|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > July 2005 > Using Virtual PC for Privacy
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 |
Using Virtual PC for Privacy
|
|
| The Method Man 2005-07-08, 2:46 am |
| This is what I've started doing...
Install an operating system, Windows, Linux, whatever on Microsoft Virtual
PC 2004. Get it all updated and set up just the way you like it, then
eneable differencing disks. This means that your main virtual hard drive is
locked, you can even make it read only. When you use your virtual install,
all changes to the disk are stored in the differencing file. To return your
virtual install to the original state, simply shred the differencin disk.
There you go - flawlessly covering your tracks.
The Method Man.
| |
| anonymous@remailer.hastio.org 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In article <2Mpze.311040$581.173044@fe05.news.easynews.com>
"The Method Man" <frosty.madness@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is what I've started doing...
>
> Install an operating system, Windows, Linux, whatever on Microsoft Virtual
> PC 2004. Get it all updated and set up just the way you like it, then
> eneable differencing disks. This means that your main virtual hard drive is
> locked, you can even make it read only. When you use your virtual install,
> all changes to the disk are stored in the differencing file. To return your
> virtual install to the original state, simply shred the differencin disk.
> There you go - flawlessly covering your tracks.
>
> The Method Man.
Interesting idea, but you'd lose all the necessary changes in the process,
like Windoze updates, remailer key updates, among others.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
| |
| Frosty Madness 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| True, but you don't have to shred the differencing disks, you have the
option to merge them into your main virtual disk. Then you effectively just
have a new baseline.
Frosty (The Method Man)
<anonymous@remailer.hastio.org> wrote in message
news:T9B6SAM638541.6393287037@anonymous.poster...
> In article <2Mpze.311040$581.173044@fe05.news.easynews.com>
> "The Method Man" <frosty.madness@gmail.com> wrote:
Virtual[vbcol=seagreen]
is[vbcol=seagreen]
install,[vbcol=seagreen]
your[vbcol=seagreen]
disk.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Interesting idea, but you'd lose all the necessary changes in the process,
> like Windoze updates, remailer key updates, among others.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 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 Remailer 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In article <42ce8087$0$93848$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> anonymous@remailer.hastio.org schreef:
>
> OTOH, if you get infected, only the Virtual Machine gets infected. A
> 'simple shred' will reset all virii again.
True.
>
> Though it is probably a good idea to apply the most important patches to
> your real install. And don't forget the firewall before you connect to
> the net!
Agreed.
>
> Wasn't it some admin here that posted this week that he didn't apply
> patches from Microsoft? Please help me on this..
>
That's not a good idea.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In article <42ce8087$0$93848$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> Wasn't it some admin here that posted this week that he didn't apply
> patches from Microsoft? Please help me on this..
>
> Thomas
<4UBMMBF338531.4841087963@anonymous.poster>
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Thrasher Remailer schreef:
> In article <42ce8087$0$93848$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
> "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
>
>
> <4UBMMBF338531.4841087963@anonymous.poster>
http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...nonymous.poster
Oh no! Not Panta! No wonder I didn't tell him not to do this, I respect
him to highly.. even uses PCAnywhere (the same trash Frog-Admin used to
run IIRC, and which at that time used it's own home brewn crypto
algorithm, just like PGP 1.x). This looks bad, very bad :-(
http://www.packetstorm.widexs.nl/99...nywhere.dos.txt
http://packetstormsecurity.org/0102...s/scx-sa-14.txt
Can't find weak crypto link right now..
http://bo2k.sourceforge.net/software/bo2k11.html is so much better (and
free!)
Panta-Admin, please repent and apply your patches!
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQs6pRwEP2l8iXKAJAQF55QMfXzpDsCvx
NxQY4pCqNG78FuJM5NJbucsj
akdaaTsIRzOwTsxyJ4/x8z/IgPPCKl1vJ66/k0SzBfOGNQ6U9maDUoIa4wvik92a
kYPIf6pLUuP3zgsVqcUljFn47XhWujhn2orpAQ==
=1G0s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In article <42cea925$1$93844$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> Panta-Admin, please repent and apply your patches!
> Thomas
If I read between the lines correctly in Panta's post, he considers it more
of a risk to update with post 9/11 patches than run a highly restricted &
locked-down box unpatched. I was a bit taken aback when I first read it,
but gave it more thought and now tend to agree with him.
