Paranoid safety thread.

I want to configure my anonymous system using virtualization, VPN and Tor (and all sorts of other networks, for example, use i2p to communicate in XMPP). Nevertheless, I do not have (as it seems to me) sufficient knowledge to realize the level of anonymity of which I want to achieve. I’ll start with the use of the tor, the use of the tor network is fixed by the Internet provider, the project for solving this problem offers to use bridges, but the fact is that they are regularly detected, it makes sense to change them regularly, which brings a number of unnecessary inconveniences, you can use this problem to solve this problem In addition to bridges, a bunch of two VPN services (not one, namely two!), The second problem follows from the VPN: what to use in general? I honestly don't see any reason to buy a paid VPN, it will be superior to a free VPN only in speed and nothing more, but personally it seems that way to me. However, if you use your own VPN server, this can cause suspicion and excess attention to itself. Regarding virtual machines: I'm not fully sure which OS to choose for them, I plan to configure 3 virtual machines: 1 - for everyday activity 2 - for private activity 3 - for private communication The first will be used by the devuan Linux (due to the lack of systemd in it), in the other two I plan to use OpenBSD or hyperbola, but again, I am not sure how it makes sense. Well, the most important problem is perhaps the risk of deanonymization through the activity itself. I can give me out of my behavior and all sorts of other nuances that depend exclusively on my behavior, etc., but how really can it be so really so much to control my behavior? For this, one way or another, a huge ability to self-control, which I, due to abuse of amphetamines, did not seem at all left at all. Give the advice of paranoid, what you are ready to share without worrying, I will be grateful.

a long while ago i was very paranoid with computers due to the cannabis i was using regularly at the time. with computers it's a question of if you want to put obstacles in your way for security. having to type in a password for every invocation of sudo/doas is more secure, but it's really annoying when you are just trying to do something. currently, i just rely on disk encryption for my login. my system has no passwords but users can't log into each other and there is an admin account for privs just in case i catch a trojan/popped shell or something. at the end of the day, having a very secure computer is basically fine, do what you want with that. the worrying part is that you seem very afraid of being detected based on behaviours/tells. at that point, you are cutting yourself short and hyperfixating on every possible action you take. take it from me, it is no way to live. your thoughts and feelings and desires won't go away, you'll just be hiding from them and suffering. the dead end of this road is not having any sense of self. i implore you to try some kind of art like painting or poetry, even if it's not "good" by some snob's standards the important part is self-expression. you don't even have to share it, it is for yourself.

>>24513 Thanks for the concern dude, but get in the position - I really if anything am afraid in terms of compromising me through my paternal behaviors. This is entirely my conscious choice. I'm willing to sacrifice the need for intimacy etc for my own safety. When I'm willing to allow a scary vulnerability in the form of honesty - I do it either in anonymous chats with strangers. In short, my safety is really important to me, and I believe that all the sacrifices I will make for it will be absolutely justified

>>24512 >Nevertheless, I do not have (as it seems to me) sufficient knowledge to realize the level of anonymity of which I want to achieve. You sincerely need a threat model or you'll be doing what >>24513 describes. The ultimate solution nonetheless is to remove yourself from the wired, there's a whole world out there. You'll survive, the internet is only 30 years old.

>>24512 Until you clarify what you need safety from, and/or develop and share a threat model (as >>24515 states), you will simply be applying measures without understanding what they are meant to protect you from. I don't care to pry into the exact reasons for setting up such a system, as those are yours to share as you please. That said, there are some notes I can make in regards to what you've mentioned. The more anonymisers you pile onto your connection, the more noticeable you become. "Anonymous" means someone knows what you are doing but not who you are. "Private" means someone knows who you are but not what you are doing. You cannot be both at the same time. Regardless of what measures you take. If someone wants to pwn you, and they are dedicated and powerful enough and have enough funds and time to devote to the task, they will eventually do so (Source: Dread Pirate Roberts, Pompompurin, various dark net market vendors/admins, cybercriminals). Defenders have to be perfect, attackers simply need to find a single vulnerability and exploit it properly. As >>24515 mentions, the ultimate solution is to remove yourself from the wired. To work towards that, you are best off parring down the technology you use to an absolute minimum (main computer and perhaps a dumbphone/severely crippled smartphone running a "secure" OS), and then securing and configuring your options from there. When you have a threat model and a set of devices, read through various anonymisers and how they work, what attacks have been made against them (if any), and how they fit into your threat model. Try journaling in a physical notebook. If you must be honest to "anonymous" strangers, pretend the journal is a means of interacting with one. Some reading for later: https://0x00sec.org/t/hacking-john-doe/716 - Thought experiment on de anonymizing someone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGiUhjuB22Y - Darknet OpSec By a Veteran Darknet Vendor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHSJ4l-f1T4 - Hunting Threat Actors Using OSINT

>>24517 > You cannot be both at the same time. I could understand if you mean to the same people but anything you will be private to one group and anonymous to another. Like your ISP knows if you are using some sort of private network but those at the other end of the network might not know who you are just what you are doing. Is that what you mean ? Since it seems obvious information passed it has to be one or the other with specific groups or individuals in mind but if you meant all over it makes no sense since one can lead to the other in the grand picture.

Sounds like the type of workflow that Qubes would excel at, is there any reason why you don't wanna just use Whonix inside of Qubes? Also I don't understand how there is no difference between a privately paid vpn that has been audited and subpoena and one that has not

It astonishes me that people think that VPNs (especially public ones) have ANYTHING to do with privacy. Their primary use is to access larger networks like for example - remote work. This is exactly what the protocol is currently designed to be compatible with.