Anonymous Servers - identifying the Real Fake Sam Sloan

Author

identifying the Real Fake Sam Sloan

trfss

2007-11-29, 1:16 am

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

I am as promised going to help Mister Sloan and I think
this will also help exonerate Mister Truong according to the
guidance of George John, at least.

This is how to identify the Real Fake Same Sloan.

First acquire a full dataset from giganews, not the ~2400
or however many that BM may have found but which presumably
omits cancels, deletes, no-archives and posts from untraced
IPs, which I count at 154 during Jun 2005 - Sep 2007.
The total obviously or probably from FSS, I'll call this
the Extended Fake Sam Sloan (EFSS) is then 2601.

Second do a pgp (posting-gap-protocol, not PGP), which is
the best way to proceed when there are dense postings.

pgp /z,3,2,all >c:\dmp.csc
- ------------------------------------------
Jun 30,2005 --> 12 (1) --> Jul 12,2005
Jul 19,2005 --> 110 (4) --> Nov 5,2005
Nov 8,2005 --> 28 (2) --> Nov 26,2005
Jan 12,2006 --> 11 (0) --> Jan 23,2006
Mar 25,2006 --> 8 (0) --> Apr 2,2006
Apr 14,2006 --> 23 (3) --> Apr 23,2006
May 30,2006 --> 6 (0) --> Jun 5,2006
Jul 4,2006 --> 56 (1) --> Aug 29,2006
Sep 28,2006 --> 29 (4) --> Oct 28,2006
Nov 18,2006 --> 11 (1) --> Nov 29,2006
Jan 18,2007 --> 5 (0) --> Jan 23,2007
Feb 18,2007 --> 5 (0) --> Feb 23,2007
Apr 6,2007 --> 5 (0) --> Apr 11,2007
Apr 19,2007 --> 7 (1) --> Apr 26,2007
May 9,2007 --> 11 (2) --> May 20,2007
Jun 5,2007 --> 46 (3) --> Jul 21,2007
Jul 30,2007 --> 8 (1) --> Aug 8,2007
Aug 12,2007 --> 10 (1) --> Aug 22,2007
Aug 27,2007 --> 10 (0) --> Sep 6,2007
Sep 19,2007 --> 6 (0) --> Sep 25,2007

Third one needs to comprehend the pgp above.
Look at the second line of the dataset. That means there
was a vacation of 110 continuous days from Jul 19 to Nov
5 2005 when EFSS did not post, except for (4) very short
periods of resumption (none of which was more than 2 days
long, and some might be just a couple minutes of posting).

Fourth look at the interlinear periods. Look at the 4th
and 5th lines of the dataset. That means between Jan 23
and Mar 25 2006, there was never a vacation of more than
2 days when EFSS did not post. EFSS was prolific.

Fifth put it all together. Most significant may be the 56
day vacation from posting from Jul 4 to Aug 29 2006,
with only one brief period of 1 day (6 posts from Aug
14-15) when posting was resumed by EFSS.

Or there's also this - from the end of Nov to the middle
of Jan, both in 2005-6 and 2006-7, there were very busy
periods when no 2 days went by without an EFSS posting.

It should be easy for PT to show this does not fit his
schedule, or represent periods when his computer was left
unattended and hence susceptible for trojan control.

It is a matter of finding whose schedule matches the pgp.
I have been reminded that is possible that postings can be
delayed via a Latency command. So when running this pgp
I manually ignored the few postings which plausibly had
been written much earlier by EFSS.

I remind you that on the theory now being universally
accepted that PT is 99% innocent then because he does not
switch his computer off and the Suddenlink does not like
being turned on and off the pgp is irrelevant to him. It
is relevant to catching the RFSS.

The rest of this posting is for Nomen Nescio who I will
assume is not Mister Sloan and is not EFSS/FSS.

OK, No-Namer, you did make a kind of point. Of the 4 FSS
posts I thought contained things that only the RSS was
likely to have known, I concede that 3 of them just may be
lucky guesses by the Real Fake Sam Sloan. In just over 2600
messages could be some fluke hits are to be expected.
Though I still do not see how the first hit is a guess.
Actually I do not think that the RSS=the RFSS, just a FFSS.

