|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > November 2005 > Complaints to remailers
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Complaints to remailers
|
|
| [Anonymous] Swamp 2005-11-26, 2:46 am |
| -----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
Message-type: plaintext
When a remailer gets a complaint, what do you do to verify
that your remailer sent the message?
IOW, if someone forged headers for your remailer, could you
check the post or email against a database (log) to verify
that your remailer actually sent the message?
Or would that be necessary? Is there some clearly distinguishable
characteristic of remailer posts that allows instant identification
that it was forged (or real)?
Assuming you can verify that your remailer didn't send the
message, what do you do to answer the complaint? Or do you just
send a standard reply and drop the matter?
Swamp
-----END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
| |
| Twisty Admin 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:50:07 -0500, "[Anonymous] Swamp"
<anonymous@bigappleremailer.com> wrote:
>-----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
>Message-type: plaintext
>
>When a remailer gets a complaint, what do you do to verify
>that your remailer sent the message?
>
If it is a request to block an e-mail address, I just check that the sender
is writing from the e-mail address that the sender wants blocked. Then I
block it, send a hand written personal apology letter, and the matter is
ended. I have only had 2 to date.
>IOW, if someone forged headers for your remailer, could you
>check the post or email against a database (log) to verify
>that your remailer actually sent the message?
No re-mailer that I know of keeps logs. Please look at section 4.0 of my
help file at http://echolot.platypuslabs.org/thesaurus/144.help
>Or would that be necessary? Is there some clearly distinguishable
>characteristic of remailer posts that allows instant identification
>that it was forged (or real)?
I think that once a post is made, the headers cannot be altered. I have
never heard of that being done in over 10+ years hanging around this group.
I am not saying it can't be done, I just never heard of it.
>Assuming you can verify that your remailer didn't send the
>message, what do you do to answer the complaint? Or do you just
>send a standard reply and drop the matter?
I assume any complaints are valid and take them seriously. I have no
standard reply letters. I will dest-block e-mail addresses at the verified
senders request. I write a personal apology letter and ask them to contact
me if any other messages get through after the destination block is in
place.
>Swamp
>-----END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
Hope this helps answer some of your questions. Now I am going to sleep 
Regards,
Twisty Admin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ4h6c4/zWl6iiTz4EQKhVwCfb5BrP/RYs0PTAifB6KVE2VGCA4EAn13Z
SgGUNt2H17Py/ZM42W5/UKTM
=MIjU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| In article <1132977007_432@bigapple.yi.org>
"[Anonymous] Swamp" <anonymous@bigappleremailer.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
> Message-type: plaintext
>
> When a remailer gets a complaint, what do you do to verify
> that your remailer sent the message?
>
> IOW, if someone forged headers for your remailer, could you
> check the post or email against a database (log) to verify
> that your remailer actually sent the message?
One would hope not.
> Or would that be necessary? Is there some clearly distinguishable
> characteristic of remailer posts that allows instant identification
> that it was forged (or real)?
Yes. Certain headers might be changed or rearranged. Disclaimers might be
added. There are a lot of items which, if you're familiar with the
characteristics of each remailer, can point to the validity of the supposed
origin. Forgeries happen but I'm pretty certain I can spot them in most
cases.
> Assuming you can verify that your remailer didn't send the
> message, what do you do to answer the complaint? Or do you just
> send a standard reply and drop the matter?
>
> Swamp
> -----END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| In article <1132977007_432@bigapple.yi.org>
"[Anonymous] Swamp" <anonymous@bigappleremailer.com> wrote:
>
> Or would that be necessary? Is there some clearly distinguishable
> characteristic of remailer posts that allows instant identification
> that it was forged (or real)?
Yes. In every case I've come across there's some chacteristic which is
uncharacteristic of the supposed exit.
You can quit trying now.
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| In article <1132977007_432@bigapple.yi.org>
"[Anonymous] Swamp" <anonymous@bigappleremailer.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-----
> Message-type: plaintext
>
> When a remailer gets a complaint, what do you do to verify
> that your remailer sent the message?
>
> IOW, if someone forged headers for your remailer, could you
> check the post or email against a database (log) to verify
> that your remailer actually sent the message?
You shouldn't keep logs of what exits from your remailer. If that is
what you are doing then I guess this post was written by Eelbash.
> Or would that be necessary? Is there some clearly distinguishable
> characteristic of remailer posts that allows instant identification
> that it was forged (or real)?
>
> Assuming you can verify that your remailer didn't send the
> message, what do you do to answer the complaint? Or do you just
> send a standard reply and drop the matter?
If someone is asking you to block mail going to their email address,
then you block it. It doesn't matter if anything has actually been
sent to them or not. If they don't want to be able to receive
anonymous messages then that is up to them.
If they are complaining about a usenet post they should have included
the headers of the post in their complaint. You can then look the
message id up on a real news server (or Google) to verify it.
Do not keep logs.
| |
| Stephen K. Gielda 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| In article < 14f1ae8b10d23d45fe48de2207fe9f60@remaile
r.org.uk>,
devnull@remailer.org.uk says...
> If someone is asking you to block mail going to their email address,
> then you block it.