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Nomen Nescio schreef:
> In article <42cea925$1$93844$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
> "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
>
>
> If I read between the lines correctly in Panta's post, he considers it more
> of a risk to update with post 9/11 patches than run a highly restricted &
> locked-down box unpatched. I was a bit taken aback when I first read it,
> but gave it more thought and now tend to agree with him.
Panta, if you are reading this, could you connect to
windowsupdate.microsoft.com and give us all the updates you are missing
out on? You don't have to actually apply the patches. (though your
Internet Explorer is probably exploitable)
I bet pl would sleep a lot better knowing that some script-kiddie
couldn't hack your computer with an exploit that was written for a leak
discovered four years ago..
I also hope you /do/ patch all other software (like firewalls and
mixmaster and stuff, ah, no, you can't actually 'update' mixmaster since
you're on Reliable, sorry, Mercury and Apache and stuff).
I did a quick search on cert and found e.g. this:
<http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/150236>
Better check it out yourself!
Thomas
- --
"You can't be safer, can't be more secure than with a breast in each
palm, that's the way I was born and that's the way I want to die" -
Sugarcubes, Mama, 1988
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQs7M3gEP2l8iXKAJAQJIIQMfXPgdjn41
uM+V5saLdAsvnvoDNVezPiS6
TBEIDG7fFo9WhQmrCfpzLBP3VIUNwHER0PfUpWcI
gSMFepKgxf5u94msmf/Ci9BK
j2yk1+Vndo1umjIMy0Ncg0a7M3YM95vzxy0Blg==
=Fcgp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In <9a7ebcba4ba4700180842acaf70b4a4a@dizum.com>, nobody@dizum.com wrote:
>In article <42cea925$1$93844$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
>"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
>If I read between the lines correctly in Panta's post, he considers it more
>of a risk to update with post 9/11 patches than run a highly restricted &
>locked-down box unpatched. I was a bit taken aback when I first read it,
>but gave it more thought and now tend to agree with him.
Please expand on this.
| |
| Anonymous Sender 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In article <C3BZAWLE38542.1790046296@reece.net.au>
Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> In <9a7ebcba4ba4700180842acaf70b4a4a@dizum.com>, nobody@dizum.com wrote:
>
> Please expand on this.
OK.
If Panta is running *no* exploitable (from the Internet) Windows services
such as IIS, and *no* exploitable windows clients like IE and OE on this
particular box, then I see little benefit in patching these things with
Microsoft patches. I gather that that box is *only* running Reliable and
Mercury which apparently (besides his admin tools) are the only things
which interface to the outside world. I trust that Panta-Admin is adept at
making Windows nothing but a paperweight as far as the Internet goes. I
know I am.
Personally I don't think there would be any harm in updating the computer
to the hilt, but the ultra-paranoid might suspect that post 9/11 patches
might contain hidden backdoors or some such.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-07-08, 5:47 pm |
| In article < c60d449caa1d320b8961417f05e2bcae@remaile
r.metacolo.com>
Anonymous Sender <anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote:
>
> In article <C3BZAWLE38542.1790046296@reece.net.au>
> Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> OK.
> If Panta is running *no* exploitable (from the Internet) Windows services
> such as IIS, and *no* exploitable windows clients like IE and OE on this
> particular box, then I see little benefit in patching these things with
> Microsoft patches. I gather that that box is *only* running Reliable and
> Mercury which apparently (besides his admin tools) are the only things
> which interface to the outside world. I trust that Panta-Admin is adept at
> making Windows nothing but a paperweight as far as the Internet goes. I
> know I am.
>
> Personally I don't think there would be any harm in updating the computer
> to the hilt, but the ultra-paranoid might suspect that post 9/11 patches
> might contain hidden backdoors or some such.
As far as Windows goes, Server 2000 is as good as it gets. It doesn't
install IIS, etc and is very stable. Add to that Panta doesn't use IE
and I would say he is better off leaving it as it is rather than
installing IIS just to install vulnerability riddled updates.
| |
| Master Yoda 2005-07-09, 2:45 am |
| In < c60d449caa1d320b8961417f05e2bcae@remaile
r.metacolo.com>,
anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com wrote:
>In article <C3BZAWLE38542.1790046296@reece.net.au>
>Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
>OK.
>If Panta is running *no* exploitable (from the Internet) Windows services
>such as IIS, and *no* exploitable windows clients like IE and OE on this
>particular box, then I see little benefit in patching these things with
>Microsoft patches. I gather that that box is *only* running Reliable and
>Mercury which apparently (besides his admin tools) are the only things
>which interface to the outside world. I trust that Panta-Admin is adept at
>making Windows nothing but a paperweight as far as the Internet goes. I
>know I am.
