f



[NEWS] 33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012, first quarter of 2013 over 10 million devices.

"33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
https://www.security.nl/artikel/45891/1/'33_miljoen_Android-toestellen_besmet_in_2012'.html
'Yesterday, 17:33 by Editor
In the past year, more than 32.8 million smartphones and tablets with the 
Linux Android operating system by malware infected. More than a 200% 
increase over 2011, when there were 10.8 million units became infected. 
Claims that the mobile security company NQ Mobile. Most infections found in 
China, followed by India and Russia.Most malware that was discovered last 
year in NQ Mobile falls into the category of "Potentially Unwanted 
Programs". These are root exploits, spyware, adware and Trojans stubborn. 
28% of mobile malware is designed to personal data of infected Linux Android 
users to earn.bricking Remarkably could reach 7% of malware designed with 
the sole purpose of "demolition" of the aircraft, known as "bricking". As it 
looks now, the number of contaminated tablets and smartphones this year, 
higher end. The security company estimates that in the first quarter of 2013 
over 10 million devices have become infected.

Oh dear, that's 45 Million Linux Android devices (and rising)
Seems that Linux Android is the virus magnet now!

-- 
Major Linux Problems on the Desktop
or Why Linux is not (yet) Ready for the Desktop,
2013 edition
http://bit.ly/gBOiz6 

0
Cola_Zealot (1051)
4/16/2013 5:21:24 PM
comp.os.linux.advocacy 124139 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

48 Replies
528 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 58

On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:21:24 +0200, Cola Zealot wrote:

> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
> https://www.security.nl/artikel/45891/1/'33_miljoen_Android-toestellen_besmet_in_2012'.html
> 'Yesterday, 17:33 by Editor
> In the past year, more than 32.8 million smartphones and tablets with the 
> Linux Android operating system by malware infected. More than a 200% 
> increase over 2011, when there were 10.8 million units became infected. 
> Claims that the mobile security company NQ Mobile. Most infections found in 
> China, followed by India and Russia.Most malware that was discovered last 
> year in NQ Mobile falls into the category of "Potentially Unwanted 
> Programs". These are root exploits, spyware, adware and Trojans stubborn. 
> 28% of mobile malware is designed to personal data of infected Linux Android 
> users to earn.bricking Remarkably could reach 7% of malware designed with 
> the sole purpose of "demolition" of the aircraft, known as "bricking". As it 
> looks now, the number of contaminated tablets and smartphones this year, 
> higher end. The security company estimates that in the first quarter of 2013 
> over 10 million devices have become infected.
> 
> Oh dear, that's 45 Million Linux Android devices (and rising)
> Seems that Linux Android is the virus magnet now!

As predicted.
When Linux reaches enough market share to be worth attacking, the
attacks will commence.

I'm so glad I switched to an iPhone.

-- 
flatfish+++
PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
0
phlatphish (6977)
4/16/2013 5:41:46 PM
Cola Zealot wrote:

> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"


That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
within 5 minutes of being reported.

This Microshaft Zealot forgets to mention
none of these 33 million are still active once the
user connects back into google's servers because
they are zapped on reconnection!!





Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?


Not anymore me thinks!




Trolling is an Industry in USA
------------------------------

Hiring low pay online trolls is ignorant.

Those hiring online trolls are too afraid to make a statement
in person in case their bollocks got cut off and sold
on ebay for 2 cents.

Most US politicians and businesses
are so corrupt and reliant to the point of addiction
on trolls and trolling and so they fund it all illegally
through charities because
funding through charities is untraceable
through loopholes in US law.

Nearly all foul mouthed trolling across all of usenet and forums
originates from the USA trolling industry.
The same ones screaming abuse against Americans 
are the same ones screaming abuse at the rest of the world.
The US politician is proud because without their
daily dose of illegal funding through charities, and the
services of industrial strength trolling machinery,
they would be out flipping burgers for a living.

Troll friendly usenet sites like eternal-september.org
banned by att.net, ameritech.net, bellsouth.net, pacbell.net
and prodigy.net for its foul mouth and lies over trolling
and off topic spammer friendly posting policies against 
the usenet charter of all known groups is where all of 
the trolling problems begins.

The US politicians, embassy staff and anyone else falling for it like 
Spanish government should know that the US trolls 
ordering embassies to this kind of work
have no mandate for these kinds of activities.

Just rich companies that have bank rolled teams of asstroturfers
to create fake support and certainly no mandate.
Companies like Eedleman also run fake survey companies
and delete everything except outlying data to fake their reports
to add legitimacy to their trolling campaigns.

The US trolling companies now set up branch offices
in foreign countries like Netherlands
and UK to post illegally and subversively what is 
handed down the chain of command leading all the way to
fake charities and marketing trolls 
shielded illegally behind big corporations in US.
Wikileaks tells us 5% of all US diplomatic activity is to
do with Appil and Micorshaft trolls and their 
trolling armies controlling US diplomatic services
at tax payer expense as their personal puppets.

There is NO MANDATE when fake asstroturfers are driving
the agenda.

The situation is so bad, it has spread into the military.
No one now knows who drives what agenda because
there is no traceability.

The fscking military, politicians, enviro nuts, music mafia,
using asstroturfing technology need the riot act read to them.

The situation is so incomprehensible that
the US has been declared falsely that it is the most charitable nation in
the world when at the same time 3 million US families
are living in shelter, and most of that charity money is fake
money being diverted from corporations into the coffers of asstroturfing
and PR companies. What would you do if you were 
forced into a shelter and all your charity
money was stolen from your charity?
You are down and they still want to steal YOUR CHARITY MONEY?!??
Thats right you would tell them NEVER and tell
them fsck off in no uncertain terms and get the law changed 
to make it a criminal offense to steal charity money
or spend it on anything other than 100% certified peer reviewed charity
without kickbacks, without creative accounting and
without morally unjust criminal behavior within
the charity system.

Most of the money funneled through
charities never make it to charitable causes in the USA.
It is stolen by politicians and pressure groups to cover
up their fake funding routes for asstroturfing.
They are used to it so we got to get over it?

No thanks!!!!

Not a single politician, embassy staff or military has a
mandate for one single political agenda because no one
knows who is funding who and who's agenda is real
and whose agenda is fake. Every signature collected
is one more fake signature for a mandate written out by
asstroturfers.

Asstroturfing through charities undermines society,
and all the nations dealing with US
and it must stop because no one in US has any legitimate
mandates for any of this activity any more.

If they have it, then should display their mandate
with pride, and show where the support had come from
and if any of it is through charities, then the
whole mandate is faked because charity status is being
abused to hide funding routes for corporate asstroturfing.



Asstroturfer offerings
----------------------


I've just read the contents of the fbo.gov solicitation RTB220610

The US government wants asstroturfers and with it sophisticated
asstroturfing technology to drown out democratic free speech,
and then hide from those whom it seeks to victimize.

It was point no.3 that caught my eye:
0003- Static IP Address Management

What that means is the same as what I've been saying for a while about 
doofi, flatcake and clog are true.

They are not individuals but a whole asstroturfing team
behind each sock puppet.

There isn't enough memory between the sock operators to know
or remember what had been said earlier so you know the
conversations are being typed out by multiple individuals
impersonating each other.
It was notable gaffs by the goofy doofy sock that first gave it away.

The asstroturfing teams had already gone into government and offered them
consulting services about what technology and asstroturfing
practices were out there for fbo.gov to decide what they will
purchase in solicitation RTB220610. Burson-Marstelar
won the contract performing all the activities
required in the solicitation with fantastic usenet software
tools for targeting individuals and trolling 24/7
and all built in outsourced India.


:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D 



https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d88e9d660336be91552fe8c1a51bacb2&tab=core&_cview=1
 
Solicitation Number: RTB220610 
Notice Type: Sources Sought 
Synopsis: Added: 2010-06-22 13:42:52Jun 22, 2010 1:42 pm
Modified: 2010-06-22  14:07:11Jun 22, 2010 2:07 pmTrack Changes 

0001- Online Persona Management Service.

50 User Licenses, 10 Personas per user. Software will
allow 10 personas per user, replete with background,
history, supporting details, and cyber presences 
that are technically, culturally and geographically
consistent. Individual applications will enable an 
operator to exercise a number of different online 
persons from the same workstation and without fear
of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries.
Personas must be able to appear to originate in 
nearly any part of the world and can interact through
conventional online services and social media platforms.
The service includes a user friendly application 
environment to maximize the user's situational
awareness by displaying real-time local information. 

 
0002- Secure Virtual Private Network (VPN).

1 each VPN provides the ability for users to 
daily and automatically obtain 
randomly selected IP addresses through 
which they can access the internet. The daily 
rotation of the user s IP address prevents compromise 
during observation of likely or targeted web sites 
or services, while hiding the existence of the
operation. In addition, may provide traffic mixing, 
blending the user s traffic with traffic from multitudes
of users from outside the organization. This traffic 
blending provides excellent cover and powerful deniability.
Anonymizer Enterprise Chameleon or equal

 
0003- Static IP Address Management.


:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D 


50 each Licence protects the identity of government 
agencies and enterprise organizations. Enables organizations
to manage their persistent online personas by assigning
static IP addresses to each persona. Individuals
can perform static impersonations, which allow
them to look like the same person over time. Also allows
organizations that frequent same site/service often to
easily switch IP addresses to look like ordinary
users as opposed to one organization.
Anonymizer IP Mapper License or equal

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D 

 
0004- Virtual Private Servers,

CONUS. 1 each Provides CONUS or OCONUS points of 
presence locations that are setup for each customer 
based on the geographic area of operations the 
customer is operating within and which allow a 
customer?s online persona(s) to appear to originate
from. Ability to provide virtual private servers that 
are procured using commercial hosting centers around 
the world and which are established anonymously. Once 
procured, the geosite is incorporated into the network 
and integrated within the customers environment and 
ready for use by the customer. Unless specifically 
designated as shared, locations are dedicated for use 
by each customer and never shared among other customers. 
Anonymizer Annual Dedicated CONUS Light Geosite or equal

 
0005- Virtual Private Servers, OCONUS.

8 Each Provides CONUS or OCONUS points of presence 
locations that are setup for each customer based on 
the geographic area of operations the customer is
operating within and which allow a customer?s 
online persona(s) to appear to
originate from. Ability to provide virtual private 
servers that are procured using commercial hosting 
centers around the world and which are established 
anonymously. Once procured, the geosite is incorporated 
into the network and integrated within the customers 
environment and ready for use by the customer. Unless 
specifically designated as shared, locations are dedicated 
for use by each customer and never shared among other 
customers. Anonymizer Annual Dedicated OCONUS Light 
Geosite or equal

 
0006- Remote Access Secure Virtual Private Network.

1 each Secure Operating Environment provides a reliable 
and protected computing environment from which to stage 
and conduct operations. Every session uses a clean 
Virtual Machine (VM) image. The solution is accessed 
through sets of Virtual Private Network (VPN) devices 
located at each Customer facility. The fully-managed 
VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) is an environment 
that allows users remote access from their desktop into 
a VM. Upon session termination, the VM is deleted and 
any virus, worm, or malicious software that the user 
inadvertently downloaded is destroyed. Anonymizer 
Virtual Desktop  Infrastructure (VDI) Solution or equal.


Contracting Office Address: 
 2606 Brown Pelican Ave.
 MacDill AFB, Florida 33621-5000 
 United States 
 Place of Performance: 
 Performance will be at MacDIll AFB, Kabul, Afghanistan and Baghdad, Iraq.
 MacDill AFB , Florida 33679 
 United States 
 
Primary Point of Contact.: 
 Russell Beasley,
 Contracting Officer
 russell.beasley-02@macdill.af.mil
 Phone: (813) 828-4729
 Fax: (813) 828-5111

0
4/16/2013 10:48:03 PM
7 wrote:

> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
>
> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>
> This Microshaft Zealot forgets to mention
> none of these 33 million are still active once the
> user connects back into google's servers because
> they are zapped on reconnection!!
>
>
> Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
> hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?
>
>
> Not anymore me thinks!

Nah, they never were worth listening to. 
They're just twatwafflers.

-- 
There's one episode of M.A.S.H. where Burns asks Hawkeye 
"why did you take an instant dislike to me" 
that gets the reply "because it saves a lot of time"

I feel the same way about trolls, hence the kf.
0
wp2061 (3218)
4/16/2013 11:06:28 PM
retarded "7" <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote 
in message news:Eykbt.23832$RJ2.14588@fx03.fr7...
> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
>
>
> Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
> hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?
>

A idiot troll like Joseph Michael from gplsquared.com is an expert when it 
comes to low pay.

> "The report found that the average salary for Linux professionals was
> $90,853 (�58,654). That's 6.2 per cent higher than the $85,619 (�55,274)
> average for tech professionals generally."

If the "average" is a little over $90k then how stupid is this person?  This 
person is evidently way, way, way below average in both skills and 
intelligence.

<quote>
"I use Linux and open source tools for my every day job. Around $1100 per 
week."

7-tard. Drooling over the burger-flipping salary he makes with Linux.
Sun, 22 Apr 2012
Message-ID: <G_Ykr.348244$xD4.289577@fx06.am4>
</quote>




0
zeke1302 (4199)
4/16/2013 11:54:49 PM
On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
>
> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>

No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.

