Anonymous Servers - Users Blocking Groups. Will it Work???

Author

Users Blocking Groups. Will it Work???

anonymous@remailer.hastio.org

2006-02-19, 10:31 am

As an intellectual exercise touching on the dynamic of remailer users as
petty criminals vs their victims, and the need for responsibility on the
part of remailer operators vs how many hours in the day that currently
exist (24), let us consider the following thought experiment:

a user sends an email to the remailer with a subject of
Group-Block: alt.privacy

The body of the message contains words that the user wants as triggers to
stop messages from going to alt.privacy. For example:

republican
democrat
bush cheney

The last one would be translated into a simple regex: bush*cheney.

The user receives a message asking him to reply to it in order to confirm
his request.

He replies, and messages containing the offending words are blocked from
being sent to alt.privacy for 30 days.

The good thing about this is that a victim can completely stop the
products of a criminal who is harassing him from being published, without
the remop having to bother putting in the block manually.

The bad things are, offhand:
Somebody can silence somebody else's legitimate anonymous posts.
A sociopath can send multiple requests, perhaps using a throwaway address,
and cause the remailer to block newsgroups that don't need it.

Some ways that misuse might be handled could:
1. letting messages go through if the sender included a whoppingly
high-bit hashcash.

2. requiring x requests before the block goes in.

This suggestion may sound absurd on the face of it, but think it over; it
might have some value.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.

Non scrivetemi

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

On 19 Feb 2006, anonymous@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
>As an intellectual exercise touching on the dynamic of remailer users as
>petty criminals vs their victims,

Eeltrash once again demonstrates how he thinks about remailers and their
users.

>and the need for responsibility on the
>part of remailer operators vs how many hours in the day that currently
>exist (24), let us consider the following thought experiment:
>
>a user sends an email to the remailer with a subject of
>Group-Block: alt.privacy
>
>The body of the message contains words that the user wants as triggers to
>stop messages from going to alt.privacy. For example:
>
>republican
>democrat
>bush cheney
>
>The last one would be translated into a simple regex: bush*cheney.

No responsible remop is going to block a stupid partisan fight, eel.

>This suggestion may sound absurd on the face of it, but think it over; it
>might have some value.

I've thought about it, and all I could come up with was:

SHUT UP, EELTRASH!!

George Orwell

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

In article <A7KHWV9O38767.6547800926@anonymous.poster>
anonymous@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
>
> As an intellectual exercise touching on the dynamic of remailer users as
> petty criminals vs their victims, and the need for responsibility on the
> part of remailer operators vs how many hours in the day that currently
> exist (24), let us consider the following thought experiment:

Let's not.
Eelbash, why do you run a remailer at all when you constantly refer to us
users as children, criminals and psychos? Why do you try to defeat
everything that a remailer should do?
It's not a thought experiment. It's what you believe! You are the criminal.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Stephen K. Gielda

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

In article <A7KHWV9O38767.6547800926@anonymous.poster>,
anonymous@remailer.hastio.org says...
> As an intellectual exercise touching on the dynamic of remailer users as
> petty criminals vs their victims, and the need for responsibility on the
> part of remailer operators vs how many hours in the day that currently
> exist (24), let us consider the following thought experiment:
>
> a user sends an email to the remailer with a subject of
> Group-Block: alt.privacy
>
> The body of the message contains words that the user wants as triggers to
> stop messages from going to alt.privacy. For example:
>
> republican
> democrat
> bush cheney
>
> The last one would be translated into a simple regex: bush*cheney.
>
>
> The user receives a message asking him to reply to it in order to confirm
> his request.
>
> He replies, and messages containing the offending words are blocked from
> being sent to alt.privacy for 30 days.
>
> The good thing about this is that a victim can completely stop the
> products of a criminal who is harassing him from being published, without
> the remop having to bother putting in the block manually.
>
> The bad things are, offhand:
> Somebody can silence somebody else's legitimate anonymous posts.
> A sociopath can send multiple requests, perhaps using a throwaway address,
> and cause the remailer to block newsgroups that don't need it.
>
> Some ways that misuse might be handled could:
> 1. letting messages go through if the sender included a whoppingly
> high-bit hashcash.
>
> 2. requiring x requests before the block goes in.
>
>
> This suggestion may sound absurd on the face of it, but think it over; it
> might have some value.