Also, thank you for the hint that it is not only the Real
Sam Sloan who writes about spyware and trojans (Jan. '01 in
rgcp, claim: USCF installs spyware in members' PCs). Yes, I
found a regular contributor who wrote in 2006 in article ID
1157079959.760880.213100@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com
"Let's use PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)".
He also admitted in that same article to be a
"BS Computer Science, Georgia Tech, with honor"
BS comes in 2 flavors. Now you pointed this crypto guy and
Chapter 11 expert to me, I can see he also wrote that
"I'll write whatever I want about a woman"
"I have millions of dollars to kick the shit out of you in a
marketing campaign"
Did I read MR accused the Real Sam Sloan of being the Real
Fake Sam Sloan because of something MR told the Real Sam
Sloan over a table which then found its way into a Fake Sam
Sloan post that same day in January 2007? Is this BS too or
can you find the Fake Sam Sloan article he wrote about?
I have to conclude that MR is no naif but is very clever (as
he wrote many times), has motive (many accusations against
PT, Susan, USCF), has the means ("millions" as he claims),
time (career status unknown - unemployed?), has enemies
(forgotten island politics but they haven't, and one with
unpleasant family connections is on Nevis) and going by
by the tastefulness of what he's written may artistically be
capable of writing such material. But I do not understand if
this giant had an opportunity to gift PT the bonus software
unless acting in collusion with the usual suspect. I would
have thought such collusion is unlikely because 2 gadflies
is either 1 or 2 gadflies (levitzky, not levitzy) too many.
The same colorful individual has proffered legal advice to
JB at pt, which doubtless was greeted with the very greatest
possible respect given its colorful and savory source.

Summarising this unsavory mess, I surely hold it redeculous
to think Paul Truong is guilty. He is a computer expert and
leaving aside whether or not he is capable of such actions
there is no way he'd be so stupid as to leave such an easily
tracked trail behind, when so easily he could have posted
but stayed untraceable. So Truong surely was set up, and the
trojan that allowed his pc to be used as a relay is the only
way I can think of. Who put it there, when(2005?) and how is
to be determined if possible. But even if it is not, the oft
proposed action against expert Mottershead must proceed as
he never even mentioned the possibility PT was a victim, his
"findings" represent terrible defamation of Paul's character
if untrue and there is old BINFO data to suggest BM is
anything but judgment-proof.

Truong writes perfectly and proofs Susan's writings. This
makes the obviously vietinglish errors in the Fake Sam Sloan
articles, not just one but in many of them, a deliberate
red herring. I read in rgcp that BM candidly admits to his
dislike of PT. All in all, in the incredible circumstance
that the action makes it to court, one would imagine that
an associate could be persuaded for an appearance fee to
provide the clearest demonstration of how malware is to be
surreptitiously injected into a mark's PC via his innocent
surfing, and thereafer the trojan is used to remotely post
via google using the victim's PC as a relay. Cost of trojan,
$0.00 via bit-torrent, which suits a pocket or two. A demo
of the technique may be arranged at the offices 1 Newark
Center for a smaller fee. A forensic examination of a tablet
PC currently in Lubbock shall provide such corroboration
as is desired.

I don't need to sign this as you can see I was able to read
<55ed70db07cf49bbf72355a582b48b10@dizum.com> which is your
private message encrypted to me and cancelled by me. I saw
that you also encrypted it to a second key as well which is
registered on the keyservers as issued to a Sam Sloan. Can
you be more explicit where you found the public key for SS?
I am not aware of him admitting to using PGP, which is why
this may be of potential (if small) beagle significance.
Please can someone archive the post I reference below, which
comprised the PGP message encrypted to my (trfss) key and to
one purportedly issued by the Real Sam Sloan?