<snipped glue induced hallucinations>


0
mist (19747)
4/17/2013 12:43:51 AM
On Apr 16, 5:43=A0pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>
> > Cola Zealot wrote:
>
> >> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
> > That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> > there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> > within 5 minutes of being reported.
>
> No proof whatsoever. =A0Just a figament of your imagination.
>
> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>

Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
every time.
0
fretwizzen (406)
4/17/2013 12:51:49 AM
On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>>
>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>
>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>
>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>
>> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>>
>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>
> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
> every time.
>
I'd rather not.  But that is up to you.  I just ignore it.
Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on 
something all the time.

0
mist (19747)
4/17/2013 4:12:45 AM
"GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote in message 
news:zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@bresnan.com...
> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>
>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>
>>
>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>
>
> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>
> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>

Joseph Michael (aka "7")  is a fifty-something year old loser who still 
lives at home with his mother. That's not something that I made up... that's 
a published fact.

(From a interview) "But you would hardly know it from the two houses in 
North London where he (Joseph Michael) lives with his parents and a 
brother."

Is that documented liar still claiming to be the "European Inventor of the 
Year?"



0
zeke1302 (4199)
4/17/2013 11:34:48 AM
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:54:49 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

> retarded "7" <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote 
> in message news:Eykbt.23832$RJ2.14588@fx03.fr7...
>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>
>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>
>>
>>
>> Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
>> hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?
>>
> 
> A idiot troll like Joseph Michael from gplsquared.com is an expert when it 
> comes to low pay.
> 
>> "The report found that the average salary for Linux professionals was
>> $90,853 (�58,654). That's 6.2 per cent higher than the $85,619 (�55,274)
>> average for tech professionals generally."
> 
> If the "average" is a little over $90k then how stupid is this person?  This 
> person is evidently way, way, way below average in both skills and 
> intelligence.
> 
> <quote>
> "I use Linux and open source tools for my every day job. Around $1100 per 
> week."
> 
> 7-tard. Drooling over the burger-flipping salary he makes with Linux.
> Sun, 22 Apr 2012
> Message-ID: <G_Ykr.348244$xD4.289577@fx06.am4>
> </quote>

But Chris Ahlstrom says 7 = Joseph Michael is zany and insightful.
Of course Chris Ahlstrom also sucks up to Mark S. Bilk and Owl so his
judgment seems to be a bit skewed in the kook direction.

-- 
flatfish+++
PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
0
phlatphish (6977)
4/17/2013 11:51:33 AM
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:34:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

> "GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote in message 
> news:zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@bresnan.com...
>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>>
>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>>
>>>
>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>>
>>
>> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>>
>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>>
> 
> Joseph Michael (aka "7")  is a fifty-something year old loser who still 
> lives at home with his mother. That's not something that I made up... that's 
> a published fact.
> 
> (From a interview) "But you would hardly know it from the two houses in 
> North London where he (Joseph Michael) lives with his parents and a 
> brother."
> 
> Is that documented liar still claiming to be the "European Inventor of the 
> Year?"

Yep.
And not a single Linux "advocate" in COLA has challenged him on that
statement.



-- 
flatfish+++
PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
0
phlatphish (6977)
4/17/2013 12:01:37 PM
On Apr 16, 10:12=A0pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>
> >>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
> >>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
> >>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> >>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> >>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>
> >> No proof whatsoever. =A0Just a figament of your imagination.
>
> >> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>
> > Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
> > must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
> > every time.
>
> I'd rather not. =A0But that is up to you. =A0I just ignore it.
> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
> something all the time.

I agree. By the way, the post you responded to was a forgery. My email
address is: fretwizzer@gmail.com (compare the length of my posting
history using this email address to Snit's forgery). Also,
unfortunately, I don't have a Mac that runs 10.8, yet ;)

X-Received: by 10.224.88.200 with SMTP id b8mr3361144qam.
8.1366159910040;
        Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.49.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr480967qev.
36.1366159910012; Tue,
 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
Path: ef9ni42441qab.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no48136123qab.0!
postnews.google.com!c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-
host=3D198.27.74.59; posting-account=3DJEXf8QoAAABo3UPk_KXdmH0JZp_Y4seO
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
References: <516d8845$0$11999$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org> <Eykbt.
23832$RJ2.14588@fx03.fr7>
 <zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:
20.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
Message-ID: <34a6efaf-
e43e-45cc-9913-785942f0546d@c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
From: Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:51:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

0
fretwizzer (2810)
4/17/2013 2:12:05 PM
On 4/16/13 9:12 PM, in article yeednUk1a9_dvPPMnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@bresnan.com,
"GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:

> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>> 
>>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>> 
>>> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>>> 
>>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>> 
>> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
>> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
>> every time.
>> 
> I'd rather not.  But that is up to you.  I just ignore it.
> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
> something all the time.
> 
Carroll is back to begging for my attention. Hard. Whatever.

-- 
"I mischaracterize things you say." - Brad cc Wiggins 

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/17/2013 2:21:09 PM
On Apr 17, 8:21=A0am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/16/13 9:12 PM, in article yeednUk1a9_dvPPMnZ2dnUVZ_oedn...@bresnan.c=
om,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> > On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>
> >>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
> >>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
> >>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> >>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> >>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>
> >>> No proof whatsoever. =A0Just a figament of your imagination.
>
> >>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>
> >> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
> >> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
> >> every time.
>
> > I'd rather not. =A0But that is up to you. =A0I just ignore it.
> > Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
> > something all the time.
>
> Carroll is back to begging for my attention. Hard. Whatever.

Says the forger 'Mr. Victim'
0
fretwizzer (2810)
4/17/2013 2:22:51 PM
On 4/17/2013 8:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Apr 16, 10:12 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>>
>>>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>
>>>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>
>>>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>>>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>>>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>
>>>> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>>
>>>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>>
>>> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
>>> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
>>> every time.
>>
>> I'd rather not.  But that is up to you.  I just ignore it.
>> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
>> something all the time.
>
> I agree. By the way, the post you responded to was a forgery. My email
> address is: fretwizzer@gmail.com (compare the length of my posting
> history using this email address to Snit's forgery). Also,
> unfortunately, I don't have a Mac that runs 10.8, yet ;)
>
> X-Received: by 10.224.88.200 with SMTP id b8mr3361144qam.
> 8.1366159910040;
>          Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> X-Received: by 10.49.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr480967qev.
> 36.1366159910012; Tue,
>   16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
> Path: ef9ni42441qab.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no48136123qab.0!
> postnews.google.com!c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
> Injection-Info: c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-
> host=198.27.74.59; posting-account=JEXf8QoAAABo3UPk_KXdmH0JZp_Y4seO
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
> References: <516d8845$0$11999$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org> <Eykbt.
> 23832$RJ2.14588@fx03.fr7>
>   <zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
> User-Agent: G2/1.0
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:
> 20.0)
>   Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
> Message-ID: <34a6efaf-
> e43e-45cc-9913-785942f0546d@c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
> From: Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com>
> Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:51:50 +0000
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>

I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is 
there, but can't that be forged as well?
Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are 
conversing?  I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of it.

0
mist (19747)
4/17/2013 4:34:45 PM
On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dnZ2d@bresnan.com,
"GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:

> On 4/17/2013 8:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> On Apr 16, 10:12 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>>> 
>>>>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>> 
>>>>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>> 
>>>>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>>>>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>>>>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>> 
>>>>> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>>> 
>>>>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>>> 
>>>> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
>>>> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
>>>> every time.
>>> 
>>> I'd rather not.  But that is up to you.  I just ignore it.
>>> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
>>> something all the time.
>> 
>> I agree. By the way, the post you responded to was a forgery. My email
>> address is: fretwizzer@gmail.com (compare the length of my posting
>> history using this email address to Snit's forgery). Also,
>> unfortunately, I don't have a Mac that runs 10.8, yet ;)
>> 
>> X-Received: by 10.224.88.200 with SMTP id b8mr3361144qam.
>> 8.1366159910040;
>>          Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> X-Received: by 10.49.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr480967qev.
>> 36.1366159910012; Tue,
>>   16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
>> Path: ef9ni42441qab.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no48136123qab.0!
>> postnews.google.com!c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
>> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
>> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
>> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
>> Injection-Info: c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-
>> host=198.27.74.59; posting-account=JEXf8QoAAABo3UPk_KXdmH0JZp_Y4seO
>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
>> References: <516d8845$0$11999$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org> <Eykbt.
>> 23832$RJ2.14588@fx03.fr7>
>>   <zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
>> User-Agent: G2/1.0
>> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:
>> 20.0)
>>   Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
>> Message-ID: <34a6efaf-
>> e43e-45cc-9913-785942f0546d@c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
>> From: Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com>
>> Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:51:50 +0000
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>> 
> 
> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> there, but can't that be forged as well?

It can. Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP. No idea
how it was done but it can be done. Carroll denied it but the wording was
clearly his.

> Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are
> conversing?  I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of it.

Carroll does that with different Google accounts. No idea why. Does Google
have a limit on the number of posts one can make in a day or an hour or
something? That is my *guess* but maybe he does it just to play the victim -
I have seen in the past where he blamed me for posting as him... including
with his main account (maybe he claims I was able to forge his headers as he
forged mine). 

-- 
"It is often hard to persuade the developers of one component to do what
improves the system as a whole rather than what will make their own
component more useful and successful." -- Richard Stallman

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/17/2013 4:46:54 PM
On Apr 17, 10:46=A0am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.c=
om,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> > On 4/17/2013 8:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> On Apr 16, 10:12 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >>> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>
> >>>> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
> >>>>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> >>>>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> >>>>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>
> >>>>> No proof whatsoever. =A0Just a figament of your imagination.
>
> >>>>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>
> >>>> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you tw=
o
> >>>> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
> >>>> every time.
>
> >>> I'd rather not. =A0But that is up to you. =A0I just ignore it.
> >>> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
> >>> something all the time.
>
> >> I agree. By the way, the post you responded to was a forgery. My email
> >> address is: fretwiz...@gmail.com (compare the length of my posting
> >> history using this email address to Snit's forgery). Also,
> >> unfortunately, I don't have a Mac that runs 10.8, yet ;)
>
> >> X-Received: by 10.224.88.200 with SMTP id b8mr3361144qam.
> >> 8.1366159910040;
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
> >> MIME-Version: 1.0
> >> X-Received: by 10.49.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr480967qev.
> >> 36.1366159910012; Tue,
> >> =A0 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
> >> Path: ef9ni42441qab.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no48136123qab.0!
> >> postnews.google.com!c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> >> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
> >> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
> >> Complaints-To: groups-ab...@google.com
> >> Injection-Info: c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-
> >> host=3D198.27.74.59; posting-account=3DJEXf8QoAAABo3UPk_KXdmH0JZp_Y4se=
O
> >> NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
> >> References: <516d8845$0$11999$6e1ed...@read.cnntp.org> <Eykbt.
> >> 23832$RJ2.14...@fx03.fr7>
> >> =A0 <zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dn...@bresnan.com>
> >> User-Agent: G2/1.0
> >> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:
> >> 20.0)
> >> =A0 Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
> >> Message-ID: <34a6efaf-
> >> e43e-45cc-9913-785942f05...@c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
> >> Subject: Re: Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
> >> From: Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com>
> >> Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:51:50 +0000
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> > I'm not familiar with forging headers. =A0The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> > there, but can't that be forged as well?
>
> It can.

No, it can't.

> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.

And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.

> No idea how it was done but it can be done.

It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
happening.

> Carroll denied it but the wording was clearly his.

The "wording" is mine? Care to explain how that works on usenet (in a
text medium)?

> > Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people ar=
e
> > conversing? =A0I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out o=
f it.
>
> Carroll does that with different Google accounts

Bull. I have one Google account, you will never be able to offer proof
that shows anything other than this because no proof exists.

> No idea why.

But you know why you're doing it.

> Does Google
> have a limit on the number of posts one can make in a day or an hour or
> something?

Asked Snit as he dishonestly pretends not to know about the
limitations to his multiple Google accounts.

> That is my *guess* but maybe he does it just to play the victim

Said the guy doing it to play the victim. Explain how I am a 'victim'
by forging myself while pointing out your lies. This makes sense to
you? Of course, which is why we find only *you* suggesting it. Better
cap off now ;)

> I have seen in the past where he blamed me for posting as him... includin=
g
> with his main account

And you'll prove this BS any minute now, too...
0
fretwizzer (2810)
4/17/2013 5:49:02 PM
On Apr 17, 10:34=A0am, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> On 4/17/2013 8:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 16, 10:12 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>
> >>>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>
> >>>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>
> >>>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
> >>>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
> >>>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>
> >>>> No proof whatsoever. =A0Just a figament of your imagination.
>
> >>>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>
> >>> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
> >>> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
> >>> every time.
>
> >> I'd rather not. =A0But that is up to you. =A0I just ignore it.
> >> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
> >> something all the time.
>
> > I agree. By the way, the post you responded to was a forgery. My email
> > address is: fretwiz...@gmail.com (compare the length of my posting
> > history using this email address to Snit's forgery). Also,
> > unfortunately, I don't have a Mac that runs 10.8, yet ;)
>
> > X-Received: by 10.224.88.200 with SMTP id b8mr3361144qam.
> > 8.1366159910040;
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > X-Received: by 10.49.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr480967qev.
> > 36.1366159910012; Tue,
> > =A0 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
> > Path: ef9ni42441qab.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no48136123qab.0!
> > postnews.google.com!c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> > Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
> > Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
> > Complaints-To: groups-ab...@google.com
> > Injection-Info: c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-
> > host=3D198.27.74.59; posting-account=3DJEXf8QoAAABo3UPk_KXdmH0JZp_Y4seO
> > NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
> > References: <516d8845$0$11999$6e1ed...@read.cnntp.org> <Eykbt.
> > 23832$RJ2.14...@fx03.fr7>
> > =A0 <zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dn...@bresnan.com>
> > User-Agent: G2/1.0
> > X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:
> > 20.0)
> > =A0 Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
> > Message-ID: <34a6efaf-
> > e43e-45cc-9913-785942f05...@c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
> > From: Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com>
> > Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:51:50 +0000
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> I'm not familiar with forging headers. =A0The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> there, but can't that be forged as well?

