Know about a proxy server?

BillJosephson wrote:
> How can I stop AvenueA, Doubleclick, etc., from infesting my computer
> after I have deleted it with spybot? Is there not help in firefox?
>
> Thanks....



Does anybody know about a proxy that stands between your compputer and
the internet? It seems like there was a discussion like this a while
back and somebody mentioned you can download a "proxy" program that
controls all information passing into your computer via the web. There
was a link to a site for a proxy server, and a dedication to the
author, who has passed away. Wish I could remember the site or find
that old thread....

Re: Know about a proxy server?

CharlesBlackstone wrote to too many newsgroups, therefore followup to poster
set:

> BillJosephson wrote:
>> How can I stop AvenueA, Doubleclick, etc., from infesting my computer
>> after I have deleted it with spybot? Is there not help in firefox?
>>
There is adblock and adblockplus, and if you have teatimer it might help a
bit as well, provided OP got rid of spyware/trojanware.
>
>
> Does anybody know about a proxy that stands between your compputer and
> the internet? It seems like there was a discussion like this a while
> back and somebody mentioned you can download a "proxy" program that
> controls all information passing into your computer via the web.

You may think about a hardware firewall/router/proxy device, in particular
if you are responsible for a small company. Or use a otherwise retired
computer to run a linux gateway. It won't need running a gui, you may
configure most things via a web(min) interface from the attached computers.
It would just need two network cards, maybe a 10G harddrive and 128 MB of
ram. That gateway can run a dhcp server, squid (the proxy) in transparent
mode (no settings necessary for clients), a dns for your own network and a
fileserver if you can have a bigger disk, together with squidguard and
clamav as virus scanner.

--
vista policy violation: Microsoft optical mouse found penguin patterns
on mousepad. Partition scan in progress to remove offending
incompatible products. Reactivate MS software.
Linux 2.6.17-mm1,Xorg7.1/nvidia [LinuxCounter#295241,ICQ#4918962]

Re: Know about a proxy server?

BillJosephson wrote:

>> How can I stop AvenueA, Doubleclick, etc., from infesting my computer
>> after I have deleted it with spybot? Is there not help in firefox?

Sounds like a job for SpywareBlaster. Visit
http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/

SpywareBlaster is freeware for personal and
educational use.

--
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/

Re: Know about a proxy server?

what you are looking for is Privoxy - it works great. Note they are
currently working on a new version, so check back in the next months for
updates as they become available.

www.privoxy.org

Privoxy is very powerful, and very user-configurable. however,
out-of-the-box it works just fine w/ its default settings. if you're
adventurous you can tweak it extensively. and it's free!

Highly Recommended.

Re: Know about a proxy server?

CharlesBlackstone wrote:
> BillJosephson wrote:
>> How can I stop AvenueA, Doubleclick, etc., from infesting my computer
>> after I have deleted it with spybot? Is there not help in firefox?
>>
>> Thanks....
>
>
>
> Does anybody know about a proxy that stands between your compputer and
> the internet? It seems like there was a discussion like this a while
> back and somebody mentioned you can download a "proxy" program that
> controls all information passing into your computer via the web. There
> was a link to a site for a proxy server, and a dedication to the
> author, who has passed away. Wish I could remember the site or find
> that old thread....
>

http://www.proxomitron.info/

Re: Know about a proxy server?

> Does anybody know about a proxy that stands between your compputer and
> the internet? It seems like there was a discussion like this a while
> back and somebody mentioned you can download a "proxy" program that
> controls all information passing into your computer via the web. There
> was a link to a site for a proxy server, and a dedication to the
> author, who has passed away. Wish I could remember the site or find
> that old thread....
>
Try not to crosspost, it's lame.

Searching in Google for proxy + "passed away" + "filter ads"
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1 &q=proxy+%22passed+away%22+%22filter+ads%22
Found startup reference.
OK.
Sooo, Proxomitron is what you are looking for.
Look in CastleCops forums.

It will not hurt you if you do try to use Google's search engine.
No pun intended.

best wishes,
gurkatoon

Re: Know about a proxy server?

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Know about a proxy server?

"gurkatoon" <@> writes:

> > Does anybody know about a proxy that stands between your compputer and
> > the internet? It seems like there was a discussion like this a while
> > back and somebody mentioned you can download a "proxy" program that
> > controls all information passing into your computer via the web. There
> > was a link to a site for a proxy server, and a dedication to the
> > author, who has passed away. Wish I could remember the site or find
> > that old thread....
> >
> Try not to crosspost, it's lame.