Back in 1999 I ran a public interface that mailed directly to mail2news
gates. It was a quick and dirty way to post speudo-anonymously to
usenet. I'll bet you can guess the abuse it took, I learned a lot about
coding in anti-flood methods and such from that. Anyway, I also had a
cgi "voting" interface. This interface used all kinds of methods to
ensure one could only vote once. If enough members of the group voted
to block, it would get a temp block placed on the newsgroup.

Total chaos. That best describes the result. There are many people and
cliques at usenet "war" with each other. And usually one side also
makes use of remailers or easy ways to sock. If you provide it, someone
will abuse it and that goes for giving any control of blocking as well.
I found out that not only was I spending time tweaking the code itself
to block flooding, but also the blocking methods. It was an exercise in
futility.

For what it's worth on this subject in general, the proper check point
isn't the remailers, it's the mail2news gateways. But content filtering
is prone to false positives, plus it turns into a whack-a-mole game when
the filters need to be public. Twisty has seen that from trying to stop
that spammer via filters. You end up chasing your tail. The best tools
currently available are rate limiting, dupe checking, hash cash, and
such.

/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org

anonymous@remailer.hastio.org

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

It's merely a thought-experiment.

What does an exit remailer want for his users and himself?

I'd say he wants to offer the greatest number of options, while keeping a
lid on the ill-intentioned, and doing it while being as little-involved as
possible.

The ideal would be to have the remailer run itself.

An example of something that has helped exit remailers toward that goal is
Panta's additions to Reliable, especially the dest-block facility.

You fellows should be thinking about this kind of thing, especially if you
are technically literate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.

Anonymous

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

On 19 Feb 2006, anonymous@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
>It's merely a thought-experiment.
>
>What does an exit remailer want for his users and himself?
>
>I'd say he wants to offer the greatest number of options, while keeping a
>lid on the ill-intentioned, and doing it while being as little-involved as
>possible.
>
>The ideal would be to have the remailer run itself.
>
>An example of something that has helped exit remailers toward that goal is
>Panta's additions to Reliable, especially the dest-block facility.
>
>You fellows should be thinking about this kind of thing, especially if you
>are technically literate.

Eeltrash, you are such a pompous, self-important little turd.

Why should any self-respecting remop have the slightest interest in what
you believe he should be thinking about? I mean, really.

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 22:16:42 +0000, Anonymous wrote:

>
> Why should any self-respecting remop have the slightest interest in what
> you believe he should be thinking about? I mean, really.

I don't know why anybody should pay attention to the suggestions of
anybody else unless he thinks the suggestions have merit.

If you prefer a different formulation of the request to think about
whatever it was, let's hear it.

Maybe we can all make use of it.

Anonymous

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 22:16:42 +0000, Anonymous wrote:
>
>
>I don't know why anybody should pay attention to the suggestions of
>anybody else unless he thinks the suggestions have merit.
>
>If you prefer a different formulation of the request to think about
>whatever it was, let's hear it.
>
>Maybe we can all make use of it.

The point is: If it is suggested, mentioned, promulgated, endorsed, or
approved of by Eeltrash, it is bad for users, remops, and the remailer
network in general. Ipso facto, prima facie.

Even if eeltrash's "ideas" have merit on the surface, all you have to do is
think them through just a little bit to realize he, once again, really has
no idea what the f**k he's talking about. -->AGAIN<--

Nomen Nescio

2006-02-19, 8:45 pm

In article <MPG.1e6298a6b265c872989cd8@news.newsreader.com>
Stephen K. Gielda <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
>
> In article <A7KHWV9O38767.6547800926@anonymous.poster>,
> anonymous@remailer.hastio.org says...
>
> Back in 1999 I ran a public interface that mailed directly to mail2news
> gates. It was a quick and dirty way to post speudo-anonymously to
> usenet...

Yet you decide _now_ that an equally quick and dirty way to post
anonymously should be implemented. Thanks for nothing but abuse.

Anonymous Sender

2006-02-19, 8:45 pm

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:51304ea83d8f3b7b955a464f11f27f41@di
zum.com...
> In article <MPG.1e6298a6b265c872989cd8@news.newsreader.com>
> Stephen K. Gielda <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
>
> Yet you decide _now_ that an equally quick and dirty way to post
> anonymously should be implemented. Thanks for nothing but abuse.