No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit couldn't
even get the email address right ;)

> Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are
> conversing? =A0I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of =
it.

Good advice. Snit dishonestly claims that the "wording" proves it was
me... I suspect you're well aware that I don't do what was done here
as you've never seen me do it. Notice that Snit also claims I forged
my own name (can you even do that?) to appear as a victim. I already
slam Snit with truths he doesn't want to face, so why would I forge my
own name to do it, all in an effort to appear 'victim'-like? This
makes NO sense at all... obviously the glue has taken over again for
poor Snit ;)

0
fretwizzer (2810)
4/17/2013 5:54:49 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

GreyCloud wrote:
> I'm not familiar with forging headers. The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> there, but can't that be forged as well?

<quote>
3.4.1 NNTP-Posting-Host

   This line is added to the header of a posted article by the server.
   The contents of the header is either the IP address or the fully
   qualified domain name of the client host posting the article.  The
   fully qualified domain name should be determined by doing a reverse
   lookup in the DNS on the IP address of the client.  If the client
   article contains this line, it is removed by the server before
   acceptance of the article by the Usenet transport system.

   This header provides some idea of the actual host posting the article
   as opposed to information in the Sender or From lines that may be
   present in the article.  This is not a fool-proof methodology since
   reverse lookups in the DNS are vulnerable to certain types of
   spoofing, but such discussions are outside the scope of this
   document.
</quote>
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2980

The NNTP-Posting-Host header can be forged by the server or by a client if 
the server has a bug that lets a client provided NNTP-Posting-Host header 
pass.

> Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are
> conversing?

Changing the IP can be easily done but changing the IP to a specific number, 
for example to forge someone specific, is usually not possible.

Another possibility would be to use the system with the IP in question as a 
proxy but that would probably require compromising that system.

> I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of it.

Nym forging is the reason why I started signing my posts.

Regards.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlFu5iMACgkQGQjO2ccW76odFAD+MGhu2Cpv5Nvtqmr/i/ySf9Tk
j0yMFOs5B04LaMnOPRUA/jG5CYuVdDxZZLHwyC6J4v++rq1LEnkAmL2WFVX4kfb8
=/M8j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

0
nomail6807 (1699)
4/17/2013 6:12:51 PM
GreyCloud wrote:


> No

Have you tried to answer this question yet:

 Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?


As you are just an online internet troll
with long history of online trolling,
I insist you read the OP and weep:

~~


That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
within 5 minutes of being reported.

This Microshaft Zealot forgets to mention
none of these 33 million are still active once the
user connects back into google's servers because
they are zapped on reconnection!!





Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?


Not anymore me thinks!




Trolling is an Industry in USA
------------------------------

Hiring low pay online trolls is ignorant.

Those hiring online trolls are too afraid to make a statement
in person in case their bollocks got cut off and sold
on ebay for 2 cents.

Most US politicians and businesses
are so corrupt and reliant to the point of addiction
on trolls and trolling and so they fund it all illegally
through charities because
funding through charities is untraceable
through loopholes in US law.

Nearly all foul mouthed trolling across all of usenet and forums
originates from the USA trolling industry.
The same ones screaming abuse against Americans 
are the same ones screaming abuse at the rest of the world.
The US politician is proud because without their
daily dose of illegal funding through charities, and the
services of industrial strength trolling machinery,
they would be out flipping burgers for a living.

Troll friendly usenet sites like eternal-september.org
banned by att.net, ameritech.net, bellsouth.net, pacbell.net
and prodigy.net for its foul mouth and lies over trolling
and off topic spammer friendly posting policies against 
the usenet charter of all known groups is where all of 
the trolling problems begins.

The US politicians, embassy staff and anyone else falling for it like 
Spanish government should know that the US trolls 
ordering embassies to this kind of work
have no mandate for these kinds of activities.

Just rich companies that have bank rolled teams of asstroturfers
to create fake support and certainly no mandate.
Companies like Eedleman also run fake survey companies
and delete everything except outlying data to fake their reports
to add legitimacy to their trolling campaigns.

The US trolling companies now set up branch offices
in foreign countries like Netherlands
and UK to post illegally and subversively what is 
handed down the chain of command leading all the way to
fake charities and marketing trolls 
shielded illegally behind big corporations in US.
Wikileaks tells us 5% of all US diplomatic activity is to
do with Appil and Micorshaft trolls and their 
trolling armies controlling US diplomatic services
at tax payer expense as their personal puppets.

There is NO MANDATE when fake asstroturfers are driving
the agenda.

The situation is so bad, it has spread into the military.
No one now knows who drives what agenda because
there is no traceability.

The fscking military, politicians, enviro nuts, music mafia,
using asstroturfing technology need the riot act read to them.

The situation is so incomprehensible that
the US has been declared falsely that it is the most charitable nation in
the world when at the same time 3 million US families
are living in shelter, and most of that charity money is fake
money being diverted from corporations into the coffers of asstroturfing
and PR companies. What would you do if you were 
forced into a shelter and all your charity
money was stolen from your charity?
You are down and they still want to steal YOUR CHARITY MONEY?!??
Thats right you would tell them NEVER and tell
them fsck off in no uncertain terms and get the law changed 
to make it a criminal offense to steal charity money
or spend it on anything other than 100% certified peer reviewed charity
without kickbacks, without creative accounting and
without morally unjust criminal behavior within
the charity system.

Most of the money funneled through
charities never make it to charitable causes in the USA.
It is stolen by politicians and pressure groups to cover
up their fake funding routes for asstroturfing.
They are used to it so we got to get over it?

No thanks!!!!

Not a single politician, embassy staff or military has a
mandate for one single political agenda because no one
knows who is funding who and who's agenda is real
and whose agenda is fake. Every signature collected
is one more fake signature for a mandate written out by
asstroturfers.

Asstroturfing through charities undermines society,
and all the nations dealing with US
and it must stop because no one in US has any legitimate
mandates for any of this activity any more.

If they have it, then should display their mandate
with pride, and show where the support had come from
and if any of it is through charities, then the
whole mandate is faked because charity status is being
abused to hide funding routes for corporate asstroturfing.



Asstroturfer offerings
----------------------


I've just read the contents of the fbo.gov solicitation RTB220610

The US government wants asstroturfers and with it sophisticated
asstroturfing technology to drown out democratic free speech,
and then hide from those whom it seeks to victimize.

It was point no.3 that caught my eye:
0003- Static IP Address Management

What that means is the same as what I've been saying for a while about 
doofi, flatcake and clog are true.

They are not individuals but a whole asstroturfing team
behind each sock puppet.

There isn't enough memory between the sock operators to know
or remember what had been said earlier so you know the
conversations are being typed out by multiple individuals
impersonating each other.
It was notable gaffs by the goofy doofy sock that first gave it away.

The asstroturfing teams had already gone into government and offered them
consulting services about what technology and asstroturfing
practices were out there for fbo.gov to decide what they will
purchase in solicitation RTB220610. Burson-Marstelar
won the contract performing all the activities
required in the solicitation with fantastic usenet software
tools for targeting individuals and trolling 24/7
and all built in outsourced India.


:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D 



https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d88e9d660336be91552fe8c1a51bacb2&tab=core&_cview=1
 
Solicitation Number: RTB220610 
Notice Type: Sources Sought 
Synopsis: Added: 2010-06-22 13:42:52Jun 22, 2010 1:42 pm
Modified: 2010-06-22  14:07:11Jun 22, 2010 2:07 pmTrack Changes 

0001- Online Persona Management Service.

50 User Licenses, 10 Personas per user. Software will
allow 10 personas per user, replete with background,
history, supporting details, and cyber presences 
that are technically, culturally and geographically
consistent. Individual applications will enable an 
operator to exercise a number of different online 
persons from the same workstation and without fear
of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries.
Personas must be able to appear to originate in 
nearly any part of the world and can interact through
conventional online services and social media platforms.
The service includes a user friendly application 
environment to maximize the user's situational
awareness by displaying real-time local information. 

 
0002- Secure Virtual Private Network (VPN).

1 each VPN provides the ability for users to 
daily and automatically obtain 
randomly selected IP addresses through 
which they can access the internet. The daily 
rotation of the user s IP address prevents compromise 
during observation of likely or targeted web sites 
or services, while hiding the existence of the
operation. In addition, may provide traffic mixing, 
blending the user s traffic with traffic from multitudes
of users from outside the organization. This traffic 
blending provides excellent cover and powerful deniability.
Anonymizer Enterprise Chameleon or equal

 
0003- Static IP Address Management.


:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D 


50 each Licence protects the identity of government 
agencies and enterprise organizations. Enables organizations
to manage their persistent online personas by assigning
static IP addresses to each persona. Individuals
can perform static impersonations, which allow
them to look like the same person over time. Also allows
organizations that frequent same site/service often to
easily switch IP addresses to look like ordinary
users as opposed to one organization.
Anonymizer IP Mapper License or equal

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D 

 
0004- Virtual Private Servers,

CONUS. 1 each Provides CONUS or OCONUS points of 
presence locations that are setup for each customer 
based on the geographic area of operations the 
customer is operating within and which allow a 
customer?s online persona(s) to appear to originate
from. Ability to provide virtual private servers that 
are procured using commercial hosting centers around 
the world and which are established anonymously. Once 
procured, the geosite is incorporated into the network 
and integrated within the customers environment and 
ready for use by the customer. Unless specifically 
designated as shared, locations are dedicated for use 
by each customer and never shared among other customers. 
Anonymizer Annual Dedicated CONUS Light Geosite or equal

 
0005- Virtual Private Servers, OCONUS.

8 Each Provides CONUS or OCONUS points of presence 
locations that are setup for each customer based on 
the geographic area of operations the customer is
operating within and which allow a customer?s 
online persona(s) to appear to
originate from. Ability to provide virtual private 
servers that are procured using commercial hosting 
centers around the world and which are established 
anonymously. Once procured, the geosite is incorporated 
into the network and integrated within the customers 
environment and ready for use by the customer. Unless 
specifically designated as shared, locations are dedicated 
for use by each customer and never shared among other 
customers. Anonymizer Annual Dedicated OCONUS Light 
Geosite or equal

 
0006- Remote Access Secure Virtual Private Network.

1 each Secure Operating Environment provides a reliable 
and protected computing environment from which to stage 
and conduct operations. Every session uses a clean 
Virtual Machine (VM) image. The solution is accessed 
through sets of Virtual Private Network (VPN) devices 
located at each Customer facility. The fully-managed 
VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) is an environment 
that allows users remote access from their desktop into 
a VM. Upon session termination, the VM is deleted and 
any virus, worm, or malicious software that the user 
inadvertently downloaded is destroyed. Anonymizer 
Virtual Desktop  Infrastructure (VDI) Solution or equal.


Contracting Office Address: 
 2606 Brown Pelican Ave.
 MacDill AFB, Florida 33621-5000 
 United States 
 Place of Performance: 
 Performance will be at MacDIll AFB, Kabul, Afghanistan and Baghdad, Iraq.
 MacDill AFB , Florida 33679 
 United States 
 
Primary Point of Contact.: 
 Russell Beasley,
 Contracting Officer
 russell.beasley-02@macdill.af.mil
 Phone: (813) 828-4729
 Fax: (813) 828-5111

0
4/17/2013 8:05:28 PM
"7" <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote in message 
news:igDbt.17778$BP1.11840@fx12.fr7...
> GreyCloud wrote:
>
>
>> No
>
>
> Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
>
>
> Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
> hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?
>

Are you the 50+ year old loser who still lives at home with mommy and 
daddy??  Why yes you are!!

That's because you are a low paid moron and documented liar who claimed to 
be the "European Inventor of the Year."


> "The report found that the average salary for Linux professionals was
> $90,853 (�58,654). That's 6.2 per cent higher than the $85,619 (�55,274)
> average for tech professionals generally."

If the "average" is a little over $90k then how stupid is this person?  This 
person is evidently way, way, way below average in both skills and 
intelligence.

<quote>
"I use Linux and open source tools for my every day job. Around $1100 per 
week."