But so is being a pedantic codpiece to the original poster who had a
reasonable question not easily found with google, yet here you are.

Re: Know about a proxy server?

> But so is being a pedantic codpiece to the original poster who had a
> reasonable question not easily found with google, yet here you are.

Sorry, "not easily found with google" ?
I see that you "forgot" to include the rest of my post, which provided the
information needed. Your post is just "noise". Flame me now, Todd...

gurkatoon

Re: Know about a proxy server?

> Crossposting to the relevant groups, limited to 5 or less, IS the proper
> way to post to multiple groups. Multiposting the same article to
> multiple groups is lame, as it prevents proper followups, prevents
> proper marking of READ for all posted groups...

Well, yes, but...
The OP crossposted to several newsgroups, with some of them beeing
"proprietary", that is, not widely available. So, I still do think THAT is
lame.

best wishes,
gurkatoon

Re: Know about a proxy server?

"gurkatoon" <@> writes:

> > But so is being a pedantic codpiece to the original poster who had a
> > reasonable question not easily found with google, yet here you are.
>
> Sorry, "not easily found with google" ?
> I see that you "forgot" to include the rest of my post, which provided the
> information needed. Your post is just "noise". Flame me now, Todd...

Yes gurky, you did find _something_ with google, that pointed the
poster not necessarily to the posting he was looking for in the past
anyway. This is usenet here, not a web forum. If the OP saw it in
usenet, he'd have to use groups.google.com to find it, and given how
little he could cobble together of the original request, there'd be no
simple way to search without having way too many results to filter
through.

Google doesn't totally replace asking intelligent humans who can
distinguish between the crapware that google finds with search terms
and the actual software that's known to work well.

--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

Re: Know about a proxy server?

> Yes gurky, you did find _something_ with google, that pointed the
> poster not necessarily to the posting he was looking for in the past
> anyway. This is usenet here, not a web forum. If the OP saw it in
> usenet, he'd have to use groups.google.com to find it, and given how
> little he could cobble together of the original request, there'd be no
> simple way to search without having way too many results to filter
> through.
>
> Google doesn't totally replace asking intelligent humans who can
> distinguish between the crapware that google finds with search terms
> and the actual software that's known to work well.
>
> --
> Todd H.
> http://www.toddh.net/

gurky...
OK Todd, Master Flamer, your flame bait was accepted.

No need to enable your "savoir faire, savoir dire, mais ne pas savoir
plaire" mode, to come down on me, poor, humble soul, because...

Because...
Because...

Sorry, I kept mumbling.
Somehow, my humble and private web of neurons went in overdrive and the
"software" froze.
I am back now, still shaky from the experience.
Well, I can now see that I am not really in your league - after all, you
are, sorry, were "(...) trying to become a Renaissance Man of some sort."
So I am a commoner.
So you are an aristocrat. And an illuminated one. Gee...
OMG.OMG.OMG.KOW.
I can live with that, if that is really so ;->>>
However, had you ->really understood<- what I posted, the link showed that:
1 - From the information wanted by the OP, as it was written, it was
possible to easily build a reliable search expression.
2 - Receive a small amount of links with said information (although the
search asked for as much as 100 links, so has to avoid going 10 at time).
3 - This information could enable the OP to get what he wanted.
4 - Most importantly, and THAT was the main objective of my post, it showed
that one can get, most of the time, the information one wants, if we DO try.
There is too much noise going around because there are so many people that
don't want to try and learn one or two things (and here I am not saying that
the OP is one of these persons). As such, it was also meant to be
pedagogical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedagogy).
5 - As a commoner, I could not follow to whatever ground you were pointing
with "and the actual software that's known to work well."
6 - From a pedagogical standpoint, and you may not get it (so if you cannot,
don't try to), it stands that I teached, that is, i gave the fish and
teached how to get it. I concede that I was somewhat cinic to the OP. You,
as an aristocrat, from obviouly an higher ground, only standards>pissed at me (not against the wind, I presume) posting standards>.


best wishes,
gurkatoon

Re: Know about a proxy server?