>
>Personally I don't think there would be any harm in updating the computer
>to the hilt, but the ultra-paranoid might suspect that post 9/11 patches
>might contain hidden backdoors or some such.
A serious point you make.
Very valid concerns you raise.
Search has anyone perfomred?
Post 9/11 backdoor exploits have they sought?
| |
| not panta 2005-07-09, 2:45 am |
| In <S107VEM138542.2457523148@reece.net.au>, thrasher@reece.net.au wrote:
>In article < c60d449caa1d320b8961417f05e2bcae@remaile
r.metacolo.com>
>Anonymous Sender <anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote:
>
>As far as Windows goes, Server 2000 is as good as it gets. It doesn't
>install IIS, etc and is very stable. Add to that Panta doesn't use IE
>and I would say he is better off leaving it as it is rather than
>installing IIS just to install vulnerability riddled updates.
My personal choice is windows 98se fully patched, IE, OE never used for
anything BUT windows update.
Apache for webserver, Mercury32 for mailserver
pgp658ckt 09b3 for encryption, JBN2 for remailer client, Reliable for
remailer
| |
| questions 2005-07-09, 7:45 am |
| In article <SXGPZ5OZ38542.4955787037@reece.net.au> not panta
<thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
> My personal choice is windows 98se fully patched, IE, OE never used for
> anything BUT windows update.
>
> Apache for webserver, Mercury32 for mailserver
>
> pgp658ckt 09b3 for encryption, JBN2 for remailer client, Reliable for
> remailer
Hello,
In the future I plan on running a remailer and nymserver with
Apache, Mercury32 (with TLS if still available) and Reliable
(Panta's Mod) on my 98se box.
Right now I plan on setting up a website, auction site and
bulleten board (PHP) running off Apache and Mercury32 from my
other 98se box behind Tor's Hidden Services.
I have a few questions for you if you don't mind:
1. Is it difficult to install and run Apache on 98se?
2. Are there any required files I will need to download that
don't come with the Apache or Mercury32 packages?
3. Is Apache, Mercury32 and Reliable resource hogs? I have my
Swap file disabled and would like to continue to do so.
Thank you
| |
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 20:58:38 +0200, Thomas J. Boschloo wrote in
Message-Id: <42ceccec$0$24985$3a628fcd@reader10.nntp.hccnet.nl>:
> Panta, if you are reading this, could you connect to
> windowsupdate.microsoft.com and give us all the updates you are missing
> out on? You don't have to actually apply the patches. (though your
> Internet Explorer is probably exploitable)
Hi Thomas,
Panta's setup is quite clever in that his Windows machine isn't visible
from the outside at all. He runs Linux and Postfix as his mail service,
then his Reliable remailer runs as a Windows VMware session within that.
Mail is collected from the Linux system using Reliables' pop3 and
transmitted back out through the postfix smtp service.
Sounds like a nice secure configuration to me. 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBQs/ 9a2oLu9HNUqmMAQoemAf7BbgLcxhF8zDZQheVwBB
STdNNwhzS3/mq
/gzOUz3CKVbgovDFJJd9f7VtiD+Tz7nslXbbAYv/66YmDufQvKCS15AMt2jdaz4j
ErnJgGy/2I82stPoJfqPesmUntBk/2Y2VfxcJeXlIn0ak7eZBEEatL0iDpJ0yjA0
IHCYR9FzlIW5BIows5rnKJlZanwbqK5XEwRNzh8S
pWF+DDpNaNTkswDFMUOhMGBE
EwtgDSWHZw27Ixr15E5y13QcU/6VLAgNadpPzr523dKMiKCON1PQ+TEoLeizy1Hx
zg4tJCUA7f33xPbrbN9lqyWiqCdhzqP9to+9A5aO
AMwHoZcnV7Y/Kg==
=bAtD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>
| |
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi Zax
Seem to have lost contact with panta, sent a mail last Saturday
could be busy with the move.