7-tard. Drooling over the burger-flipping salary he makes with Linux.
Sun, 22 Apr 2012
Message-ID: <G_Ykr.348244$xD4.289577@fx06.am4>
</quote>



0
zeke1302 (4199)
4/17/2013 8:08:24 PM
On 4/17/2013 11:54 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Apr 17, 10:34 am, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>> On 4/17/2013 8:12 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 16, 10:12 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/16/2013 6:51 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 16, 5:43 pm, GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, 7 wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Cola Zealot wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
>>
>>>>>>> That was oh so yesterday with some 600 million+ devices out
>>>>>>> there, and to top that, all of these infections are gone
>>>>>>> within 5 minutes of being reported.
>>
>>>>>> No proof whatsoever.  Just a figament of your imagination.
>>
>>>>>> <snipped glue induced hallucinations>
>>
>>>>> Snit is the original gluey. You never call him on his crap so you two
>>>>> must be part of the same herd. Snit Logic 101 and you fall for it
>>>>> every time.
>>
>>>> I'd rather not.  But that is up to you.  I just ignore it.
>>>> Fraud 7, on the other hand, is the one that seems to be high on
>>>> something all the time.
>>
>>> I agree. By the way, the post you responded to was a forgery. My email
>>> address is: fretwiz...@gmail.com (compare the length of my posting
>>> history using this email address to Snit's forgery). Also,
>>> unfortunately, I don't have a Mac that runs 10.8, yet ;)
>>
>>> X-Received: by 10.224.88.200 with SMTP id b8mr3361144qam.
>>> 8.1366159910040;
>>>           Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> X-Received: by 10.49.72.225 with SMTP id g1mr480967qev.
>>> 36.1366159910012; Tue,
>>>    16 Apr 2013 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Path: ef9ni42441qab.0!nntp.google.com!ca1no48136123qab.0!
>>> postnews.google.com!c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
>>> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:51:49 -0700 (PDT)
>>> Complaints-To: groups-ab...@google.com
>>> Injection-Info: c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-
>>> host=198.27.74.59; posting-account=JEXf8QoAAABo3UPk_KXdmH0JZp_Y4seO
>>> NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
>>> References: <516d8845$0$11999$6e1ed...@read.cnntp.org> <Eykbt.
>>> 23832$RJ2.14...@fx03.fr7>
>>>    <zcqdnREGJ5jUbfDMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dn...@bresnan.com>
>>> User-Agent: G2/1.0
>>> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:
>>> 20.0)
>>>    Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
>>> Message-ID: <34a6efaf-
>>> e43e-45cc-9913-785942f05...@c5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls?
>>> From: Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com>
>>> Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:51:50 +0000
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>
>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>
> No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit couldn't
> even get the email address right ;)
>
>> Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are
>> conversing?  I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of it.
>
> Good advice. Snit dishonestly claims that the "wording" proves it was
> me... I suspect you're well aware that I don't do what was done here
> as you've never seen me do it. Notice that Snit also claims I forged
> my own name (can you even do that?) to appear as a victim. I already
> slam Snit with truths he doesn't want to face, so why would I forge my
> own name to do it, all in an effort to appear 'victim'-like? This
> makes NO sense at all... obviously the glue has taken over again for
> poor Snit ;)
>
This must've been a very long and ongoing dispute between you two.
As I have said... I usually stay out of it.

0
mist (19747)
4/17/2013 9:26:29 PM
On 4/17/2013 12:12 PM, Lusotec wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
>> I'm not familiar with forging headers. The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>
> <quote>
> 3.4.1 NNTP-Posting-Host
>
>     This line is added to the header of a posted article by the server.
>     The contents of the header is either the IP address or the fully
>     qualified domain name of the client host posting the article.  The
>     fully qualified domain name should be determined by doing a reverse
>     lookup in the DNS on the IP address of the client.  If the client
>     article contains this line, it is removed by the server before
>     acceptance of the article by the Usenet transport system.
>
>     This header provides some idea of the actual host posting the article
>     as opposed to information in the Sender or From lines that may be
>     present in the article.  This is not a fool-proof methodology since
>     reverse lookups in the DNS are vulnerable to certain types of
>     spoofing, but such discussions are outside the scope of this
>     document.
> </quote>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2980
>
> The NNTP-Posting-Host header can be forged by the server or by a client if
> the server has a bug that lets a client provided NNTP-Posting-Host header
> pass.
>
>> Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are
>> conversing?
>
> Changing the IP can be easily done but changing the IP to a specific number,
> for example to forge someone specific, is usually not possible.
>
> Another possibility would be to use the system with the IP in question as a
> proxy but that would probably require compromising that system.
>
>> I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of it.
>
> Nym forging is the reason why I started signing my posts.
>
> Regards.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iF4EAREIAAYFAlFu5iMACgkQGQjO2ccW76odFAD+MGhu2Cpv5Nvtqmr/i/ySf9Tk
> j0yMFOs5B04LaMnOPRUA/jG5CYuVdDxZZLHwyC6J4v++rq1LEnkAmL2WFVX4kfb8
> =/M8j
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

Thnx.  IP stuff I've ignored for too long.  I really should get a couple 
of good books on the topic.
Any book suggestions?

0
mist (19747)
4/17/2013 9:28:36 PM
On 4/17/2013 2:05 PM, 7 wrote:
> GreyCloud wrote:
>
>
>> No
>

A postal editor eh?  Was the glue really that good?

<snipped dementia>

0
mist (19747)
4/17/2013 9:29:47 PM
On 4/17/13 2:26 PM, in article m_Wdnac-274UjvLMnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@bresnan.com,
"GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:

>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>> 
>> No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit couldn't
>> even get the email address right ;)
>> 
>>> Or if one person switches IPs around to make it look like two people are
>>> conversing?  I wouldn't be able to tell and usually I just stay out of it.
>> 
>> Good advice. Snit dishonestly claims that the "wording" proves it was
>> me... I suspect you're well aware that I don't do what was done here
>> as you've never seen me do it. Notice that Snit also claims I forged
>> my own name (can you even do that?) to appear as a victim. I already
>> slam Snit with truths he doesn't want to face, so why would I forge my
>> own name to do it, all in an effort to appear 'victim'-like? This
>> makes NO sense at all... obviously the glue has taken over again for
>> poor Snit ;)
>> 
> This must've been a very long and ongoing dispute between you two.
> As I have said... I usually stay out of it.

I stay out of the dispute as well. And Carroll is always out of it. :)

Bottom line: the stalker is one of very, very few people's whose posts I
have made it known I set to "auto-read", meaning they are not deleted so I
*can* go back and read them if I care to but by default I do not even see
them. When I see others responding to him I will look at a few of his
posts... and inevitably he is obsessing over me, accusing me of forging him,
bringing up *ancient* debates (as in from 10 years ago or so), and sometimes
even acknowledging that he is simply trolling me and lying about me just to
get my attention. 

It is not as if I never mention him, but I think it is clear I do so a *lot*
less than he does toward me and I do not lie about him as he does about me.
He has been doing so since 2004 when he blamed me for his then-girlfriend
obsessing over me, something I never wanted and even contacted the police
about to get her to stop. He has never moved on.

-- 
Personally, [Stallman's] "weirdness" does not bother me (as long as I
don't have to be near him) but his extremist positions do bother me.
-- Lusotec

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/17/2013 9:31:54 PM
flatfish+++ <phlatphish@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:54:49 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

> > retarded "7" <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote 
> > in message news:Eykbt.23832$RJ2.14588@fx03.fr7...
> >> Cola Zealot wrote:
> >>
> >>> "33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Is it worth listening to opinions of low pay trolls
> >> hired by 4th rate trolling companies any who?
> >>
> > 
> > A idiot troll like Joseph Michael from gplsquared.com is an expert when it 
> > comes to low pay.
> > 
> >> "The report found that the average salary for Linux professionals was
> >> $90,853 (£58,654). That's 6.2 per cent higher than the $85,619 (£55,274)
> >> average for tech professionals generally."
> > 
> > If the "average" is a little over $90k then how stupid is this person?  This 
> > person is evidently way, way, way below average in both skills and 
> > intelligence.
> > 
> > <quote>
> > "I use Linux and open source tools for my every day job. Around $1100 per 
> > week."
> > 
> > 7-tard. Drooling over the burger-flipping salary he makes with Linux.
> > Sun, 22 Apr 2012
> > Message-ID: <G_Ykr.348244$xD4.289577@fx06.am4>
> > </quote>

> But Chris Ahlstrom says 7 = Joseph Michael is zany and insightful.
> Of course Chris Ahlstrom also sucks up to Mark S. Bilk and Owl so his
> judgment seems to be a bit skewed in the kook direction.

You live in a neighborhood full of empty houses with a trash dump on
every block, but I'm the kook.

0
owl (2215)
4/18/2013 12:58:10 AM
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:

> >
> > > I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> > > there, but can't that be forged as well?
> >
> > It can.

> No, it can't.

Yes it can.

> > Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.

> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.

Proof above.

> > No idea how it was done but it can be done.

> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
> happening.

Example above.

0
owl (2215)
4/18/2013 2:53:52 AM
On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>>
>>> It can.
>
>> No, it can't.
>
> Yes it can.
>
>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
>
>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
>
> Proof above.
>
>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
>
>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>> happening.
>
> Example above.
>
 From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP 
belonging to someone else?

0
mist (19747)
4/18/2013 6:23:15 AM
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
> > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> >>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
> >>>
> >>> It can.
> >
> >> No, it can't.
> >
> > Yes it can.
> >
> >>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
> >
> >> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
> >
> > Proof above.
> >
> >>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
> >
> >> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
> >> happening.
> >
> > Example above.
> >
>  From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP 
> belonging to someone else?

In the case of Usenet headers, they're just headers.  They don't have
anything to do with TCP/IP handshaking.  If you can get away with inserting
an NNTP-Posting-Host, then you can put in anything you want.  In my case,
my news client allows it, and my news server allows it.  The IP in this
post is RFC 1918, so nobody should be bothered about it, but technically
I could put in any IP.  The NNTP-Posting-Host header means nothing.

0
owl (2215)
4/18/2013 7:13:31 AM
On 4/18/13 12:13 AM, in article ehtu00q.43@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

>>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>>>> happening.
>>> 
>>> Example above.
>>> 
>>  From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP
>> belonging to someone else?
> 
> In the case of Usenet headers, they're just headers.  They don't have
> anything to do with TCP/IP handshaking.  If you can get away with inserting
> an NNTP-Posting-Host, then you can put in anything you want.  In my case,
> my news client allows it, and my news server allows it.  The IP in this
> post is RFC 1918, so nobody should be bothered about it, but technically
> I could put in any IP.  The NNTP-Posting-Host header means nothing.

All I know is that it *can* be done because the stalker used to forge my
posts *including* my IP address. After a while he stopped - so I am guessing
that the provider that was allowing it stopped doing so. He then got an
account with my ISP and would post with a different IP but one from my ISP.


-- 
"90% of computers use Microsoft's Windows ... Macs account for 9% of the
market while the open source system Linux accounts for 0.8%."
-- Linus Torvalds

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/18/2013 1:50:37 PM
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:

> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>>>
>>>> It can.
>>
>>> No, it can't.
>>
>> Yes it can.
>>
>>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
>>
>>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
>>
>> Proof above.
>>
>>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
>>
>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>>> happening.
>>
>> Example above.
>>
> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP belonging to
> someone else?
>
>

You're joking, right?

-- 
A certain COLA "advocate" faking his user-agent in order to pretend to be a Linux 
user: User-Agent: Outlook 5.5 (WinNT 5.0), User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0
(Linux), Message-ID: <wPGdnd3NnOM0ACfdRVn-hw@comcast.com>
0
hadronquark (21814)
4/19/2013 4:32:49 PM
"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:a2mwsu4h1q.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:
>
>> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article 
>>>>> etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>>>>
>>>>> It can.
>>>
>>>> No, it can't.
>>>
>>> Yes it can.
>>>
>>>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
>>>
>>>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
>>>
>>> Proof above.
>>>
>>>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
>>>
>>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>>>> happening.
>>>
>>> Example above.
>>>
>> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP 
>> belonging to
>> someone else?
>>
>>
>
> You're joking, right?
>

(I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is 
whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)

Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured or 
allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP address 
themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like 
the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care 
about.

For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be extremely 
surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so that 
anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.

-- 
<quote>
Hypothetical issue in that the threat is "potential" and not actually 
exploited. And hasn't Flash closed these holes?   There are actually none 
now that you know about. So you use former Flash vulnerabilities to claim a 
present security vulnerability.
</quote>
Mar 08 2011

wRonG - trying to claim in March 2011 that it's wrong to claim that Flash 
still has vulnerabilities. There have been "just a few" announced since his 
claim.