"gurkatoon" <@> wrote in message
news:459eb89b$0$1803$a729d347@news.telepac.pt...
>> Yes gurky, you did find _something_ with google, that pointed the
>> poster not necessarily to the posting he was looking for in the past
>> anyway. This is usenet here, not a web forum. If the OP saw it in
>> usenet, he'd have to use groups.google.com to find it, and given how
>> little he could cobble together of the original request, there'd be no
>> simple way to search without having way too many results to filter
>> through.
>>
>> Google doesn't totally replace asking intelligent humans who can
>> distinguish between the crapware that google finds with search terms
>> and the actual software that's known to work well.
>>
>> --
>> Todd H.
>> http://www.toddh.net/
>
> gurky...
> OK Todd, Master Flamer, your flame bait was accepted.
>
> No need to enable your "savoir faire, savoir dire, mais ne pas savoir
> plaire" mode, to come down on me, poor, humble soul, because...
>
> Because...
> Because...
>
> Sorry, I kept mumbling.
> Somehow, my humble and private web of neurons went in overdrive and the
> "software" froze.
> I am back now, still shaky from the experience.
> Well, I can now see that I am not really in your league - after all, you
> are, sorry, were "(...) trying to become a Renaissance Man of some sort."
> So I am a commoner.
> So you are an aristocrat. And an illuminated one. Gee...
> OMG.OMG.OMG.KOW.
> I can live with that, if that is really so ;->>>
> However, had you ->really understood<- what I posted, the link showed
> that:
> 1 - From the information wanted by the OP, as it was written, it was
> possible to easily build a reliable search expression.
> 2 - Receive a small amount of links with said information (although the
> search asked for as much as 100 links, so has to avoid going 10 at time).
> 3 - This information could enable the OP to get what he wanted.
> 4 - Most importantly, and THAT was the main objective of my post, it
> showed that one can get, most of the time, the information one wants, if
> we DO try. There is too much noise going around because there are so many
> people that don't want to try and learn one or two things (and here I am
> not saying that the OP is one of these persons). As such, it was also
> meant to be pedagogical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedagogy).
> 5 - As a commoner, I could not follow to whatever ground you were pointing
> with "and the actual software that's known to work well."
> 6 - From a pedagogical standpoint, and you may not get it (so if you
> cannot, don't try to), it stands that I teached, that is, i gave the fish
> and teached how to get it. I concede that I was somewhat cinic to the OP.
> You, as an aristocrat, from obviouly an higher ground, only > posting standards>pissed at me (not against the wind, I presume) > my posting standards>.
>
>
> best wishes,
> gurkatoon
>

So sorry for the typo.
Were you read "so has to avoid going 10 at time" it should say "so as to
avoid going 10 at a time".

Interesting link:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toddh.net %2F%22&hl=en&start=0&sa=N&num=100
(11900 links: he really is a prodigy-boy).

best wishes,
gurkatoon

Re: Know about a proxy server?

"gurkatoon" <@> writes:
> > Yes gurky, you did find _something_ with google, that pointed the
> > poster not necessarily to the posting he was looking for in the past
> > anyway. This is usenet here, not a web forum. If the OP saw it in
> > usenet, he'd have to use groups.google.com to find it, and given how
> > little he could cobble together of the original request, there'd be no
> > simple way to search without having way too many results to filter
> > through.
> >
> > Google doesn't totally replace asking intelligent humans who can
> > distinguish between the crapware that google finds with search terms
> > and the actual software that's known to work well.
> >
> > --
> > Todd H.
> > http://www.toddh.net/
>
> gurky...
> OK Todd, Master Flamer, your flame bait was accepted.
>
> No need to enable your "savoir faire, savoir dire, mais ne pas savoir
> plaire" mode, to come down on me, poor, humble soul, because...
>
> Because...
> Because...
>
> Sorry, I kept mumbling.
> Somehow, my humble and private web of neurons went in overdrive and the
> "software" froze.
> I am back now, still shaky from the experience.
> Well, I can now see that I am not really in your league - after all, you
> are, sorry, were "(...) trying to become a Renaissance Man of some sort."
> So I am a commoner.
> So you are an aristocrat. And an illuminated one. Gee...
> OMG.OMG.OMG.KOW.
> I can live with that, if that is really so ;->>>

LOL.. ???? Step away from the crack pipe. Yer right--we middle class
kids of midwestern farm kids really have the bluest of blood! Heh...

