than what is being done today [previous posts]), new protocols, new technology, and everything is supported by the OS.....

....there would have to be several protocols in place that would be able to recognize the 'identifier' that is attached to your masked last section of your IP address, and convert it (flipping it correctly) when data packets are sent back.

The site has a masked IP address, but when the data (packets) go back it's adjusted correctly.

I took the ZoneAlarm example and tried to give a hypothetical view as to what needs to be done. New, alter, incorporate, communicate differently etc....


----------



## brendandonhu

Ok, I'll try to explain this one more time. Your idea requires an identifier that can be converted back into the correct address-- you can not stop anyone from converting your "masked" address back to the original. If all nodes on the network can't convert the address properly, its impossible for the packets to be routed.


----------



## redivivus

Maestro99

Your idea is illogical. You dont have to know much about communications to understand this even...

You send data *with your IP*... the site returns data *to the IP you sent it with *(otherwise you would not get it...)

The only way i could see your idea working at all is if microsoft acted like a proxy server to relay the data from the "false IP" to your true IP. This would still not be truely 'anonymous.'

The way the proxy servers work is that when the data is that you send them data to send to the site... the site gets it from THEIR IP and returns data to THEIR IP, which they relay back to you.

Im guessing that when you select that option, ZoneAlarm simply deletes the record of your IP and keeps your registration or comments or w/e anonymous.


----------



## Maestro99

redivivus,

*What part of this.....*



> (*different than what is being done today* [previous posts]),* new protocols, new technology*, and everything is supported by the OS.....
> 
> ....*there would have to be several protocols in place* that would be able to recognize the 'identifier' that is attached to your masked last section of your IP address, and convert it (flipping it correctly) when data packets are sent back.


*don't you understand.*

You make it sound like I don't know how computers communicate, when I've just posted above the definition and information. This is a hypothetical situation, completely different method, a revamp of the system, new protocols.......HOW ELSE DO YOU PARTIALLY HIDE THE IP ADDRESS USING ZONEALARM EXAMPLE, AND TRY APPLYING IT TODAY?!...You don't have to be Einstien to figure it out - the system needs to be revamped!

*I'm at the point where I'm going to ignore this thread!!!! I have to repeat myself over and over and over....*

Thank you....but I don't need the definition of proxy server and the option in ZoneAlarm. How about using -------- to break it.

----------------------------------------
brendandonhu,

I understood your previous question post #48, which is the same question again.
<response> "I don't think we're on the same page......"
<your message> "Right, I'm just still wondering how it would be any more anonymous."
..and you ask the same question again like #48.

This discussion is like two individuals having a conversation about computers before the Internet was created.

"Probably, we're going to get mail using computers," said A.
"Mail using computers? Tell me A, how do you get the postman inside the motherboard?"

The problem with this discussion is that you are stuck with today's methods. Computers communicating the way the protocols are setup today. Trying to introduce something new definitely means the system needs to be revamped.

Okay. Since this is going to take significant tweaking.....

.....there are Decipher Stations throughout the network where everything goes first that deciphers the identifier, and corrects the IP address and routes it to its destination.

A has no identifier so the Decipher Station does nothing 123.456.789. Goes to its destination with all the information. [AA > BB> CC>]

A sending the requested information back to B (B my IP address with identifier) > Decipher Station (reads the identifier and corrects the IP (flips the last section of my IP address correctly and attaches all the necessary information requested. IP address correct 987.654.321. [ZZ > YY >]


----------



## JohnWill

How did this thread morph from the simple topic of IP hiding to some futuristic discussion on a non-existent network topology?

We're talking about today on the Internet, using IPv4, which is what all of us use. You seem to be talking about inventing a new Internet. Who do you think you are, Al Gore?


----------



## Foxbluff

send flowers to girlfriend and ask for forgiveness?!?!?


----------



## brendandonhu

> .....there are Decipher Stations throughout the network where everything goes first that deciphers the identifier, and corrects the IP address and routes it to its destination.


That's why its not anonymous...what would stop me from setting up my own "decipher station" and decoding the IP addresses myself?


----------



## Maestro99

brendandonhu said:


> That's why its not anonymous...what would stop me from setting up my own "decipher station" and decoding the IP addresses myself?


 WWII, they needed somebody like that. "The Decipher Man", who is able to crack codes. You're going to control all the Decipher Stations, and most importantly, you're going to steal the decrypting device code.

Tell me, are you serious when you reply? Apparently not.


----------



## brendandonhu

So you're proposing that all IP addresses would be encrypted by some magical secret key that no one can decrypt except these "decipher stations"? Now you're adding a single point of failure to the internet- if the "decipher station" is hacked or fails, no one can access the internet at all. And whatever organization or ISP is in charge of the "decipher station" would have control over all of the internet. You still haven't explained how this would make anything more anonymous...your "encrypted" IP address would be one-to-one with traditional IP addresses, it would still translate to 1 unique node on the network.


----------



## Maestro99

*^*

 Yuo aer wasting ym time!


----------



## brendandonhu

No, you're just posting nonsense. I've pointed out numerous flaws in your post and you don't even respond to it...


----------



## redivivus

brendandonhu said:


> So you're proposing that all IP addresses would be encrypted by some magical secret key that no one can decrypt except these "decipher stations"? Now you're adding a single point of failure to the internet- if the "decipher station" is hacked or fails, no one can access the internet at all. And whatever organization or ISP is in charge of the "decipher station" would have control over all of the internet. You still haven't explained how this would make anything more anonymous...your "encrypted" IP address would be one-to-one with traditional IP addresses, it would still translate to 1 unique node on the network.


 :up:

This guy is funny, because if you change the word "decipher station" to "proxy server" that is what we have right now. Proxies are not truely anonymous, and nothing in life is, or ever will be.


----------



## JohnWill

I think I'm going to close this post, we are far beyond the original scope of the question, and I don't see any new information being presented.


----------