--------------------------------------------------
PARTIAL List of security updates for Adobe Flash Player since that post
--------------------------------------------------

1 CVE-2013-1374 Exec Code 2013-02-12
2 CVE-2013-1373 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
3 CVE-2013-1372 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
4 CVE-2013-1370 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
5 CVE-2013-1369 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
6 CVE-2013-1368 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
7 CVE-2013-1367 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
8 CVE-2013-1366 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
9 CVE-2013-1365 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
10 CVE-2013-0649 Exec Code 2013-02-12
11 CVE-2013-0647 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2013-02-12
12 CVE-2013-0645 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
13 CVE-2013-0644 Exec Code 2013-02-12
14 CVE-2013-0642 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
15 CVE-2013-0639 Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
16 CVE-2013-0638 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2013-02-12
17 CVE-2013-0637 DoS Exec Overflow 2013-02-12
18 CVE-2013-0634 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2013-02-08
19 CVE-2013-0633 Exec Overflow 2013-02-08
20 CVE-2013-0630 Exec Overflow 2013-01-11
21 CVE-2012-5678 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-12-12
22 CVE-2012-5677 Exec Overflow 2012-12-12
23 CVE-2012-5676 Exec Overflow 2012-12-12
24 CVE-2012-5673 Exec Overflow 2012-11-13
25 CVE-2012-5287 Exec Overflow 2012-11-13
26 CVE-2012-5286 Exec Overflow 2012-11-13
27 CVE-2012-5285 Exec Overflow 2012-11-13
28 CVE-2012-5280 Exec Overflow 2012-11-07
29 CVE-2012-5279 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-11-07
30 CVE-2012-5278 Exec Code Bypass 2012-11-07
31 CVE-2012-5277 Exec Overflow 2012-11-07
32 CVE-2012-5276 Exec Overflow 2012-11-07
33 CVE-2012-5275 Exec Overflow 2012-11-07
34 CVE-2012-5274 Exec Overflow 2012-11-07
35 CVE-2012-5272 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-10-09
36 CVE-2012-5271 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-10-09
37 CVE-2012-5270 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-10-09
38 CVE-2012-5269 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-10-09
39 CVE-2012-5268 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-10-09
40 CVE-2012-5267 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr 2012-10-09
41 CVE-2012-5266 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
42 CVE-2012-5265 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
43 CVE-2012-5264 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
44 CVE-2012-5263 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-10-09
45 CVE-2012-5262 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
46 CVE-2012-5261 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-10-09
47 CVE-2012-5260 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
48 CVE-2012-5259 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
49 CVE-2012-5258 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-10-09
50 CVE-2012-5257 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
51 CVE-2012-5256 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-10-09
52 CVE-2012-5255 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
53 CVE-2012-5254 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
54 CVE-2012-5253 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
55 CVE-2012-5252 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-10-09
56 CVE-2012-5251 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
57 CVE-2012-5250 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
58 CVE-2012-5249 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
59 CVE-2012-5248 Exec Overflow  2012-10-09
60 CVE-2012-5054 Exec Overflow  2012-09-24
61 CVE-2012-4171 DoS  2012-08-31  2012-09-05
62 CVE-2012-4168 Exec Overflow  2012-08-21
63 CVE-2012-4167 Exec Overflow  2012-08-21
64 CVE-2012-4165 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-08-21
65 CVE-2012-4164 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-08-21
66 CVE-2012-4163 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-08-21
67 CVE-2012-2040 Exec Overflow  2012-06-08
68 CVE-2012-2039 DoS Exec Overflow  2012-06-08
69 CVE-2012-2038 Bypass +Info  2012-06-08
70 CVE-2012-2037 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-06-08
71 CVE-2012-2036 Exec Overflow  2012-06-08
72 CVE-2012-2035 Exec Overflow  2012-06-08
73 CVE-2012-2034 DoS Exec Code Mem. Corr.  2012-06-08
74 CVE-2012-1535 DoS Exec Code  2012-08-15
75 CVE-2012-0779 Exec Code  2012-05-04
76 CVE-2012-0773 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-03-28
77 CVE-2012-0772 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-03-28
78 CVE-2012-0769 DoS Exec Code  2012-03-05
79 CVE-2012-0768 DoS Exec Code Mem. Corr.  2012-03-05
80 CVE-2012-0767 XSS  2012-02-16
81 CVE-2012-0756 Bypass  2012-02-16
82 CVE-2012-0755 Bypass  2012-02-16
83 CVE-2012-0754 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-02-16
84 CVE-2012-0753 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-02-16
85 CVE-2012-0752 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2012-02-16
86 CVE-2012-0751 DoS Exec Code Mem. Corr.  2012-02-16
87 CVE-2011-4694 Exec Code  2011-12-07
88 CVE-2011-4693 Exec Code  2011-12-07
89 CVE-2011-2460 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
90 CVE-2011-2459 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
91 CVE-2011-2458 Bypass  2011-11-11
92 CVE-2011-2457 Exec Overflow  2011-11-11
93 CVE-2011-2456 Exec Overflow  2011-11-11
94 CVE-2011-2455 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
95 CVE-2011-2454 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
96 CVE-2011-2453 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
97 CVE-2011-2452 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
98 CVE-2011-2451 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
99 CVE-2011-2450 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
100 CVE-2011-2445 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-11-11
101 CVE-2011-2444 XSS  2011-09-21
102 CVE-2011-2430 Exec Code  2011-09-21
103 CVE-2011-2429 Bypass +Info  2011-09-21
104 CVE-2011-2428 DoS Exec Code  2011-09-21
105 CVE-2011-2427 DoS Exec Overflow  2011-09-21
106 CVE-2011-2426 Exec Overflow  2011-09-21
107 CVE-2011-2425 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-08-10
108 CVE-2011-2424 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-08-15
109 CVE-2011-2417 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-08-10
110 CVE-2011-2416 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
111 CVE-2011-2415 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
112 CVE-2011-2414 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
113 CVE-2011-2140 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-08-10
114 CVE-2011-2139 Bypass +Info  2011-08-10
115 CVE-2011-2138 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
116 CVE-2011-2137 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
117 CVE-2011-2136 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
118 CVE-2011-2135 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-08-10
119 CVE-2011-2134 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
120 CVE-2011-2130 Exec Overflow  2011-08-10
121 CVE-2011-2110 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-06-16
122 CVE-2011-2107 XSS  2011-06-08
123 CVE-2011-0628 Exec Overflow  2011-05-31
124 CVE-2011-0627 DoS Exec Code Mem. Corr.  2011-05-13
125 CVE-2011-0626 Exec Code  2011-05-13
126 CVE-2011-0625 Exec Code  2011-05-13
127 CVE-2011-0624 Exec Code  2011-05-13
128 CVE-2011-0623 Exec Code  2011-05-13
129 CVE-2011-0622 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-05-13
130 CVE-2011-0621 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-05-13
131 CVE-2011-0620 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-05-13
132 CVE-2011-0619 DoS Exec Ovflow Mem Corr  2011-05-13
133 CVE-2011-0618 Exec Overflow  2011-05-13
134 CVE-2011-0611 DoS Exec Overflow  2011-04-13
135 CVE-2011-0609 DoS Exec Code  2011-03-15




0
zeke1302 (4199)
4/19/2013 4:41:38 PM
On 4/19/13 9:41 AM, in article kkrruh$igo$1@dont-email.me, "Ezekiel"
<zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:

....
>>> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP belonging
>>> to someone else?
>> 
>> You're joking, right?
> 
> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
> 
> Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured or
> allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP address
> themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like
> the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care
> about.

This is my understanding as well. And whatever server Carroll and crew used
to use to forge my IP is either no longer around or no longer allows this.

> For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be extremely
> surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so that
> anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.

Hence the reason Carroll does not forge my IP address or even one from my
neck of the woods as he accuses me of posting as him. It would not surprise
me in the least, though, if he did get an account with my ISP just to try to
play his victim game.


-- 
> As for Stallman, he is a repulsive person by any standard of decency.
.... standard of decency or hygiene.
-- Lusotec


0
usenet2 (47889)
4/19/2013 5:06:18 PM
"Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> writes:

> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:a2mwsu4h1q.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
>> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article 
>>>>>> etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>>>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It can.
>>>>
>>>>> No, it can't.
>>>>
>>>> Yes it can.
>>>>
>>>>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
>>>>
>>>>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
>>>>
>>>> Proof above.
>>>>
>>>>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
>>>>
>>>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>>>>> happening.
>>>>
>>>> Example above.
>>>>
>>> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP 
>>> belonging to
>>> someone else?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You're joking, right?
>>
>
> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is 
> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
>
> Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured or 
> allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP address 
> themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like 
> the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care 
> about.
>
> For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be extremely 
> surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so that 
> anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.

Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.

-- 
A certain COLA "advocate" faking his user-agent in order to pretend to be a Linux 
user: User-Agent: Outlook 5.5 (WinNT 5.0), User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0
(Linux), Message-ID: <wPGdnd3NnOM0ACfdRVn-hw@comcast.com>
0
hadronquark (21814)
4/19/2013 7:40:34 PM
On 4/19/13 12:40 PM, in article hkr4i62tsd.fsf@news.eternal-september.org,
"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:

>> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
>> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
>> 
>> Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured or
>> allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP address
>> themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like
>> the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care
>> about.
>> 
>> For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be extremely
>> surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so that
>> anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.
> 
> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.
> 
> -- 
> A certain COLA "advocate" faking his user-agent in order to pretend to be a
> Linux 
> user: User-Agent: Outlook 5.5 (WinNT 5.0), User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0
> (Linux), Message-ID: <wPGdnd3NnOM0ACfdRVn-hw@comcast.com>

I saw one of Carroll's posts where he was accusing me of forging him - he
claimed to not have OS X 10.8 and the headers "proved" his forger did (he
knows I do):
---------
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:20.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0,gzip(gfe)
Message-ID:
<ccf20807-c095-4b56-8f16-71fdad81867e@e5g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
From: Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com>
---------

So I looked at some of his other posts. This one from the same email and
same IP:
---------
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_7_5)
AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.65
Safari/537.31,gzip(gfe)
Message-ID:
<ed53e1bd-00d5-40b7-8913-56c0d82fcd7a@i5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
From: Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com>
---------

Funny how from the same IP he uses both OS X 10.7 and 10.8... but one could
say he just has two machines and is not forging anything (just lying as he
accuses me of forging him). But also from the same email and same IP -
obvious forgeries on his part:
---------
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.27.74.59
X-HTTP-UserAgent: SnitBrowser 2.1 (TrollKit; Intel Mac OS X 10.8;
rv:20.0) TrollKit/20100101 SnitBrowser/1.2,gzip(gfe)
Message-ID:
<67913d9c-ec4e-49ed-aef6-c4125c975a6d@p12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
From: Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com>
---------

His obsession with me is never ending. I am sure if others look at different
headers of his they will find yet other BS headers from him... I looked at 5
or 6 of his posts and found those three variations. I am sure there are
more.

-- 
"When making pornography involves real abuse of real children ... that does
not excuse censorship. No matter how disgusting published works might be,
censorship is more disgusting." -- Richard Stallman

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/19/2013 8:04:54 PM
"Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hkr4i62tsd.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
> "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> writes:
>
>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:a2mwsu4h1q.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
>>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article
>>>>>>> etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>>>>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It can.
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it can't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it can.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
>>>>>
>>>>> Proof above.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>>>>>> happening.
>>>>>
>>>>> Example above.
>>>>>
>>>> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP
>>>> belonging to
>>>> someone else?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're joking, right?
>>>
>>
>> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
>> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
>>
>> Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured 
>> or
>> allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP 
>> address
>> themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like
>> the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care
>> about.
>>
>> For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be 
>> extremely
>> surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so 
>> that
>> anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.
>
> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.

Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client 
anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts 
to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care. 
That header is provided by the client anyway.

I thought the thread was about the IP address. That's something that I 
haven't seen spoofed/faked because that's something that's added by the 
server. A client can try and set it in their newsreader but the server will 
ignore it and use the address from the TCP/IP connection.

The most likely way to fake an IP address is to use a proxy somewhere and 
post via the proxy. If someone used a low level network tool to change the 
"from" IP then it woudn't work with any protocol that relies on an exchange 
(HTTP, etc) because the response would be sent to the fake IP and would 
never be received. Most ISPs also use routers and switches that will drop 
packets that don't come from your valid IP address which makes the later 
extremely difficult.

> -- 
> A certain COLA "advocate" faking his user-agent in order to pretend to be 
> a Linux
> user: User-Agent: Outlook 5.5 (WinNT 5.0), User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0
> (Linux), Message-ID: <wPGdnd3NnOM0ACfdRVn-hw@comcast.com>

He's a tool.  How pathetic that he needs to fake his headers just to be "one 
of the boys."



0
zeke1302 (4199)
4/19/2013 9:09:47 PM
Ezekiel <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:hkr4i62tsd.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
> > "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> writes:
> >
> >> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:a2mwsu4h1q.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
> >>> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
> >>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article
> >>>>>>> etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> >>>>>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It can.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> No, it can't.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes it can.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Proof above.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
> >>>>>> happening.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Example above.
> >>>>>
> >>>> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP
> >>>> belonging to
> >>>> someone else?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> You're joking, right?
> >>>
> >>
> >> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
> >> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
> >>
> >> Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured 
> >> or
> >> allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP 
> >> address
> >> themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like
> >> the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care
> >> about.
> >>
> >> For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be 
> >> extremely
> >> surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so 
> >> that
> >> anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.
> >
> > Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
> > the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
> > when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.

> Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client 
> anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts 
> to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care. 
> That header is provided by the client anyway.

> I thought the thread was about the IP address. That's something that I 
> haven't seen spoofed/faked

Now you've seen it.

> because that's something that's added by the 
> server. A client can try and set it in their newsreader but the server will 
> ignore it and use the address from the TCP/IP connection.

> The most likely way to fake an IP address is to use a proxy somewhere and 
> post via the proxy. If someone used a low level network tool to change the 
> "from" IP then it woudn't work with any protocol that relies on an exchange 
> (HTTP, etc) because the response would be sent to the fake IP and would 
> never be received. Most ISPs also use routers and switches that will drop 
> packets that don't come from your valid IP address which makes the later 
> extremely difficult.

This is about NNTP-Posting-Host, not spoofing IP header source address.

0
owl (2215)
4/19/2013 10:41:22 PM
On 4/19/13 2:09 PM, in article kksbla$e8i$1@dont-email.me, "Ezekiel"
<zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:

>> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
>> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
>> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.
> 
> Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client
> anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts
> to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care.
> That header is provided by the client anyway.
> 
> I thought the thread was about the IP address. That's something that I
> haven't seen spoofed/faked because that's something that's added by the
> server. A client can try and set it in their newsreader but the server will
> ignore it and use the address from the TCP/IP connection.