Speak for yourself, Jackass. I have plans to use it to save the world.

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:45 pm

OK, here's the whole thing.

From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
Subject: what Eelbash forgot to mention...
Date: 2000/07/07
Message-ID: <39c412abcf6ea4fa208b99f83a568bf6@dizum.com>
X-Deja-AN: 643357748
References: <7I814U6I36713.848587963@anonymous.poster>
Organization: The Orange Project
Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@zedz.net
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at <abuse@dizum.com>.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Below (for those of you who have become too sick from the recent ongoings on apas) is
yet another post from Eelbash. This one now "appends" his last "seeing the light" post
in which he forgot to tell us he is likely to monitor, censor and devulge user IDs/contents
which he finds disagreeable with his personal beliefs.

Now I will *not* jump the gun and make a decision which will affect the entire network
(I can learn from my mistakes, as some claim this was). However I IMPLORE ALL
other active remailer operators to GET INVOLVED. The implications of allowing
this to be an acceptable remailer-operator position are far reaching and profound.
While I understand that the remailer network should not be based on blind trust
(but on strong chains) I likewise believe that by allowing this as acceptable
remailer-op behavior we are damaging the reputability and sincerity of remailer
operators, setting a big brother/netcop style example to future remops (and tipping
the scales on what it means to be a rem-op and what it stands for), and if nothing
else allowing a blantant contradiction to the very reason remailers exist (to
allow an individual to be heard even if others do no like what you have to say).
This is most certainly laughable by remailer oposers, and a wonderful criticism
of them and the ideas and ideals upon which the are founded.

The remailer network needs to band together and make a group decision
what should be done. I urge many of the "old school" rem-ops to get involved
(especially these) as they have been around the longest (means theyve been
doing somthing right) and will likely be able to aid in leading the way to a decision
and/or solution about this. (Im thinking particularly of: LCS/nym, EFGA, DeJoode)

Ill make no decisions/blocks/whatevers on my own, but humbly ask for discussion
from the whole. Ive made some short replys to eelbash in his post (if he cares to read)

- -Orange Admin

On , eelbash-admin@excite.com wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>By the way, boys, I apologize in advance, but in throwing away the naughty
>French version of Reliable, and going back to the good old American
>version, I neglected to say that I make no representations as to the length
>of time that will pass before I again embrace the delectable French
>Reliable.

This seems to be a very convienient ommital from your original
"repenting". One aimed mainly at removing these blocks and having
you re-added to stats.

>If I see too many instances of nastiness showing up on the net, I may feel
>the need to jump back in and start monitoring again; blocking follows from
>that ('censorship' to the Shyster); and after that, making known the id of
>the scumbags responsible.

what about your being "wrong, wrong, wrong...."? Seems this was all
but a manipulative move to have eelbash readopted (it really tipped
the sincerity scales). Would it be so inappropriate for me to start
jumping up and down screaming "lair! liar!" now? This seems to be
the maturity with which you are dealing with the situation and shows
your lack of respect for the levity of the situation.

If there was any doubt for anyone before: notice the complete admital
of eel admin willingness to expose users he finds personally disagreeable.
If you dont want to let people with opinions different from yours have
free speech might I suggest that you shut down your remailer and
officially join remailer oposition. It is enevitable that people who
you dont like will use your service....its just one of those things youve
got to accept.

>It goes without saying that more sophisticated
>monitoring will follow: keyword searches of content; monitoring the input
>to the remailer, etc., etc.

Eelbash&Frog, Inc. developing spyware to nulify the remailer networks
efforts EST 2000. I can see the banner now....

>I can say that I will never jeopardize or invade the privacy of legitimate
>users, but people I suspect of being in the scumbag catergory, and it is I
>who must decide who is or is not a scumbag, have, in my humble opinion, no
>right to privacy: I will track them down like the skunks they are.

And you will NEVER "accidentally" read an innocent users email right?
You will never accidentally expose the wrong person when chasing your
precious scumbags through your useless flame wars (as you have possilby
already done) right? These promises are a joke and an impossibility using
your monitoring tools and your methods.

>And, yes, I think that content is something that must be looked at, and
>when it is found to fall into the scumbag category (according to my
>judgement), may and will be used to censor the post: I will not (I mean,
>possibly, and in the future) allow Eelbash to be used as a conduit for
>every species of filth).