Kudos for attempting to help the OP in your reply vs the usual "STFW"
response. I'm happy acknowledging that, especially in light of your
acknowledging being a bit of an a55 about it. It's just a sport of
mine to take the folks who give most variants of the kneejerk "google
it, idiot" response to questions that are far from easily answerable
with the usual search terms.... down a peg.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

Re: Know about a proxy server?

gurkatoon <@> wrote:
> > Crossposting to the relevant groups, limited to 5 or less, IS the proper
> > way to post to multiple groups. Multiposting the same article to
> > multiple groups is lame, as it prevents proper followups, prevents
> > proper marking of READ for all posted groups...
>
> Well, yes, but...
> The OP crossposted to several newsgroups, with some of them beeing
> "proprietary", that is, not widely available. So, I still do think THAT is
> lame.

It is irrelevant if some of the groups are "proprietary" or/and "not
widely available" as long as nobody removes any of them from their
response. Since you *did* delete them, *you* are being "lame", because
you are preventing your response from getting to the original audience.

Not only is it lame, but it's also rather silly, because you have no
way of knowing if the parent/original poster will see your response.

I am apparently subscribed to this group, but to which of the original
groups [1] is the OP subscribed? Answer: You have no way of knowing. And
a quick search shows that he is *probably* *not* subscribed to this
group and hence will probably not see your response(s).

So might I suggest to learn how things actually work, instead of using
the L-word so often?

[1] > Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,c omp.security.misc,24hoursupport.helpdesk

Re: Know about a proxy server?

> It is irrelevant if some of the groups are "proprietary" or/and "not
> widely available" as long as nobody removes any of them from their
> response. Since you *did* delete them, *you* are being "lame", because
> you are preventing your response from getting to the original audience.
>
> Not only is it lame, but it's also rather silly, because you have no
> way of knowing if the parent/original poster will see your response.
>
> I am apparently subscribed to this group, but to which of the original
> groups [1] is the OP subscribed? Answer: You have no way of knowing. And
> a quick search shows that he is *probably* *not* subscribed to this
> group and hence will probably not see your response(s).
>
> So might I suggest to learn how things actually work, instead of using
> the L-word so often?
>
> [1] > Newsgroups:
> mozilla.support.firefox,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,c omp.security.misc,24hoursupport.helpdesk

Yes, we agree to disagree.

best wishes,
gurkatoon

Re: Know about a proxy server?

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Know about a proxy server?

In our last episode of Flame the Flamer, "Scott B." clevery wrote:
> gurkatoon wrote:
> >> It is irrelevant if some of the groups are "proprietary" or/and "not
> [snip]
> > Yes, we agree to disagree.
>
> Since you are apparently interested in Usenet etiquette, I suggest
> you consider using attribution.
>
> http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote1.html

Good point Scott! LOL.

You're right, this IS a good time to point out to Gurky that failing
to attribute quotations properly "is lame!" And adding something like
"Now go away or we shall taunt you a second time-ah," would be another
ironic twist to add in honor of our French-speaking protagonist.

I do feel a little bad about the Gurkatoon pile-on. I was in a bit of
a mood when I read his first (snotty, but mildly helpful) reply to the
OP, but he made it too easy and fun to escalate--hopefully he doesn't
take it personally. But I also get a vibe that he's a bit of a young
chap and might take many things personally.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

Re: Know about a proxy server?

[Attribution fixed.]

gurkatoon <@> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > It is irrelevant if some of the groups are "proprietary" or/and "not
> > widely available" as long as nobody removes any of them from their
> > response. Since you *did* delete them, *you* are being "lame", because
> > you are preventing your response from getting to the original audience.
> >
> > Not only is it lame, but it's also rather silly, because you have no
> > way of knowing if the parent/original poster will see your response.
> >
> > I am apparently subscribed to this group, but to which of the original
> > groups [1] is the OP subscribed? Answer: You have no way of knowing. And
> > a quick search shows that he is *probably* *not* subscribed to this
> > group and hence will probably not see your response(s).
> >
> > So might I suggest to learn how things actually work, instead of using
> > the L-word so often?
> >
> > [1] > Newsgroups:
> > mozilla.support.firefox,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,c omp.security.misc,24hoursupport.helpdesk
>
> Yes, we agree to disagree.

No, we don't, because one can not "disagree" with *facts* [1]. One can
*ignore* them - and we're not really suprised that you do -, one can
*challenge* them, etc., but one can't disagree with them.

So since you didn't challenge any of my statements, we can only
conclude that you agree with them and will abide by them in future.

[1] Yes, most of what I wrote is fact, not opinion.