>
After verifying by replying to them and receiving a confirmation
response first, of course, otherwise you open yourself up to someone
forging an e-mail attempting to get someone else blocked. Like for
example if you get an e-mail from me, the helpdesk address, or another
service account asking to be blocked it's a safe bet that it didn't come
from me and blocking would cause me to lose wanted mail. I do know
someone tried that once, because they hit a remailer that I was running
anonymously.
/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| In article <MPG.1df2a7abd6cbe21a989bde@news.newsreader.com>
Stephen K. Gielda <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
>
> In article < 14f1ae8b10d23d45fe48de2207fe9f60@remaile
r.org.uk>,
> devnull@remailer.org.uk says...
>
> After verifying by replying to them and receiving a confirmation
> response first, of course, otherwise you open yourself up to someone
> forging an e-mail attempting to get someone else blocked. Like for
> example if you get an e-mail from me, the helpdesk address, or another
> service account asking to be blocked it's a safe bet that it didn't come
> from me and blocking would cause me to lose wanted mail. I do know
> someone tried that once, because they hit a remailer that I was running
> anonymously.
>
> /steve
Yes, after verifying. Someone submitted a patch that does an
automated challenge-response on a dest-blk request, so the whole thing
can be automated. I think it was being added to the Mixmaster CVS
after being cleaned up a bit.
| |
| Twisty Admin 2005-11-26, 5:46 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:09:51 +0000, Anonymous <devnull@remailer.org.uk>
wrote:
>In article <MPG.1df2a7abd6cbe21a989bde@news.newsreader.com>
>Stephen K. Gielda <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
>
>Yes, after verifying. Someone submitted a patch that does an
>automated challenge-response on a dest-blk request, so the whole thing
>can be automated. I think it was being added to the Mixmaster CVS
>after being cleaned up a bit.
The only two I received were real. One was from a company, another from an
individual. Viewing the RFC-822 headers can pretty much tell you if it was
from a a real person or comapany and not an imposter. For instance, in
Steve's case, the RFC-822 headers would not match the request to block his
e-mail address. I'll block if the RFC-822 headers check out. If I am ever
in doubt, confirmation would be required. Again, I only have had 2 requests
so i can't speak from extensive experience.
Regards,
Twisty Admin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ4jyq4/zWl6iiTz4EQK8DACgkU/saBQwBucrng+ECSJfy1yDzecAn3+r
ycKEy/Pj6w0hxDGdEUeY5oNy
=suQw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| anonymous@remailer.hastio.org 2005-11-26, 8:45 pm |
| In article <j0tgo1hbnlpkmp2s807vslt0h8l8srbhr6@4ax.com>
Twisty Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
>
> I think that once a post is made, the headers cannot be altered. I have
> never heard of that being done in over 10+ years hanging around this group.
> I am not saying it can't be done, I just never heard of it.
Watch out - I have.
The schnook just takes the valid headers from some target remailer and
inserts them in manually before sending with another remailer (usually one
with full From headers) as exit. Most pass them on relatively intact, but
there's always some clue that it's a forgery.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
| |
| Thrasher Admin 2005-11-26, 8:45 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <i4sho1tjhu86p39aai8mps3786bpjm67ls@4ax.com>
Twisty Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 23:09:51 +0000, Anonymous <devnull@remailer.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
> The only two I received were real. One was from a company, another from an
> individual. Viewing the RFC-822 headers can pretty much tell you if it was
> from a a real person or comapany and not an imposter. For instance, in
> Steve's case, the RFC-822 headers would not match the request to block his
> e-mail address. I'll block if the RFC-822 headers check out. If I am ever
> in doubt, confirmation would be required. Again, I only have had 2 requests
> so i can't speak from extensive experience.
Have you activated Panta's dest-block modification? It works well, saves
time and uses a challenge response to avoid abuse.
- --
Cheers,
Thrasher.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
iQEVAwUBQ4iKz2e9vBuCUlx7AQG4NQf9F78oiM1/uERIxxL4gcAuojmK71K8wnxK
EO/ ncpOKLrmVks7k9Hy1qKqbWnz5Gv2xkbHcCc1nfC6
blpj6Vutgb3ow+j9qv5UV
xjgK9xcdlykaJq4yX4wg98Y9EjGn5aoYmkQQD9e7
oQiG2cK4XPFT5llZYctqHYWO
xMVmVV5onb4wuze8gUDbEE0Ic5NXmEbV54X1aO1J
pQYwoxwSVL0qGN4Dpiy3arAV
NCs1q2SjUZ+uBqNwbmGSH3g4dujt07pWE+I0zOG/Ehlk/XZCAtACanP0X268OqrJ
If2YS/ OjA8LqPOV3nns5bWPC1MASSS7TuTUNhsNfji0971
82u+0+1Q==
=ZNU5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Twisty Admin 2005-11-26, 8:45 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 27 Nov 2005 00:22:07 -0000, Thrasher Admin <thrasher_admin@reece.net.au>
wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>In article <i4sho1tjhu86p39aai8mps3786bpjm67ls@4ax.com>
>Twisty Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
>Have you activated Panta's dest-block modification? It works well, saves
>time and uses a challenge response to avoid abuse.
No, but I sure will. Didn't realize there was one. Thanks!!!
Regards,
Twisty Admin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ4j/SY/zWl6iiTz4EQKSzgCfbWubsdJ6N/OBfSa7YUMOKhcu0g4Anixn
/fhn5sO/nmeJZ1npY5HekcSc
=HpxA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|
|