On 11/25/2007, <some fake email address> had written in
55ed70db07cf49bbf72355a582b48b10@dizum.com:
- -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.3

hQCMA7H/ kLl1fGJZAQQAhuc2Io8P3L43e2XOrIzKgKXZyCnI
icZp7MKr+WF2nj2S
||snip||

Expanding for the benefit of some other NG character-
> It is remarkable that the conjectured trojan had the
> foresight to delete much of its own work the moment
> Paul Truong was fingered as the Fake Sloan
You do not understand what is a trojan, then. It is subject
to a remote control, and the self-annihilate button was no
doubt pressed by its controller as soon as he became aware
of his trap being sprung (here, by the unfortunate BM). By
the time the victim, PT, got to hear of the sting, I think
malware had erased itself and many traces of its existence.
> Thus far, all we have seen from the Fake Sloan suit
> defendants is excuses and diversions.
As The Carpenters sang in 1970, ........
> five dollars
That may be your estimate of the value of the Real Sam
Sloan's reputation, but it is not my estimate. Sui generis,
it is unconscionable that the defendants wish to give the
plaintiff the satisfaction of his first bona fide victory in
court as a pro se or otherwise. Even for five lousy bucks.
> Turn this around to check for validity: is SS "mad"?
No. I never suggested he was. Neither is mad.
> Would he be any more likely than PT to leave such a trail
> of breadcrumbs?
But SS did not, so the question is irrelevant. Whoever had
inserted the trojan in PT's 60-80 Gb drive (just a guess)
has had 30 months to obscure any trail that maybe existed.
Stop thinking that SS is the perp.

OK, now I am logging out of this NG. I helped enough. Hope
Denny does not have to waste time with this type of material.
It is more suitable for Judge Robby Restaino.
Saludos+Sheesh
trfss,which does not stand for what you thought it stood for

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: n/a

iQA/ AwUBR0yPtMyEjS8GcTJfEQJZ8QCgg9zBeQq1n3eW
srBqaKavbi8iOOEAnAlt
5wBDtd+03bDJminXlYscX7Jo
=/OFg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

