How to upload binary ZIP file to net anonymously?

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:49:34 +0100, Peter K?hlmann wrote:

No, Android cannot be secured. It phones home by default. It's
extremely difficult to block. It has numerous backdoors, so you have
to update it with new backdoors when hackers discover the old ones.
When you update it Google sucks all your data.

Good thing is that you don't have the foggiest what you are babbling about

I will open a separate thread on where exactly (facts only) Android is
doing that stuff above, so that we can outline solutions (facts only) to
negate those things if they are happening.

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:25:24 -0200, Shadow wrote:

No, Android cannot be secured.

My responses below are NOT meant to belittle your opinion that Android is
less secure than iOS. My response below is merely to obtain facts on where
Android is less secure than iOS, and then, the only goal will be to turn
off those "phone home" features, which I think I have already done.

All I care about are facts.
These are facts:
1. No consumer mobile device is "secure" out of the box. Not one.
2. People use Google apps on iOS too (which has the same issues).
3. Android "is" harder to secure (it takes more intelligence) though.

I already gave you a half dozen facts in my prior post which I do to better
"secure" Android. What are your facts that these dozen things don't make my
Android device as secure (and even more secure in some ways_ than iOS
devices, e.g., I've removed the Advertiser ID on non-rooted Android while
it's impossible to do that on non-jailbroken iOS)?

Facts are all that matter.
Not opinion (which may be based purely on Apple Marketing shiny stuff).

It phones home by default.

Tell us one fact of how that happens.
Just one fact.
And I'll show you how to turn it off.

What is your one fact where Android phones home?
If you can tell me that, I will tell you how I secured my phone against it.

It's extremely difficult to block.

I have blocked everything I know about.
Is there something, a fact, that you want to list that I can show you how
I've blocked it?

It has numerous backdoors, so you have
to update it with new backdoors when hackers discover the old ones.

All operating systems have zero-day bugs you are not going to know about.
The only way you find out is when they're discovered, which happens on iOS
and on Android.

If you know of a single back door that I haven't already blocked, that's
all I want to know. Facts.

When you update it Google sucks all your data.

Hmmmm.... When you update what? The operating system?
What "data" does Google "suck" that Apple doesn't suck when you update iOS?
Facts please.


And you still have not told me why you need to be anonymous to
send the URL of an app to a friend.

I told you twice, but I'll tell you again.
1. I eat food.
2. I write books.

The fact I eat food and the fact I write books are independent facts.
They're not directly related.
So you asking why I eat food to write books is a nonsense question.
It can't be answered.

Let's try this again:
1. I am anonymous when on the net.
2. I gave someone a URL last week.

The fact I am anonymous on the net and the fact I gave someone a URL last
week are independent facts. They are not directly related.

All you're doing is repeating your nonsense question, and I keep repeating
my factual answer to your nonsense question.

The fact you don't (apparently) understand (or accept) the answer is not an
indication that I didn't give the correct answer (multiple times already).

(yes, I know about all the other stuff you mentioned, I'm
familiar with aircrack-ng. I even used Kismet back in the day. Note :
calling your things "a" "b" and "c" would ID you in a flash. That must
be the Uniquemost name on the internet. Call your PC some singer or
actor's name, and rotate them).

My naming algorithm is more complex than I wrote in a Usenet article.
I am aware of security by obscurity measures.

Back to the discussion of where Android is less secure than iOS, I'm
perfectly able to agree with you - but for everything I've found that is
insecure, I've implemented a fix.

So that's why I ask for simple facts (and not Apple Marketing shiny stuff).

Stijn De Jong wrote:

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:49:34 +0100, Peter K?hlmann wrote:

No, Android cannot be secured. It phones home by default. It's
extremely difficult to block. It has numerous backdoors, so you have
to update it with new backdoors when hackers discover the old ones.
When you update it Google sucks all your data.

Good thing is that you don't have the foggiest what you are babbling
about

I will open a separate thread on where exactly (facts only) Android is
doing that stuff above, so that we can outline solutions (facts only) to
negate those things if they are happening.

Fine. Do so. And leave alt.os.linux out of it. Although Android is partly
linux, it is still off-topic here. And dimbulbs like "Shadow" are already
enough present, "Shadow" is certainly not needed

In article , Stijn De Jong
wrote:


It's extremely difficult to block.

I have blocked everything I know about.

and you *can't* block what you don't know about.

you've proved his point

nospam wrote:

In article , Stijn De Jong
wrote:


It's extremely difficult to block.

I have blocked everything I know about.

and you *can't* block what you don't know about.

you've proved his point

Ye gods. Now this "nospam" cretin is invading this linux group, too. Have
the reasononable apple users shown you the door, you freaking idiot twit?

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:21:49 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:25:24 -0200, Shadow wrote:

No, Android cannot be secured.

My responses below are NOT meant to belittle your opinion that Android is
less secure than iOS.

Huh ? iOS is as insecure as Android.
They both leak like strainers.
Just fire up a wifi monitor and watch (or set up a Linux box
as a "fake"router. probably better, that way you will see the
Megabytes of your private data being uploaded).

I switch on my XP ---- absolute network silence. The only
time my router blinks is when my PC pings it, once every 10 minutes or
so.... I can leave Wireshark on and leave for hours, and when I get
back all there is recorded are the pings and the replies. Zero
leakage.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 18:37:48 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
wrote:

nospam wrote:

In article , Stijn De Jong
wrote:


It's extremely difficult to block.

I have blocked everything I know about.

and you *can't* block what you don't know about.

you've proved his point

Ye gods. Now this "nospam" cretin is invading this linux group, too. Have
the reasononable apple users shown you the door, you freaking idiot twit?

Kind of wonder who the **** IS. You left the Linux groups
there in your reply-to fields.... cretin.

Newsgroups:
comp.mobile.android,microsoft.public.windowsxp.gen eral,ALT.OS.LINUX
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

In microsoft.public.windowsxp.general, on Wed, 15 Feb 2017 03:05:41
-0500, tlvp wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 02:37:34 -0500, micky wrote:

Earlier:
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 16:06:06 -0500, tlvp wrote:
... Play Store, now up to v. 6.0.9, no longer
offers v. 3.2.0, and that the only places that are offering it are sites
whose practices may be ... let's say ... on the shady side.

Any advice where safely to get that particular older (circa 2014-era)
version? From apk4fun? apkdom? appsuu? apkapk.org? 9apps? other?

What's wrong with apk4fun.

Yup, that was (part of) my question :-) .

It says it has mobi.infolife.appbackup-3.2.0-www.APK4Fun.com.apk
and the file length is 3,318,353, which converts to 3,241KB, the same
length that you have above.

...

I looked at 4 reviews and they all say it's okay. Except for the 2nd
one, AVG, I don't know ...

There's "all" and there's "all but one". Very different (4 vs. 3).

I mean that I have heard of AVG and I think they must be reliable, since
I've relied on them for years.

... who reviews the reviewers, but check out

https://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/apk4fun.com

But AVG is reliable:
http://www.avgthreatlabs.com/us-en/w...n/apk4fun.com/
No current active malware appears on this website. However, during the
last 30 days potentially active threats did appear on a subdomain.
Last update: Feb 12, 2017
Safety Rating Safe
Malware Found 1
Compromised Pages 0

"Malware Found: 1" is one too many for me, thanks :-) .

They still thought it was safe. Maybe there was something the malware
that wasn't mal.

More reassuring is that neither VirusTotal nor Jotti found anything
suspicious in the apk4fun-provided .apk archive I might want to be using.

Thanks for your investigations on my behalf. Cheers, -- tlvp

Sure. TBH, it sounds like something I should want too.