At least in the past there were Usenet providers which allowed the spoofing
of IP headers... or at least I assume this is how it was done when my IP was
spoofed. I *know* there were email providers that allowed that because
*playing around with folks who know* I did it. I *never* did it in any
dishonest way.

> The most likely way to fake an IP address is to use a proxy somewhere and
> post via the proxy. If someone used a low level network tool to change the
> "from" IP then it woudn't work with any protocol that relies on an exchange
> (HTTP, etc) because the response would be sent to the fake IP and would
> never be received. Most ISPs also use routers and switches that will drop
> packets that don't come from your valid IP address which makes the later
> extremely difficult.



-- 
"Actually, I would like to know from Snit exactly how watching movies of
naked people having sex is harmful to children." - Mark S Bilk

Proof: the Stallman cult is repulsive.

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/19/2013 10:52:16 PM
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/13 2:09 PM, in article kksbla$e8i$1@dont-email.me, "Ezekiel"
> <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:

> >> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
> >> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
> >> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.
> > 
> > Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client
> > anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts
> > to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care.
> > That header is provided by the client anyway.
> > 
> > I thought the thread was about the IP address. That's something that I
> > haven't seen spoofed/faked because that's something that's added by the
> > server. A client can try and set it in their newsreader but the server will
> > ignore it and use the address from the TCP/IP connection.

> At least in the past there were Usenet providers which allowed the spoofing
> of IP headers... or at least I assume this is how it was done when my IP was
> spoofed. I *know* there were email providers that allowed that because
> *playing around with folks who know* I did it. I *never* did it in any
> dishonest way.

The Usenet header in question is NNTP-Posting-Host, which is not an
"IP header."  The IP protocol has its own headers, one of which is
"Source Address."  Spoofing NNTP-Posting-Host is completely unrelated
to spoofing IP Source Address. 

From rfc 791:
<quote>
3.1.  Internet Header Format

  A summary of the contents of the internet header follows:

                                    
    0                   1                   2                   3   
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |Version|  IHL  |Type of Service|          Total Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Identification        |Flags|      Fragment Offset    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Time to Live |    Protocol   |         Header Checksum       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Source Address                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Destination Address                        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Options                    |    Padding    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Example Internet Datagram Header

                               Figure 4.

  Note that each tick mark represents one bit position.
</quote>

0
owl (2215)
4/19/2013 11:14:29 PM
On 4/19/13 4:14 PM, in article eh9fu03q.a3px@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 4/19/13 2:09 PM, in article kksbla$e8i$1@dont-email.me, "Ezekiel"
>> <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
>>>> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
>>>> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.
>>> 
>>> Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client
>>> anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts
>>> to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care.
>>> That header is provided by the client anyway.
>>> 
>>> I thought the thread was about the IP address. That's something that I
>>> haven't seen spoofed/faked because that's something that's added by the
>>> server. A client can try and set it in their newsreader but the server will
>>> ignore it and use the address from the TCP/IP connection.
> 
>> At least in the past there were Usenet providers which allowed the spoofing
>> of IP headers... or at least I assume this is how it was done when my IP was
>> spoofed. I *know* there were email providers that allowed that because
>> *playing around with folks who know* I did it. I *never* did it in any
>> dishonest way.
> 
> The Usenet header in question is NNTP-Posting-Host, which is not an
> "IP header." 

Whose question? If you look at the paragraph directly preceding mind you
can, I hope (!), find the text:

    I thought the thread was about the IP address.

I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
NNTP-Posting-Host... and there were other references earlier in the thread.
Then again, maybe you have as hard of a time telling those two apart as you
do telling apart Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr.
....


-- 
Summary of cc's statistical BS: <http://tinyurl.com/7rwazxw>
Details on cc's "outliers" BS: <http://tinyurl.com/84r3ypq>
More on cc's ignorance about outliers: <http://tinyurl.com/7vyhttc>
Four method compared to cc's absurd claims: <http://tinyurl.com/7efkuzm>
Details on cc's sigma and R^2 BS: <http://tinyurl.com/7vambev>

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/19/2013 11:33:51 PM
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/13 4:14 PM, in article eh9fu03q.a3px@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/19/13 2:09 PM, in article kksbla$e8i$1@dont-email.me, "Ezekiel"
> >> <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>>> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
> >>>> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
> >>>> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.
> >>> 
> >>> Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client
> >>> anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts
> >>> to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care.
> >>> That header is provided by the client anyway.
> >>> 
> >>> I thought the thread was about the IP address. That's something that I
> >>> haven't seen spoofed/faked because that's something that's added by the
> >>> server. A client can try and set it in their newsreader but the server will
> >>> ignore it and use the address from the TCP/IP connection.
> > 
> >> At least in the past there were Usenet providers which allowed the spoofing
> >> of IP headers... or at least I assume this is how it was done when my IP was
> >> spoofed. I *know* there were email providers that allowed that because
> >> *playing around with folks who know* I did it. I *never* did it in any
> >> dishonest way.
> > 
> > The Usenet header in question is NNTP-Posting-Host, which is not an
> > "IP header." 

> Whose question? If you look at the paragraph directly preceding mind you
> can, I hope (!), find the text:

>     I thought the thread was about the IP address.

Ezekiel's misunderstanding of the question is not important.

> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
> NNTP-Posting-Host... and there were other references earlier in the thread.
> Then again, maybe you have as hard of a time telling those two apart as you
> do telling apart Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr.
> ...

You are well aware (since you responded to that post) that this started with
GreyCloud's post above.

<quote GreyCloud>
I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
there, but can't that be forged as well?
</quote>

So what is it you are trying to say here?  Are you suggesting that
there is a Usenet "IP header"?

0
owl (2215)
4/19/2013 11:59:39 PM
On 4/19/13 4:59 PM, in article ehtu0430a3.3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

....
>>> The Usenet header in question is NNTP-Posting-Host, which is not an
>>> "IP header." 
> 
>> Whose question? If you look at the paragraph directly preceding mind you
>> can, I hope (!), find the text:
> 
>>     I thought the thread was about the IP address.
> 
> Ezekiel's misunderstanding of the question is not important.

My comment was about *your* misunderstanding - not about anyone else's, real
or not. Please do not try to move the goal post. Some other quotes from this
thread:

  The stalker trying to get my attention:
    -----
    No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit
    couldn't even get the email address right ;)
    -----

  Hadron, speaking of what he believed the topic to be:
    -----
    I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the
    topic is whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.
    -----

Looking there it seems the stalker is the one who brought up the topic of IP
address spoofing in his plea to get my attention and others followed up on
the topic of IP spoofing.

>> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
>> NNTP-Posting-Host... and there were other references earlier in the thread.
>> Then again, maybe you have as hard of a time telling those two apart as you
>> do telling apart Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr.
>> ...
> 
> You are well aware (since you responded to that post) that this started with
> GreyCloud's post above.
> 
> <quote GreyCloud>
> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> there, but can't that be forged as well?
> </quote>
> 
> So what is it you are trying to say here?  Are you suggesting that
> there is a Usenet "IP header"?

I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses. Not sure why this is a
challenge for you to understand, but you also are challenged in
understanding that Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr. are not the same
person, so it is not as though you have shown much ability in making
reasonable conclusions.



-- 
"On desktops, Linux has had a hard time cracking the 1 per cent mark,
although some of the web analytics companies now put it at around 1.5 per
cent." -- Linus Torvalds

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/20/2013 4:25:46 AM
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/13 4:59 PM, in article ehtu0430a3.3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> ...
> >>> The Usenet header in question is NNTP-Posting-Host, which is not an
> >>> "IP header." 
> > 
> >> Whose question? If you look at the paragraph directly preceding mind you
> >> can, I hope (!), find the text:
> > 
> >>     I thought the thread was about the IP address.
> > 
> > Ezekiel's misunderstanding of the question is not important.

> My comment was about *your* misunderstanding - not about anyone else's, real
> or not. Please do not try to move the goal post. Some other quotes from this
> thread:

>   The stalker trying to get my attention:
>     -----
>     No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit
>     couldn't even get the email address right ;)
>     -----

>   Hadron, speaking of what he believed the topic to be:
>     -----
>     I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the
>     topic is whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.
>     -----

> Looking there it seems the stalker is the one who brought up the topic of IP
> address spoofing in his plea to get my attention and others followed up on
> the topic of IP spoofing.

Good god but you are desperate, not to mention *completely wrong*.
Let's address the quotes you make above, with *context*:

First, the quote from "your stalker" is directly in reply to GreyCloud's
post that I quoted, and is absolutely referring to NNTP-Posting-Host:

Steve Carroll in  Message-ID: <4af76c39-a4b2-4fdc-980d-9f6d35c4bb8b@v20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> :
<quote>
> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> there, but can't that be forged as well?

No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit couldn't
even get the email address right ;)
</quote>

Second, the quote you attribute to Hadron was from *Ezekiel*, not Hadron:
Ezekiel in Message-ID: <kkrruh$igo$1@dont-email.me> :
<quote>
(I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
</quote>

That also is obviously referring to forging an IP address in a *Usenet post*.

Neither of these has anything to do with IP header spoofing, yet you
supply them as evidence of IP header spoofing.  (You clod).

> >> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
> >> NNTP-Posting-Host... and there were other references earlier in the thread.
> >> Then again, maybe you have as hard of a time telling those two apart as you
> >> do telling apart Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr.
> >> ...
> > 
> > You are well aware (since you responded to that post) that this started with
> > GreyCloud's post above.
> > 
> > <quote GreyCloud>
> > I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
> > there, but can't that be forged as well?
> > </quote>
> > 
> > So what is it you are trying to say here?  Are you suggesting that
> > there is a Usenet "IP header"?

> I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
> that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses.

Maybe you could point to when this occurred, or where in *any* Usenet
post you might find an IP Source Address header, which is what is
spoofed when one is "spoofing IP addresses."  NNTP-Posting-Host is
the *Usenet header* where one often finds an IP address.  Spoofing
*that* header is what is under discussion here in the context of --
guess what -- Usenet posts.  IP header spoofing is something completely
different, and has nothing to do with Usenet.

> Not sure why this is a
> challenge for you to understand, but you also are challenged in
> understanding that Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr. are not the same
> person, so it is not as though you have shown much ability in making
> reasonable conclusions.

Of course I know that Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman are not the same person.
But laughably you are unable to distinguish between Jeff Bauman and
John Lennon.

0
owl (2215)
4/20/2013 5:09:07 AM
On 4/19/13 10:09 PM, in article nexefhe8a.a3ra30@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 4/19/13 4:59 PM, in article ehtu0430a3.3@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> ...
>>>>> The Usenet header in question is NNTP-Posting-Host, which is not an
>>>>> "IP header." 
>>> 
>>>> Whose question? If you look at the paragraph directly preceding mind you
>>>> can, I hope (!), find the text:
>>> 
>>>>     I thought the thread was about the IP address.
>>> 
>>> Ezekiel's misunderstanding of the question is not important.
> 
>> My comment was about *your* misunderstanding - not about anyone else's, real
>> or not. Please do not try to move the goal post. Some other quotes from this
>> thread:
> 
>>   The stalker trying to get my attention:
>>     -----
>>     No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit
>>     couldn't even get the email address right ;)
>>     -----
> 
>>   Hadron, speaking of what he believed the topic to be:
>>     -----
>>     I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the
>>     topic is whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.
>>     -----
> 
>> Looking there it seems the stalker is the one who brought up the topic of IP
>> address spoofing in his plea to get my attention and others followed up on
>> the topic of IP spoofing.
> 
> Good god but you are desperate, not to mention *completely wrong*.

I have proved myself correct. Not really interested in your BS whining.
Bottom line: I responded in context to a post and you whined based on your
own misunderstanding. Now you want to have a meta-debate over what the topic
of the conversation should be. I am not even slightly interested in this
absurd meta-debate of yours.

> Let's address the quotes you make above, with *context*:
> 
> First, the quote from "your stalker" is directly in reply to GreyCloud's
> post that I quoted, and is absolutely referring to NNTP-Posting-Host:
> 
> Steve Carroll in  Message-ID:
> <4af76c39-a4b2-4fdc-980d-9f6d35c4bb8b@v20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> :
> <quote>
>> I'm not familiar with forging headers. �The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
> 
> No... but as that isn't my IP address it doesn't matter. Snit couldn't
> even get the email address right ;)
> </quote>

So the stalker did not understand what he read. What is new? But the fact he
cannot understand what he reads is not an excuse for you to suffer from the
same malady.

> Second, the quote you attribute to Hadron was from *Ezekiel*, not Hadron:

If I got that wrong I apologize.

> Ezekiel in Message-ID: <kkrruh$igo$1@dont-email.me> :
> <quote>
> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
> </quote>
> 
> That also is obviously referring to forging an IP address in a *Usenet post*.

As opposed to on a chicken? Really, what alternative were you thinking?

> Neither of these has anything to do with IP header spoofing, yet you
> supply them as evidence of IP header spoofing.  (You clod).

Comments about spoofing an IP address in a Usenet post are evidence of a
discussion about spoofing an IP address in a Usenet post. I do not care what
argument you put forth to try to "prove" me wrong about this.