Now you will determine the acceptability level of content? What if I decide
to make some usenet posts about how much I hate cats and this offends
you (and yer little kitty)? I guess your right to silence me outwieghts my right
to speak my mind (because im using your pseudo-anonymous remailer)?

>At the moment I don't have to tools to do the job properly: a keyword
>search program is needed, but when I do, the temptation to use it may be
>overwhelming.

Thank god your not a programmer (obvious from your IPworks/reliable
compilation woes). Hopfully your programming ability is as strong as
your ethical fucundity.....

>Please note that none of this is the case now: I am simply reserving the
>right to do it at some time in the future.

Yes, "oops, sorry I forgot to mention when I was stating how wrong wrong wrong
I was, that I didnt really mean Id stop like I said I would since I was so very wrong"
Im sure this was an innocent and completely accidental omission.

>Think about it: American society has become so degraded that 'motherXXXXer'
>is now a term of endearment! Unfortunately, the US seems to have a large
>influence on other Western countries, and I don't doubt that 'motherXXXXer'
>is also a term of endearment in many other nations, or is at least
>considered a benign word of greeting and reference.

Now you just sound like a lunatic.
Besides what do you care about the state of the US as a Canadian?

"...AND SO our hero, Eelbash-admin and his censoring/monitoring/scum-bag
exposing remailer went to rid the world of all that was not acceptable
to the white middleclass suburbanite! (but only ended up damaging free speech)"

>Do you want the remailers to be a part of this? Do you want to lie down
>with the lice and get lousy, or do you want to apply the bug spray of
>monitoring and censorship to destroy the little bastards?

I want to let people say what they want to say with privacy and anonymity.
If this means lying down with the lice, then sure, whatever.

>Even if you are one of the lice, remailers that follow such an
>irresponsible course will, eventually, bring down the wrath of the public
>and politicians, and end up legislated out of existence.

Heh, this is a strangely revealing argument. "If we dont clean up our users
language well be shut down".....I dont think it legal to legislate shutting
remailers up in the US. (I supose eelbash can try to do this next)

>Of course, remailers are klunky, and something like Publius, or WOF, will
>probaby soon replace them.; I'm not sure how they work, but have the
>feeling it will become more difficult for right-minded operators to do
>their good work. That will probably hasten the demise of Publius and WOF,
>along with all other remailers.

This shows how little grasp you have on the situation (and your own actions).
Rprocess: PLEASE HURRY ON WOF!!!
Eelbash-admin: FYI->once WOF is up you cant take it down
(each user is a small remailer) You cant censor/shutdown 100000 mini
remailers linked together.

>My apolgies again for misleading you, perhaps.

Perhaps Indeed.

- -Orange Admin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQEVAwUBOWV13wiZnv2t/C4jAQEU1gf/eS8la0bHtft7uxcUAeNzOO97XmLed7eq
NY0SVXXYjncpj035P5gsemLIpY4iQyLcsW3IdvYb
nt7MWqxg6vjGFu8hGlSKG4UW
wasrATKNBDHjURl/ vFz412f039UVr5Pn9ZVOgcKq3DKXXGKQUtxax1Da
IheV3l7u
yhNTPsRQ+zPXbEN7GUIWr/ jP6d+CB4R7Osq6olZ0+vDInnFkA8A5bEcoB1BILV
pc
paSLm/ HlBnoQO30UOD+h5UWHj7CHW164ROGEGblPGxDXUJ
GHDXiR/vcONekO5d0y
/uxjV2+gsQyqdiO0NoZQl0/i99Cc76Y10YEbgpRHgJpYBSZlqSUbNw==
=sqTe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Nothing's changed in five and a half years. I can't believe remops put up
with this shit. Why do ANY pingers list this piece of trash?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Stephen K. Gielda

2006-02-19, 8:45 pm

In article <51304ea83d8f3b7b955a464f11f27f41@dizum.com>,
nobody@dizum.com says...
> In article <MPG.1e6298a6b265c872989cd8@news.newsreader.com>
> Stephen K. Gielda <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote:
>
> Yet you decide _now_ that an equally quick and dirty way to post
> anonymously should be implemented. Thanks for nothing but abuse.