Alex
AdminAT4096DOTnet
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/
iQEVAwUBQtAIcDDmI5WVhfKpAQFjVQf/fu3LZxOpfxIQayrCaiqA/tNknspOfVXg
k3p6R8sB/ 5eVpiy0yJxgF4Lt7BRk1ALUHzTuaaxM9etICj8gz
x3woo6rO5nxxWRI
7IFIN/QOyqRQ+QupjHSP2oR4sawl9UDmeYCAt/hROPCHK9CSmNtJVLu9qUDcgSoF
QNpJQ7t10hGs+B7g2b8/wxRZ4Us9etTBSmAR/W4w3pK2hL01Yw1boHydNNOFbH90
Z72EjC6k0o7YFTMFBPNATJZhOEttDycvEk/dtU+hcLmYPqsMSDJ3ugkPxrypMDoR
OcRCNEuIMCRdbN9k9W4K9/NCzMlxMJjD9phOrpq3LQPy/dVXBChcNQ==
=1hsF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Zax wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 20:58:38 +0200, Thomas J. Boschloo wrote in
> Message-Id: <42ceccec$0$24985$3a628fcd@reader10.nntp.hccnet.nl>:
>
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Panta's setup is quite clever in that his Windows machine isn't visible
> from the outside at all. He runs Linux and Postfix as his mail service,
> then his Reliable remailer runs as a Windows VMware session within that.
> Mail is collected from the Linux system using Reliables' pop3 and
> transmitted back Hi out through the postfix smtp service.
>
> Sounds like a nice secure configuration to me.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEVAwUBQs/ 9a2oLu9HNUqmMAQoemAf7BbgLcxhF8zDZQheVwBB
STdNNwhzS3/mq
> /gzOUz3CKVbgovDFJJd9f7VtiD+Tz7nslXbbAYv/66YmDufQvKCS15AMt2jdaz4j
> ErnJgGy/2I82stPoJfqPesmUntBk/2Y2VfxcJeXlIn0ak7eZBEEatL0iDpJ0yjA0
> IHCYR9FzlIW5BIows5rnKJlZanwbqK5XEwRNzh8S
pWF+DDpNaNTkswDFMUOhMGBE
> EwtgDSWHZw27Ixr15E5y13QcU/6VLAgNadpPzr523dKMiKCON1PQ+TEoLeizy1Hx
> zg4tJCUA7f33xPbrbN9lqyWiqCdhzqP9to+9A5aO
AMwHoZcnV7Y/Kg==
> =bAtD
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
> Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
> uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-07-10, 7:45 am |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Zax schreef:
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 20:58:38 +0200, Thomas J. Boschloo wrote in
> Message-Id: <42ceccec$0$24985$3a628fcd@reader10.nntp.hccnet.nl>:
>
>
>
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Panta's setup is quite clever in that his Windows machine isn't visible
> from the outside at all. He runs Linux and Postfix as his mail service,
> then his Reliable remailer runs as a Windows VMware session within that.
> Mail is collected from the Linux system using Reliables' pop3 and
> transmitted back out through the postfix smtp service.
>
> Sounds like a nice secure configuration to me.
I value your opinion on this, but I still am a bit worried. Maybe I am
paranoid, but not patching your system gives me the creeps. I would at
least download and install the latest service packs.
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows200...tins/rollup.asp>
(April 30th 2005). As lot op people and businesses use them you can
probably check their hashes and feel safe in the crowd.
When you don't apply patches, you might be safe from the TLA. But at the
same time you might be a target for every script-kiddie on the Internet!
Also, I am pretty sure that the NSA would spend their time well focusing
on undiscovered exploits. Meaning you cannot defend against them anyway
(but if you run a honeypot, you might be able to find out new exploits
and publish them!).
I understand from your post that Reliable is the only thing that is
allowed through the firewall Panta-Admin has installed. So the SSL I
posted about is probably not an issue (I feared Mercury or Apache might
have used it instead of OpenSSL under windows, maybe as an option).
Also, when you block everything non localaddress:pop3 and
localaddress:smtp, that might also keep any (NSA) trojans at bay! You
could use a hash verification program to check your reliable files for
modifications. (or a firewall like Kerio that does both)
Still, if you are running linux, why also run Reliable?
More is less and less is more after all?
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQtEPIAEP2l8iXKAJAQHclAMgkbsN+CPr
Jrn7MjBuFBaQwBUvVASBJCV4
hbIrV/e28W7XNS23+Ejg1SMxCo+ff2mfGfSm2Ick/zAVSGhkwtAxpcsVOlh0FGbd
wEoiyVA4Q9c9p1bYT1VMoW19Zjn/LmTxXWB+Wg==
=Dbh/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-07-10, 5:46 pm |
| On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Zax schreef:
>
>I value your opinion on this, but I still am a bit worried. Maybe I am
>paranoid, but not patching your system gives me the creeps.