>>>> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
>>>> NNTP-Posting-Host... and there were other references earlier in the thread.
>>>> Then again, maybe you have as hard of a time telling those two apart as you
>>>> do telling apart Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr.
>>>> ...
>>> 
>>> You are well aware (since you responded to that post) that this started with
>>> GreyCloud's post above.
>>> 
>>> <quote GreyCloud>
>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>> </quote>
>>> 
>>> So what is it you are trying to say here?  Are you suggesting that
>>> there is a Usenet "IP header"?
> 
>> I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
>> that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses.
> 
> Maybe you could point to when this occurred, or where in *any* Usenet
> post you might find an IP Source Address header, which is what is
> spoofed when one is "spoofing IP addresses."  NNTP-Posting-Host is
> the *Usenet header* where one often finds an IP address.  Spoofing
> *that* header is what is under discussion here in the context of --
> guess what -- Usenet posts.  IP header spoofing is something completely
> different, and has nothing to do with Usenet.

You really do not have any ability to understand context, do you? My
comments were about spoofing an IP in a Usenet post.

>> Not sure why this is a
>> challenge for you to understand, but you also are challenged in
>> understanding that Lt. Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman Jr. are not the same
>> person, so it is not as though you have shown much ability in making
>> reasonable conclusions.
> 
> Of course I know that Nick Vogt and Jeff Bauman are not the same person.

Yet you pointed to and backed an image which claim they were the same
person.

> But laughably you are unable to distinguish between Jeff Bauman and
> John Lennon.

And once again you toss in red herrings.

In other words, you are just being foolish.



-- 
"It is often hard to persuade the developers of one component to do what
improves the system as a whole rather than what will make their own
component more useful and successful." -- Richard Stallman

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/20/2013 5:19:27 AM
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/13 10:09 PM, in article nexefhe8a.a3ra30@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

....

> > 
> >> I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
> >> that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses.
> > 
> > Maybe you could point to when this occurred, or where in *any* Usenet
> > post you might find an IP Source Address header, which is what is
> > spoofed when one is "spoofing IP addresses."  NNTP-Posting-Host is
> > the *Usenet header* where one often finds an IP address.  Spoofing
> > *that* header is what is under discussion here in the context of --
> > guess what -- Usenet posts.  IP header spoofing is something completely
> > different, and has nothing to do with Usenet.

> You really do not have any ability to understand context, do you? My
> comments were about spoofing an IP in a Usenet post.

Make up your mind.  If your context is "spoofing IP in a Usenet post,"
then why do you say this:
<quote (you)>
>>>> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
>>>> NNTP-Posting-Host
</quote>

NNTP-Posting-Host is what one would typically modify in order to "spoof"
the IP address in a Usenet post.

0
owl (2215)
4/20/2013 5:34:45 AM
"Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> writes:

> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:hkr4i62tsd.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
>> "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> writes:
>>
>>> "Hadron" <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:a2mwsu4h1q.fsf@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/17/2013 8:53 PM, owl wrote:
>>>>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Apr 17, 10:46 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/17/13 9:34 AM, in article
>>>>>>>> etednaYimpC0UvPMnZ2dnUVZ_o2dn...@bresnan.com,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "GreyCloud" <m...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not familiar with forging headers.  The NNTP Posting Host IP is
>>>>>>>>> there, but can't that be forged as well?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It can.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it can't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes it can.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Carroll and some of his buddies in CSMA used to forge my IP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And you'll be showing proof of this any minute now <eyeroll>.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Proof above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No idea how it was done but it can be done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It can't be done... that's why no one can find examples of it
>>>>>>> happening.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Example above.
>>>>>>
>>>>> From a technical standpoint... how can one forge perfectly an IP
>>>>> belonging to
>>>>> someone else?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're joking, right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> (I wasn't following this thread all that closely but I think the topic is
>>> whether the IP address can be forged in a usenet post.)
>>>
>>> Technically it can be done provided that the NNTP server is misconfigured 
>>> or
>>> allows you to do it. Most (nearly all) NNTP servers will set the IP 
>>> address
>>> themselves whether or not the user attempts to supply one.  It's not like
>>> the BS headers (X-favorite-song, etc) that the server doesn't really care
>>> about.
>>>
>>> For example, if you're posting thru Google Groups then I would be 
>>> extremely
>>> surprised if they did such a piss-poor job configuring their service so 
>>> that
>>> anyone could put whatever IP address they wanted in there.
>>
>> Forget the "technically". It's easy to add misleading headers too : see
>> the link below when Creepy Chris Ahlstrom was pretending to use Linux
>> when he was in fact using his work QA Windows machine.
>
> Oh, I don't care about the "User-Agent" header. That comes from the client 
> anyway so if a client lets you change it (or someone like Ahlstrom attempts 
> to pretend he's using Linux and fails) then the server won't know or care. 
> That header is provided by the client anyway.

Sure, but this is my point. Morons like Dumb Willy and Ahlstrom and co
think they're "header gurus". As the link below show Ahlstrom is not as
clever as he likes to pretend.

-- 
A certain COLA "advocate" faking his user-agent in order to pretend to be a Linux 
user: User-Agent: Outlook 5.5 (WinNT 5.0), User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0
(Linux), Message-ID: <wPGdnd3NnOM0ACfdRVn-hw@comcast.com>
0
hadronquark (21814)
4/20/2013 6:59:48 AM
On 4/19/13 10:34 PM, in article ehf8x900a.a3rhjr3a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 4/19/13 10:09 PM, in article nexefhe8a.a3ra30@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> 
>>> 
>>>> I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
>>>> that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses.
>>> 
>>> Maybe you could point to when this occurred, or where in *any* Usenet
>>> post you might find an IP Source Address header, which is what is
>>> spoofed when one is "spoofing IP addresses."  NNTP-Posting-Host is
>>> the *Usenet header* where one often finds an IP address.  Spoofing
>>> *that* header is what is under discussion here in the context of --
>>> guess what -- Usenet posts.  IP header spoofing is something completely
>>> different, and has nothing to do with Usenet.
> 
>> You really do not have any ability to understand context, do you? My
>> comments were about spoofing an IP in a Usenet post.
> 
> Make up your mind.  If your context is "spoofing IP in a Usenet post,"
> then why do you say this:
> <quote (you)>
>>>>> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
>>>>> NNTP-Posting-Host
> </quote>
> 
> NNTP-Posting-Host is what one would typically modify in order to "spoof"
> the IP address in a Usenet post.
> 
My mistake. Sorry about that. I was thinking in terms of the IP of the
*Host* there and not the client. Know better, too.


-- 
"There are 'extremists' in the free software world, but that's one major
reason why I don't call what I do 'free software' any more. I don't want to
be associated with the people for whom it's about exclusion and hatred."
-- Linus Torvalds

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/20/2013 4:58:36 PM
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/13 10:34 PM, in article ehf8x900a.a3rhjr3a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/19/13 10:09 PM, in article nexefhe8a.a3ra30@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> >>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > 
> >>> 
> >>>> I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
> >>>> that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses.
> >>> 
> >>> Maybe you could point to when this occurred, or where in *any* Usenet
> >>> post you might find an IP Source Address header, which is what is
> >>> spoofed when one is "spoofing IP addresses."  NNTP-Posting-Host is
> >>> the *Usenet header* where one often finds an IP address.  Spoofing
> >>> *that* header is what is under discussion here in the context of --
> >>> guess what -- Usenet posts.  IP header spoofing is something completely
> >>> different, and has nothing to do with Usenet.
> > 
> >> You really do not have any ability to understand context, do you? My
> >> comments were about spoofing an IP in a Usenet post.
> > 
> > Make up your mind.  If your context is "spoofing IP in a Usenet post,"
> > then why do you say this:
> > <quote (you)>
> >>>>> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
> >>>>> NNTP-Posting-Host
> > </quote>
> > 
> > NNTP-Posting-Host is what one would typically modify in order to "spoof"
> > the IP address in a Usenet post.
> > 
> My mistake. Sorry about that. I was thinking in terms of the IP of the
> *Host* there and not the client. Know better, too.

I'm not sure I understand your distinction between "client" and
"host." NNTP-Posting-Host, if present, *usually* indicates the ip
address/hostname of the client machine.  Sometimes it is modified or
shows only a server name/address, or an obfuscation, but both server
and client are running on "hosts."

0
owl (2215)
4/20/2013 6:02:35 PM
On 4/20/13 11:02 AM, in article ehfur00q.a3wtr@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 4/19/13 10:34 PM, in article ehf8x900a.a3rhjr3a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/19/13 10:09 PM, in article nexefhe8a.a3ra30@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>>>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> ...
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am saying that when people speak specifically of spoofing IP addresses
>>>>>> that they are speaking of spoofing IP addresses.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Maybe you could point to when this occurred, or where in *any* Usenet
>>>>> post you might find an IP Source Address header, which is what is
>>>>> spoofed when one is "spoofing IP addresses."  NNTP-Posting-Host is
>>>>> the *Usenet header* where one often finds an IP address.  Spoofing
>>>>> *that* header is what is under discussion here in the context of --
>>>>> guess what -- Usenet posts.  IP header spoofing is something completely
>>>>> different, and has nothing to do with Usenet.
>>> 
>>>> You really do not have any ability to understand context, do you? My
>>>> comments were about spoofing an IP in a Usenet post.
>>> 
>>> Make up your mind.  If your context is "spoofing IP in a Usenet post,"
>>> then why do you say this:
>>> <quote (you)>
>>>>>>> I think we can safely say that was about the IP address and not the
>>>>>>> NNTP-Posting-Host
>>> </quote>
>>> 
>>> NNTP-Posting-Host is what one would typically modify in order to "spoof"
>>> the IP address in a Usenet post.
>>> 
>> My mistake. Sorry about that. I was thinking in terms of the IP of the
>> *Host* there and not the client. Know better, too.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand your distinction between "client" and
> "host." NNTP-Posting-Host, if present, *usually* indicates the ip
> address/hostname of the client machine.  Sometimes it is modified or
> shows only a server name/address, or an obfuscation, but both server
> and client are running on "hosts."

I was thinking the IP of the Usenet provider, not the user. A silly mistake
- and, as I said, I know better. So there you have it - proof I am not
perfect. :)

But it is a good example: when I make a mistake I admit to it, even when it
is a silly mistake. :)

-- 
"I mischaracterize things you say." - Brad cc Wiggins 

0
usenet2 (47889)
4/20/2013 8:02:56 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Uncovering Linux Android Master Key That Makes 99% of Linux Devices Vulnerable, nearly 900 million Linux devices
The Bluebox Security research team - Bluebox Labs - recently discovered a vulnerability in Linux Android's security model that allows a hacker to modify APK code without breaking an application's cryptographic signature, to turn any legitimate application into a malicious Trojan, completely unnoticed by the app store, the phone, or the end user. The implications are huge! This vulnerability, around at least since the release of Android 1.6 (codename: "Donut" ), could affect any Android phone released in the last 4 years1 - or nearly 900 million Linux devices2- and depending on the type of application, a hacker can exploit the vulnerability for anything from data theft to creation of a mobile botnet." http://bluebox.com/corporate-blog/bluebox-uncovers-android-master-key/ OMG........... "7"? , Grufftard?......... Kohltard?..... please come and tell us this isn't so!!!!!!!! <chuckle> -- Major Linux Problems on the Desktop or Why Linux is not (yet) Ready for the Desktop, 2013 edition http://bit.ly/gBOiz6 Cola Zealot wrote: > The Bluebox Security research team - Bluebox Labs - recently discovered a > vulnerability in Linux Android's security model that allows a hacker to > modify APK code without breaking an application's cryptographic signature, > to turn any legitimate application into a malicious Trojan, completely > unnoticed by the app store, the phone, or the end us...

[News] [Linux] MontaVista Claims to Have Shipped 35 Million Linux Devices
MontaVista asserts mobile Linux leadership ,----[ Quote ] | MontaVista Software announced today that its commercial Linux OS has | shipped in 35 million mobile devices, including 15 million last year. | Additionally, it said it ranked fourth overall among mobile operating | system providers in terms of revenue, according to figures compiled | by Venture Development Corp. (VDC). `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS2687231088.html Who Leads The Real-time Linux Niche? ,----[ Quote ] | "Linux was not designed to be a real-time system by any means and | when we started MontaVista in...

[News] Review of a Unique Linux Device, Linux Grows in Embedded Devices
Meet the chumby ,----[ Quote ] | I've been pacing the chumby maternity ward for nearly a year, waiting for | this unique wireless device to see the light of day. I recently took delivery | of my own little bundle of chumby joy and, at first look, I think it will | make a great addition to my growing gadget family. `---- http://www.linux.com/feature/119766 LinuxCertified Announces Embedded and Real-Time Linux Development Training ,----[ Quote ] | Over the past few years, more and more organizations have been opting for | Linux as their embedded platform. `---- http://www.linux...

[News] Everything in Mobile Devices is Linux, Linux, Linux....
Better Than Kindle? ,----[ Quote ] | While I'm thinking about all the things I'd do with it, this is what comes to | my mind: this thing cost around $400. There are few other devices that cost | that much these days: | | * Nokia N810 | * Asus eeePC 701 | * OLPC `---- http://justanystuff.blogspot.com/2007/12/better-than-kindle.html Here's a good early look at Android: Hands on with Android: XML Parsing ,----[ Quote ] | Here is an XML parser that I created to showcase Android’s UI. It retrieves | NBA, MLB and NFL scores off of my web server. The true beauty is ...