I posted here requesting feedback on whether or not to release. The
remops that responded, responded in favor of releasing. If any are
against it, they may speak as well. If the remops were against it, I
would not release. But so far they are for it.

For what it's worth, this is not a "dirty" way. What I have working is
a stand alone exe that works as sort of a proxy. With one news server
it allows reading and replying where all posts and replies are piped
directly to mixmaster while reading is done from the news server. All
it is is a very easy way to use the remailers from within any news
client, making their use transparent. But just because it is easy does
not make it dirty or unsecure. It pipes directly to mixmaster just like
the clients do.

But yes, it is very easy to use because you don't even know it's there.
It will also likely bring about an increase in all types of traffic at
first, phasing out as novelty passes. So if the remops are in any way
against it, they will speak out. You keep spewing vitriol at me for it,
but it is their voice that matters.

/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:45 pm

In article <A7KHWV9O38767.6547800926@anonymous.poster>
anonymous@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
>
> As an intellectual exercise touching on the dynamic of remailer users as
> petty criminals vs their victims, and the need for responsibility on the
> part of remailer operators vs how many hours in the day that currently
> exist (24), let us consider the following thought experiment:
>
> a user sends an email to the remailer with a subject of
> Group-Block: alt.privacy
>
> The body of the message contains words that the user wants as triggers to
> stop messages from going to alt.privacy. For example:
>
> republican
> democrat
> bush cheney
>
> The last one would be translated into a simple regex: bush*cheney.
>
>
> The user receives a message asking him to reply to it in order to confirm
> his request.
>
> He replies, and messages containing the offending words are blocked from
> being sent to alt.privacy for 30 days.

I'm sure that wouldn't be abused in the slightest.

anonymous@remailer.hastio.org

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

In article <MTLUD5A038767.6782638889@anonymous.poster>
Anonymous <Use-Author-Supplied-Address@[127.1]> wrote:
>
> Eeltrash, you are such a pompous, self-important little turd.

*little* turd?! I think you'll find that he is a great *big* turd. One
of those that just refuses to flush. You come back in a few hours later
and there it is, still there, still bobbing up and down.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.

George Orwell

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

anonymous wrote:

> bush cheney
>
> The last one would be translated into a simple regex: bush*cheney.

Why would it be translated to "bus + any number of the letter h + cheny"?
That's not even close to what you'd want. If your obsessive desire
to control and your pathetic desire to be accepted ever produced anything
anyone would want to begin with that is.

Yes, that's right, you're as technically incompetent as you are socially
deficient and morally challenged. Have a nice day!

TwistyCreek Admin

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 20:58:26 -0500, Stephen K. Gielda wrote:

snipped

>I posted here requesting feedback on whether or not to release. The
>remops that responded, responded in favor of releasing. If any are
>against it, they may speak as well. If the remops were against it, I
>would not release. But so far they are for it.
>
>For what it's worth, this is not a "dirty" way. What I have working is
>a stand alone exe that works as sort of a proxy. With one news server
>it allows reading and replying where all posts and replies are piped
>directly to mixmaster while reading is done from the news server. All
>it is is a very easy way to use the remailers from within any news
>client, making their use transparent. But just because it is easy does
>not make it dirty or unsecure. It pipes directly to mixmaster just like
>the clients do.
>
>But yes, it is very easy to use because you don't even know it's there.
>It will also likely bring about an increase in all types of traffic at
>first, phasing out as novelty passes. So if the remops are in any way
>against it, they will speak out. You keep spewing vitriol at me for it,
>but it is their voice that matters.
>
>/steve

I know I shouldn't say anything. Incoming

Reminds me of long ago.

I support it fully. The easier for a user, the better.

It is a tough learning experience, but from my very little learning
experience so far, REAL abuse is rare. Certainly so rare that it is not
worth the effort to consider the original topic of this thread.

1. A DoS attack around last Christmas (No effect on anyone except the exit
re-mailers)

2. A personal attack on me because my kid beat the shit out of someone's
big buddy that was attempting to molest my daughter. I had no idea for the
longest time until he slipped up and sent a few messages to me without a
re-mailer in between. I had wrongly suspected everyone in the world and
that sent my temper spinning. As it turned out, that was a personal matter
unrelated to the re-mailer.

