|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > February 2006 > Warning users about eelbash remailer
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 |
Warning users about eelbash remailer
|
|
| TwistyCreek 2006-02-19, 8:45 pm |
| I once had an ongoing battle with a net-cop that was trolling warez groups
trying to attract the readers of those groups to his honey-pot web site.
He regularly responded to requests for specific cracks and serials with
promises of "get that crack at www..com", etc). As a public service to my
friends in those groups I used remailers to post followups to each and
every one of his posts indicating that his site in fact contained no
cracks, serials, warez, etc and existed only to gain the information
unsuspecting warez hunters provided when they registered to gain entry.
Perhaps it's time we warn unsuspecting users of eelbash's remailer. Google
makes it fairly easy to track down messages with the identifying header
info (or at least it used to).
Thoughts?
| |
| Xabriol 2006-02-19, 8:45 pm |
| TwistyCreek <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>I once had an ongoing battle with a net-cop that was trolling warez groups
>trying to attract the readers of those groups to his honey-pot web site.
>He regularly responded to requests for specific cracks and serials with
>promises of "get that crack at www..com", etc). As a public service to my
>friends in those groups I used remailers to post followups to each and
>every one of his posts indicating that his site in fact contained no
>cracks, serials, warez, etc and existed only to gain the information
>unsuspecting warez hunters provided when they registered to gain entry.
>
>Perhaps it's time we warn unsuspecting users of eelbash's remailer. Google
>makes it fairly easy to track down messages with the identifying header
>info (or at least it used to).
>
>Thoughts?
Great idea! Let's trash this group worse than it already has been by
encouraging Eelbash to respond everytime his remailer gets dissed.
Jesus...
| |
| A.Melon 2006-02-19, 8:45 pm |
| In article <TFPIEPSI38768.3711226852@reece.net.au>
TwistyCreek <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
> Perhaps it's time we warn unsuspecting users of eelbash's remailer. Google
> makes it fairly easy to track down messages with the identifying header
> info (or at least it used to).
>
> Thoughts?
I think you'll be hard-pressed to find many eel-borne messages floating
around out there. Google doesn't seem to allow searching in headers
(someone correct me if I'm wrong).
So if we search for eelbash's current default From of "Tudman Todmorden" I
got 257 hits total, many of them tests, pings, and a.a.m. messages. There
just aren't that many.
Duh, I wonder why.
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2006-02-20, 5:47 pm |
| On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:54:18 -0800, A.Melon wrote:
>
> I think you'll be hard-pressed to find many eel-borne messages floating
> around out there.
Rome wasn't built in a day.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2006-02-20, 5:47 pm |
| In article <72566681527402a98fff487760c73868@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> Rome wasn't built in a day.
With you at the helm eelbash, it wouldn't have been built at all.
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2006-02-20, 5:47 pm |
| In article <72566681527402a98fff487760c73868@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:54:18 -0800, A.Melon wrote:
>
>
> Rome wasn't built in a day.
I'm not sure what comparisons you see between Rome and your remailer.
One is a great city, the other is a content filtering, censoring, spying
honeypot of a remailer.
| |
| George Orwell 2006-02-20, 5:47 pm |
| Thrasher Remailer wrote:
>
> With you at the helm eelbash, it wouldn't have been built at all.
Sure it would have. But...
1. Its name would be different, and one too many characters long to be
chiseled into the arch over the gates of the city.
2. The Emperor Eelbashious would have served as gate century so that Rome
could have been kept more "civil" by thoroughly groping every passing
tunic.
3. The history books would have had a considerably greater number of "Rise
And Fall" chapters, but they would have all been about half a page long.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2006-02-21, 2:46 am |
| In article < 1292f71a8dc2cb16ecfb4258292f066a@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
> Thrasher Remailer wrote:
>
>
> Sure it would have. But...
>
> 1. Its name would be different, and one too many characters long to be
> chiseled into the arch over the gates of the city.
No, his artisans would all quit because he'd change the name of the
empire too fast for them to finish chiseling the sign.
> 2. The Emperor Eelbashious would have served as gate century so that Rome
> could have been kept more "civil" by thoroughly groping every passing
> tunic.
All the statues would have their privates covered with a little sign
that says "Bad part".
> 3. The history books would have had a considerably greater number of "Rise
> And Fall" chapters, but they would have all been about half a page long.
Can't think of anything to add to this one.
| |
| George Orwell 2006-02-21, 7:46 am |
| Lines: 43
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.privacy.anon-server:432344
Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>
> No, his artisans would all quit because he'd change the name of the empire
> too fast for them to finish chiseling the sign.
And then he'd welsh on their salaries after promising them a bonus.
>
>
> All the statues would have their privates covered with a little sign that
> says "Bad part".
Not to mention the inscription on the base of every statue warning viewers
about the childish psycho who carved it.
>
> Can't think of anything to add to this one.
Hmmm...... I suspect the Coliseum floor would have been covered in kitty
litter rather than dirt, and the competitive quilting semifinals would
have been a typical Friday night main event.
<laugh>
This is sorta fun. I hope Emperor Eelbashious is happy his sock puppetry
has finally lead to something still not useful, but at least amusing. 
| |
| George Orwell 2006-02-21, 7:46 am |
| On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>In article < 1292f71a8dc2cb16ecfb4258292f066a@mixmast
er.it>,
>nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>No, his artisans would all quit because he'd change the name of the
>empire too fast for them to finish chiseling the sign.
>
>
>All the statues would have their privates covered with a little sign
>that says "Bad part".
OMG! ROTFLMAO!
>
>
>Can't think of anything to add to this one.
Yeah, this one is great, too. ;-)
| |
| TwistyCreek 2006-02-21, 7:46 am |
| In article < 81d370bcfc5cd831f8428a911b8c109e@mixmast
er.it>
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> This is sorta fun. I hope Emperor Eelbashious is happy his sock puppetry
> has finally lead to something still not useful, but at least amusing.
I doubt it. If this were Rome, Emperor Eelbashious would have beheaded you
for uncivil speech about him.
|
|
|
|
|