[News] [Linux] Linux USB Device Experience Better Than Windows USB Device Experience
Another Ubuntu Win: USB Devices ,----[ Quote ] | I had a similar experience with my Canon camera. It's so weird that | Windows is trying to make it easy with all of it's autodetecting USB | devices and searching for drivers, but then it just fails. Ubuntu | just works. `---- http://www.leonatkinson.com/index.php/another-ubuntu-win-usb-devices/ Related: Ubuntu and wireless - now better than Windows! ,----[ Quote ] | For years, Linux has had a reputation of being notoriously bad for | wireless access, whether through access points, ad-hoc, whatever. | But the new KWirelessNetwork...

10.8 Million Android Devices Infected With Malware.
"From 2010 to 2011, Android officially overtook Symbian as the most targeted mobile platform in the world by cyber criminals, according to NQ Mobile." "In 2011, newer and more advanced forms of malware have successfully infected an estimated 10.8 million Android devices worldwide. This is expected to increase throughout 2012." http://tinyurl.com/74ar9w9 On 2/26/2012 7:57 PM, Foster wrote: > "From 2010 to 2011, Android officially overtook Symbian as the most > targeted mobile platform in the world by cyber criminals, according > to NQ Mobile." > >...

Linux sold at least 14 million Linux devices PER DAY ALL DAY in 2010!!!!!!!!!
Linux sold at least 14 million Linux devices PER DAY ALL DAY in 2010!!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Think of all the factories and retailers that made money on the back of Linux. Linux sold at least 14 million gadgets PER DAY ALL DAY EVERY DAY in 2010. 2011 will will be a massive bonanza for electronics factories, gadget makers, Linux software developers, and governments that support Linux industries to grab a piece of the action. This despite global recession. Obama, you should pull out all the stops to get in on the Linux a...

Linux Android rootkit on 145 million devices , impossible to remove that shit!
[q] "Carrier IQ has access to basically everything you do on your device, from keystroke logging, to usernames and passwords sent over SSL encrypted connections (albeit before they are encrypted). And while new research has shown that it appears that none of this personal data actually is being harvested, the potential for misuse is very high." <------> "To summarize, this is a logging application with administrator access hiding on many consumer devices. Even though people pay a yearly, locked-in contract, the service providers felt no responsibility to notify the...

[News] Tens of Millions of Linux Instances Discussed at Linux Expo, Texas Linux Fest Planned
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 SCALE 8x: Ten million and one penguins ,----[ Quote ] | At SCALE 8x, Ronald Minnich gave a | presentation about the difficulties in trying | to run millions of Linux kernels for | simulating botnets. The idea is to be able to | run a botnet "at scale" to try to determine | how it behaves. But, even with all of the | compute power available to researchers at the | US Department of Energy's Sandia National | Laboratories—where Minnich works—there are | still various stumbling blocks to be overcome. `---- https://lwn.net/Sub...

[News] [Linux] Linux is Coming to 3 More Devices
Intel shows more advanced ultraportable ,----[ Quote ] | Instead of Windows, the MIMD uses Midinux, a Linux operating | system for mobile devices from China's Red Flag Linux. `---- http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/06/07/Intel-shows-advanced-ultraportable_1.html Apple-TV to run Linux soon? ,----[ Quote ] | Despite early success, the project's labors are "not ready for prime | time yet," according to the Wiki page. EFI is not fully working yet, | and the instructions appear to be incomplete and apparently still | evolving. The Wiki page concludes, "I just wanna ...

[News] NAS Device Runs Linux, Many Other Devices Do Too
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Two-bay home office NAS device runs Linux ,----[ Quote ] | Synology America Corp. is shipping a two-bay | network-attached storage (NAS) device, offering | up to 4TB of sharable storage for home and | entry-level business users. The Linux-based | DS210j is equipped with an 800MHz processor, a | gigabit Ethernet port, two USB ports, and | version 2.2 of Synology's DNLA-compliant Disk | Station Manager software. `---- http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Synology-DS210j/ BoxeeBox among 2009's most popular DIY projects ,----[ Qu...

[News] [Linux] Companies Keep Introducing More and More Linux Devices
Atmel Introduces an AVR32 Application Processor for Linux-based, Cost-constrained Embedded Designs ,----[ Quote ] | The new device is built to run the popular Linux operating system | in an embedded setting. Atmel provides a free port and support of | the OS and tool chain. `---- http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2007-06/artikel-8358750.asp Imaging Solutions Group (ISG) Announces New Remote-Eye Custom Camera Platform ,----[ Quote ] | The platform has a high performance low-power Linux CPU along with | 10/100 Ethernet, on-board JPEG compression, NTSC composite and S-Video. `--...

[News] [Linux] Another Linux Device Gets Praises
Small bundle of sluggy joy ,----[ Quote ] | Inside the case, the NSLU2 is in fact a tiny Linux machine with 32MB | of RAM and an Intel XScale CPU. This turns out to be plenty enough | resources to serve files on a small network. Aside from my prosaic | needs, the NSLU2 has been put to several more innovative uses, such | as a music server for Apple ITunes and a 4-line home telephone | exchange. `---- http://times.usefulinc.com/2007/05/31-nslu2 Leading to: Open (and Linux) Wins The Home Again ,----[ Quote ] | Open (and Linux) wins again. Companies that find ways to leverage | (and c...

[News] Multi-Million Linux Deal with Linux Vendor
Yen, not US dollars! *wink* e-System Signs $100-million Yen Reseller Deal With Linux Vendor Levanta ,----[ Quote ] | Levanta announced that new Japanese reseller partner e-System corporation | has made an additional commitment to more than $105-million yen in sales | of Levanta's Intrepid M Linux management appliance. The agreement follows | strong initial interest in the Intrepid M from e-System's Linux customer | base, including a major deal with one of the top 25 corporations on the | Global 1000 list. e-System corporation expects to resell more than 100 of | the Intrepid M applia...

[News] Cortex-A8 Does Linux, More Linux Devices Highlighted
Cortex-A8 SoCs target embedded, consumer devices ,----[ Quote ] | The EVM accepts application-specific daughter cards, and comes with a | TI-designed Linux board support package (BSP) that includes a 2.6.22 kernel, | peripheral drivers, U-boot, and a Busybox-based root file system. TI's Linux | BSPs are developed by an internal team, Andrews said. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5754452968.html Customizable SoCs gain virtual Linux support http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS7130367334.html Related: Four billion embedded systems shipped in '06 http://www.linuxdevic...

[News] Heaps of New Devices with Linux or Linux Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 JetCard 5400-w Embedded Linux PCI-104 Single Board Computer with -40-80℃ Operating Temperature for Efficient & Secure VPN Network Construction in Enhanced Industrial Control Applications! ,----[ Quote ] | Korenix releases JetCard 5400-w Embedded | Linux PCI-104 Single Board Computer with | -40-80℃ Operating Temperature for Efficient | & Secure VPN Network Construction in | Enhanced Industrial Control Applications. `---- http://www.linuxpr.com/releases/11714.html Touchscreen PC is designed for outdoor mounting ,----[ Quote ] | Ax...

[News] Embedded Linux/Device Vendors Boost Linux Support
High-integration MIPS processors run Linux ,----[ Quote ] | An evaluation board is also available, as is a PM2429-KIT Linux development | kit. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS9530578373.html Debugger improves Linux OS-aware support ,----[ Quote ] | SourcePoint 6.5.1 adds better Linux OS-aware debug support with no changes to | the user interface, according to the company. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS3330471786.html Sysgo names new CEO, plots global expansion ,----[ Quote ] | Sysgo's ELinOS and ELinOS Real-time Linux distributions target embedded, | indus...

[News] [Linux] School Children in Hawaii Use Linux Devices
Classroom Software Goes Mobile ,----[ Quuote ] | Fourth-graders, in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, are on a special school | project with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; | they are observing and recording the behavior of humpback whales | from shore, explains C/Net. They record the whales behavior on | small, handheld wireless device called an Indigo, made by | LearningSoft. `---- http://www.dailywireless.org/2007/05/10/classroom-software-goes-mobile ...

[News] [Linux] New Linux Devices, Signs of Growth in the Market
Slurp up some WiFi ,----[ Quote ] | It is, in fact, a mini computer running Debian Linux. Utilizing a | 266Mhz processor and 64 megabytes of RAM, the Slupr is no slouch. `---- http://www.gadgetell.com/2007/05/slurp-up-some-wifi/ MontaVista Expands in Europe to Serve Growing Number of Companies... ,----[ Quote ] | With many millions of devices using MontaVista Linux, we are already | the leader in the commercial distribution of embedded Linux. `---- http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/topix/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070530005172&newsLang=en Motorola Breaks the $...

[News] [Linux] Platform of Choice for Mobile Device May Be Linux
Will 2008 be the year of mobile Linux? ,----[ Quote ] | These three operating systems are the world leaders, while players | in the U.S. include BlackBerry and Palm. It seems Linux is a | recurring theme in these articles and it looks like 2008 may | shape up to be the year of the Linux mobile operating system. `---- http://blogs.zdnet.com/mobile-gadgeteer/?p=359 Related: OpenMoko Interface - I'm Loving It! ,----[ Quote ] | It reminds me of one of my favorite Window manager, Enlightenment | with its brushed metal background and such. Looking at OpenMoko, | makes me wanting iPhone les...

[News] A Look at the Linux-based Little, Other Examples of Linux Devices
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Litl Plans to Launch Web-Connected TV Box ,----[ Quote ] | The Litl box will run an open Linux-based | OS, the same used in the Webbook, making | it easier to encourage users to create web | apps due to the open OS. litl will also be | releasing an Adobe Flash 10.1-based | Software Development Kit (SDK) at this | weekend's Flash and the City developers | conference. `---- http://www.pcworld.com/article/196329/litl_plans_to_launch_webconnected_tv_box.html Linux on the iPhone: Status update ,----[ Quote ] | I know...

[News] [Linux] Embedded Devices and Components Keep Linux Relationships
Low-cost, customizable processor runs Linux ,----[ Quote ] | Atmel has launched an interesting new chip line aimed at reducing | NRE (non-recurring engineering) expenses associated with ASIC | (application-specific integrated circuit) development. The CAP | ("customizable Atmel processor") integrates a Linux-friendly | ARM9 core together with a metal-programmable function block | where users can implement cores, `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8477708762.html Multicore MIPS64 chips target Linux-based storage devices ,----[ Quote ] | Embedded Linux specialist MontaVi...

[News] Android Linux Moves Up the Hierarchy of Devices
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 2 + 8 = Glass: Android Desktop Phone Seeking Market Entry ,----[ Quote ] | The Android based, VoIP-capable Glass phone with a chip each for operating | system and telephony plus an 8" touchscreen is supposed to welcome a new era | in business telephony. `---- http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/Online/News/2-8-Glass-Android-Desktop-Phone-Seeking-Market-Entry Do We Need New App Stores for Android? ,----[ Quote ] | ARCHOS' Android tablet promises to be a very different kind of Android | device--definitely not a smartphone. "We bel...

[News] More Devices That Run Linux: Remote Monitoring Device, Thin Clients
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Remote monitoring device offers 3G modem ,----[ Quote ] | Machine-to-machine (M2M) communications vendor Sixnet is shipping a | cellular-enabled remote monitoring and control device that runs Linux. `---- http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5490897310.html?kc=rss Low-cost thin client offers choice of protocols ,----[ Quote ] | Igel Technology announced a $186 thin client for small and home office (SOHO) | businesses and "unmanaged" environments. The Igel One runs Linux on a Via | Eden processor clocked at 400MHz, with 512MB RAM, ...

Web resources about - [NEWS] 33 Million Linux Android devices infected in 2012, first quarter of 2013 over 10 million devices. - comp.os.linux.advocacy

Infected Mushroom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
... sources, including acoustic guitars and complex synthesized basses, and their compositions often contain changes of drum beat and tempo . Infected ...

Trend Micro Will Make A HouseCall To Facebook Users Infected By Malware
Facebook users who have potentially been infected by malware may be prompted to download the free version of HouseCall to remove any existing ...

HIV-infected cell - Flickr - Photo Sharing!
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0050026

Infected with Ebola in Atlanta Airport, 13 December - YouTube
Another Ebola case has been discovered in Atlanta 13 December. Liberian citizen, arrived to the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. ...

Doctors treating Emirati at Abu Dhabi hospital also infected with Mers virus
... have been diagnosed in the UAE, local and international health officials announced. ABU DHABI // Four Abu Dhabi doctors treating a man infected ...

Ebola-infected patients on the run in Liberia
Young men who believe the Ebola epidemic is a lie have attacked a clinic in Liberia, forcing infected patients to flee for their lives.

Spanish nurse may have been infected with Ebola by touching face with contaminated gloves
A Spanish nurse, who is the first person to contract Ebola outside Africa, may have been infected by touching her face with gloves while she ...

Ekka E-coli video - Ekka showgoers infected with E-coli, Brisbane
A number of people contract the potentially "deadly illness" E-coli at the Ekka, prompting authorities to urge showgoers to "wash your hands" ...

Measles-infected tourist visits Dreamworld
Queensland Health has confirmed another interstate tourist was infected with measles while visiting the Sunshine State in early October.


Resources last updated: 3/10/2016 2:26:47 PM