3. I was singled out for the multitude of Sexual Survey Participants Wanted
by some old Fart in France. A Google groups search shows I was the only
re-mailer used. This was systematic abuse. Not by a casual or regular
re-mailer user.
I went to the site, filled out the forms and added my comments about the
problems he caused me. I also found a contact address on dnsstuff and sent
an E-mail explaining the problems he was creating.
That did have an effect on newsgroup users. Some were pretty irate and were
not afraid to write me about it using some new and rather unique
expletives. That old Fart really had me going in circles trying to stop
him.
That was REAL abuse.
Yes, he had me really pissed and extremely frustrated. After 3 weeks of
chasing my tail, I reached my limit. If he were a paying customer, I would
have terminated his account

If he continues, my son will get a paid
vacation to France

Someone gave me a "heads up" today that someone used my re-mailer to post a
binary to a text group today and I will probably get a shitload of
complaints if it continues. I appreciated the kindness of a "heads up".
Nobody has bitched at me yet. The only thing I know about what goes in or
out of the re-mailer are from other people sending me an E-mail (unless it
is one of the few groups I read). Some are irate, some are ambivalent but
informative, and some want to give me a "heads up" that trouble may be
brewing.

There are the few people that wished to have their E-mail, posting names,
etc. blocked. That kind of stuff is expected and pretty much routine. It
doesn't happen very often. I haven't had any requests like that for a month
or so.

Good Luck Steve
TwistyCreek Admin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/AwUBQ/lS1/ 9qPDhkRaWyEQJqsACfcEefPOWNRulP5Z7eadGyif
fU/0gAoOZ3
GJO6vokqbezy/Gv1cCtwxZav
=SpVr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

George Orwell

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

anonymous wrote:

> It's merely a thought-experiment.
>
> What does an exit remailer want for his users and himself?
>
> I'd say he wants to offer the greatest number of options, while keeping a
> lid on the ill-intentioned, and doing it while being as little-involved as
> possible.

No, that might be what YOU want, but that's not what a SANE exit remailer
operator wants. You really are doing nothing but showing your true colors
here. Holding up your unsuitability, pointing your finger aat it, and
screaming "LOOK HERE!!".

Options are not even considerations for real remops, goofball. In fact
they can be in opposition to what a remop SHOULD be focusing on.
Anonymity. The more ways you let people shoot themselves in the feet, the
more foot injuries you'll enable. So if options are offered, they should
be offered sparingly. Certainly not in line with your obsessive "as many
as possible" philosophy. MOST remops configure their software to a
standard, and leave it alone. That's better for them, and better for their
users. Your bizarre obsessions have never allowed you to grasp that simple
fact. You have no business being involved in the remailer community in any
way because of it.

Control is something MOST remops don't even want in the first place. It's
contrary to everything remailers were designed for. The "free flow" if you
will. Sane remops deal with abuse with as minimalistic ways as they can in
good conscience, and in accordance with accepted norms. That way they're
still running effective remailers, not "sticking out" and jeopardizing
their users by drawing attention to themselves, and the remailer network
in general. They're also not heaping more responsibility on themselves
and others by becoming some sort of "editor", and thus displaying a
pattern that must be, but never CAN be adhered to.

You have NEVER been able to grasp these simple concepts. They've been
explained to you time and time again, but you're too obsewssed to let them
sink in. You have some major issues that make you completely undesireable
and unwanted in the remailer community. If you really wanted to help out,
you'd leave. Honestly.

Stephen K. Gielda

2006-02-20, 5:47 pm

In article <2udiv1l303rt6c8q17pj93d7djbmk5vs4n@4ax.com>,
admin^@^twistycreek^.^com says...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 20:58:26 -0500, Stephen K. Gielda wrote:
>
> snipped
>
>
> I know I shouldn't say anything. Incoming

Reminds me of long ago.
>
> I support it fully. The easier for a user, the better.

I ran into a small snag that has me in rewrite mode, I'm having trouble
with blocking in Windows. Fork isn't really supported well, plus it
crashes if I try it, and using select is a juggling act with trying to
keep news server connections as well. The blocking version works fine,
however blocking means that those clients that open multiple connections
to the news server will end up not being able to do so. So no reading
and posting to one group while downloading headers or posts from
another, etc. I'm making headway though.