No, you're not paranoid. But you are an idiot with delusions of grandeur.
Why should any real operator care what you think about his config? Really?
All you do is sit there and collect your government check and give bad,
incomplete advice to newbies. Go back to your video games, boy.
| |
| Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer 2005-07-10, 5:46 pm |
| On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>Zax schreef:
>
>I value your opinion on this, but I still am a bit worried. Maybe I am
>paranoid, but not patching your system gives me the creeps.
No, you're not paranoid. But you are an idiot with delusions of grandeur.
Why should any real operator care what you think about his config? Really?
All you do is sit there and collect your government check and give bad,
incomplete advice to newbies. Go back to your video games, boy.
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-07-10, 5:46 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Thrasher Remailer schreef:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
>
>
> No, you're not paranoid. But you are an idiot with delusions of grandeur.
> Why should any real operator care what you think about his config? Really?
It is against my nature not to patch. I want the latest and the best in
everything!
> All you do is sit there and collect your government check and give bad,
> incomplete advice to newbies. Go back to your video games, boy.
I just played WoW for a couple (many) of hours and now I am back here to
check out how *you* are. And all you do is call me names.
I could ask you the same question you asked me: Why should any regular
here care about what some anonymous troll says about him? At least I try
to keep the discussion going.. This issue has not been dealt with to my
satisfaction yet.. (and I guess a lot of satisfied users of Panta also
want to hear him on this issue, just like I did when I first read about
his policy of not patching for nearly four years).
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQtF7fgEP2l8iXKAJAQHLjQMeIF1JoazK
d0IrXwxw7t5HlZ9MdP6SLG0O
BGGgsf3GBv05TZyIANyDdmDSzLUrAMuDf9jPD18b
QXo0su6rp8S3z394NF5Ds7Ek
FtkxwiHk8bSdVrEE9u/Pz2LUZVowmePMfpRKbg==
=v7aY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
|
|
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-07-10, 5:46 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer schreef:
<snip>
> All you do is sit there and collect your government check and give bad,
> incomplete advice to newbies. Go back to your video games, boy.
And to add to that, if Panta-Admins config is so good (as you seem to
claim), why shouldn't more Reliable operators run their systems this
way? I might be the devils advocate here, but this discussion *must*
take place IMNSHO.
And it is true that I don't run a remailer. But coincidentally, that
might change since I have experienced problems with my current PC in the
city of Ironforge (WoW). So I might want to take my savings and get
myself an new computer and that frees up my current computer for my
little sister (she likes the black casing), which frees up her computer
as a potential middleman remailer (my second computer, an Athlon 700).
And just so you know.. You can ask me _anything_ about my config and
security when *I* run a remailer. Helpful suggestions are also welcome..
I also don't like your use of the word 'grandeur'. It's french, use
'greatness' or 'omnipotence' instead. I don't think you ever ran a
remailer yourself, now did you? You just have a big mouth because I care
about the security of remailers and you don't, now don't you?
hth,
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQtGaOgEP2l8iXKAJAQF0bwMffGIeK6mP
BC7k1CFVA3CXvIBZvLHEOMJy
eQN/ObtxG7I5tsnmBY/hSg42AIBuxMwGpO8wjWzGQt/PS/pxnfpfwCqMkCeKZMI6
7kOoBFeAmEEBfDHw8SJCJt6t8Ks1qMgD4sgVcA==
=3pYx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Petit Mal 2005-07-13, 5:52 pm |
| "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> writes:
>I also don't like your use of the word 'grandeur'. It's french, use
>'greatness' or 'omnipotence' instead. I don't think you ever ran a
>remailer yourself, now did you? You just have a big mouth because I care
>about the security of remailers and you don't, now don't you?
U tell 'im Bosch!!
--
Tiny
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
| |
| Thomas J. Boschloo 2005-07-13, 5:52 pm |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Petit Mal schreef:
> "Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> writes:
>
>
>
> U tell 'im Bosch!!
Petit Mal, little/small pain :-) [I do remember something of French
class after all]
Thomas
- --
Life is like a videogame with no chance to win - ATR
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQB5AwUBQtV79AEP2l8iXKAJAQE5OwMgt4DZW4F3
MEGR5jsts9bj7I3Eu5IurNjP
70CLifWkNQrgYMQ+/ jplRoD0oqOHfI8kz7urv6ieMnR8oHnpGa2E5Z00G
cJqvdVl
+zPq29nn5ogSDmY3aAZrIi9w80oL36U3piaOYA==
=NM6I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|
|