> It is a tough learning experience, but from my very little learning
> experience so far, REAL abuse is rare. Certainly so rare that it is not
> worth the effort to consider the original topic of this thread.

It never stops being a learning experience. As far as the abuse,
attacks, etc. You aren't the first and won't be the last. Your shell
will harden if you stick with it. Best advice, though difficult at
times to follow, is to know what to ignore and to ignore it. A lot of
it is baiting.

/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org

A.Melon

2006-02-21, 2:46 am

ok
"Stephen K. Gielda" <steve@packetderm.com.bogus> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e63c4d7741081e9989cda@news.newsreader.com...
> In article <2udiv1l303rt6c8q17pj93d7djbmk5vs4n@4ax.com>,
> admin^@^twistycreek^.^com says...
>
> I ran into a small snag that has me in rewrite mode, I'm having trouble
> with blocking in Windows. Fork isn't really supported well, plus it
> crashes if I try it, and using select is a juggling act with trying to
> keep news server connections as well. The blocking version works fine,
> however blocking means that those clients that open multiple connections
> to the news server will end up not being able to do so. So no reading
> and posting to one group while downloading headers or posts from
> another, etc. I'm making headway though.
>
>
> It never stops being a learning experience. As far as the abuse,
> attacks, etc. You aren't the first and won't be the last. Your shell
> will harden if you stick with it. Best advice, though difficult at
> times to follow, is to know what to ignore and to ignore it. A lot of
> it is baiting.
>
> /steve
> --
> The Missing Amendment
> The Right To Privacy
> http://www.themissingamendment.org

Fritz Wuehler

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 17:34:57 -0700, Anonymous Sender wrote:

> "Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
> news:51304ea83d8f3b7b955a464f11f27f41@di
zum.com...
>
> Speak for yourself, Jackass. I have plans to use it to save the world.

If it works as advertised, and is easy to install, it will be a milestone
for remailing.

Once the word gets around, I wouldn't be surprised to see remailer traffic
double.

And maybe it will get the author of QS to add an nntp 'listener' to his
program.

Stephen K. Gielda

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

In article
<569ab5fdb7e74673de65872ee639162c@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>,
fritz@spamexpire-200602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net says...
> If it works as advertised, and is easy to install, it will be a milestone
> for remailing.

I worked out the details of the previous issue I mentioned in another
thread. It should go beta later today or tomorrow. Beta version will
require that mixmaster is installed and configured, but it's own install
and use is very simple. Just unzip, edit the conf, and run the exe.

>
> Once the word gets around, I wouldn't be surprised to see remailer traffic
> double.

There will likely be a spike, though how much of one is a guess.

> And maybe it will get the author of QS to add an nntp 'listener' to his
> program.

That's basically all it is now, it can be used in conjunction with QS or
JBN. It's definitely not a replacement for them, it's use is very
specific.

/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

In article <MPG.1e652eb9dc710389989cdb@news.newsreader.com>,
steve@packetderm.com.bogus says...
> I worked out the details of the previous issue I mentioned in another
> thread. It should go beta later today or tomorrow. Beta version will
> require that mixmaster is installed and configured, but it's own install
> and use is very simple. Just unzip, edit the conf, and run the exe.
>
>

This is posted using Microplanet Gravity on win2k running the latest
news2remail.exe. Reading is proxied from newsreader.com and all posts
and replies are piped to mixmaster, which is installed locally on this
machine. I have it set to strip the User-Agent: header Gravity adds,
but left the mime types and others. I set a chain on the fly using X-
Chain: at the top of my reply. I added one custom header using X-
Custom: at the top of my post.

/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org

A.Melon

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
> In article <MPG.1e652eb9dc710389989cdb@news.newsreader.com>,
> steve@packetderm.com.bogus says...
>
> This is posted using Microplanet Gravity on win2k running the latest
> news2remail.exe. Reading is proxied from newsreader.com and all posts
> and replies are piped to mixmaster, which is installed locally on this
> machine. I have it set to strip the User-Agent: header Gravity adds,
> but left the mime types and others. I set a chain on the fly using X-
> Chain: at the top of my reply. I added one custom header using X-
> Custom: at the top of my post.
>
> /steve

Stupendous!
I'm proud to see one of my suggestions made it into the beta.
I'm impatiently clicking the link for the zip