B. Lafferty

2007-11-29, 1:15 pm

"trfss" <calvin@slamstoan.org> wrote in message
news:33ffbd2318bc456aff582ee0f124cd6f@ms
gid.frell.theremailer.net...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I am as promised going to help Mister Sloan and I think
> this will also help exonerate Mister Truong according to the
> guidance of George John, at least.
>
> This is how to identify the Real Fake Same Sloan.
>
> First acquire a full dataset from giganews, not the ~2400
> or however many that BM may have found but which presumably
> omits cancels, deletes, no-archives and posts from untraced
> IPs, which I count at 154 during Jun 2005 - Sep 2007.
> The total obviously or probably from FSS, I'll call this
> the Extended Fake Sam Sloan (EFSS) is then 2601.
>
> Second do a pgp (posting-gap-protocol, not PGP), which is
> the best way to proceed when there are dense postings.
>
> pgp /z,3,2,all >c:\dmp.csc
> - ------------------------------------------
> Jun 30,2005 --> 12 (1) --> Jul 12,2005
> Jul 19,2005 --> 110 (4) --> Nov 5,2005
> Nov 8,2005 --> 28 (2) --> Nov 26,2005
> Jan 12,2006 --> 11 (0) --> Jan 23,2006
> Mar 25,2006 --> 8 (0) --> Apr 2,2006
> Apr 14,2006 --> 23 (3) --> Apr 23,2006
> May 30,2006 --> 6 (0) --> Jun 5,2006
> Jul 4,2006 --> 56 (1) --> Aug 29,2006
> Sep 28,2006 --> 29 (4) --> Oct 28,2006
> Nov 18,2006 --> 11 (1) --> Nov 29,2006
> Jan 18,2007 --> 5 (0) --> Jan 23,2007
> Feb 18,2007 --> 5 (0) --> Feb 23,2007
> Apr 6,2007 --> 5 (0) --> Apr 11,2007
> Apr 19,2007 --> 7 (1) --> Apr 26,2007
> May 9,2007 --> 11 (2) --> May 20,2007
> Jun 5,2007 --> 46 (3) --> Jul 21,2007
> Jul 30,2007 --> 8 (1) --> Aug 8,2007
> Aug 12,2007 --> 10 (1) --> Aug 22,2007
> Aug 27,2007 --> 10 (0) --> Sep 6,2007
> Sep 19,2007 --> 6 (0) --> Sep 25,2007
>
> Third one needs to comprehend the pgp above.
> Look at the second line of the dataset. That means there
> was a vacation of 110 continuous days from Jul 19 to Nov
> 5 2005 when EFSS did not post, except for (4) very short
> periods of resumption (none of which was more than 2 days
> long, and some might be just a couple minutes of posting).
>
> Fourth look at the interlinear periods. Look at the 4th
> and 5th lines of the dataset. That means between Jan 23
> and Mar 25 2006, there was never a vacation of more than
> 2 days when EFSS did not post. EFSS was prolific.
>
> Fifth put it all together. Most significant may be the 56
> day vacation from posting from Jul 4 to Aug 29 2006,
> with only one brief period of 1 day (6 posts from Aug
> 14-15) when posting was resumed by EFSS.
>
> Or there's also this - from the end of Nov to the middle
> of Jan, both in 2005-6 and 2006-7, there were very busy
> periods when no 2 days went by without an EFSS posting.
>
> It should be easy for PT to show this does not fit his
> schedule, or represent periods when his computer was left
> unattended and hence susceptible for trojan control.
>
> It is a matter of finding whose schedule matches the pgp.
> I have been reminded that is possible that postings can be
> delayed via a Latency command. So when running this pgp
> I manually ignored the few postings which plausibly had
> been written much earlier by EFSS.
>
> I remind you that on the theory now being universally
> accepted that PT is 99% innocent then because he does not
> switch his computer off and the Suddenlink does not like
> being turned on and off the pgp is irrelevant to him. It
> is relevant to catching the RFSS.
>
> The rest of this posting is for Nomen Nescio who I will
> assume is not Mister Sloan and is not EFSS/FSS.
>
> OK, No-Namer, you did make a kind of point. Of the 4 FSS
> posts I thought contained things that only the RSS was
> likely to have known, I concede that 3 of them just may be
> lucky guesses by the Real Fake Sam Sloan. In just over 2600
> messages could be some fluke hits are to be expected.
> Though I still do not see how the first hit is a guess.
> Actually I do not think that the RSS=the RFSS, just a FFSS.
>
> Also, thank you for the hint that it is not only the Real
> Sam Sloan who writes about spyware and trojans (Jan. '01 in
> rgcp, claim: USCF installs spyware in members' PCs). Yes, I
> found a regular contributor who wrote in 2006 in article ID
> 1157079959.760880.213100@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com
> "Let's use PGP (Pretty Good Privacy)".
> He also admitted in that same article to be a
> "BS Computer Science, Georgia Tech, with honor"
> BS comes in 2 flavors. Now you pointed this crypto guy and
> Chapter 11 expert to me, I can see he also wrote that
> "I'll write whatever I want about a woman"
> "I have millions of dollars to kick the shit out of you in a
> marketing campaign"
> Did I read MR accused the Real Sam Sloan of being the Real
> Fake Sam Sloan because of something MR told the Real Sam
> Sloan over a table which then found its way into a Fake Sam
> Sloan post that same day in January 2007? Is this BS too or
> can you find the Fake Sam Sloan article he wrote about?
> I have to conclude that MR is no naif but is very clever (as
> he wrote many times), has motive (many accusations against
> PT, Susan, USCF), has the means ("millions" as he claims),
> time (career status unknown - unemployed?), has enemies
> (forgotten island politics but they haven't, and one with
> unpleasant family connections is on Nevis) and going by
> by the tastefulness of what he's written may artistically be
> capable of writing such material. But I do not understand if
> this giant had an opportunity to gift PT the bonus software
> unless acting in collusion with the usual suspect. I would
> have thought such collusion is unlikely because 2 gadflies
> is either 1 or 2 gadflies (levitzky, not levitzy) too many.
> The same colorful individual has proffered legal advice to
> JB at pt, which doubtless was greeted with the very greatest
> possible respect given its colorful and savory source.
>
> Summarising this unsavory mess, I surely hold it redeculous
> to think Paul Truong is guilty. He is a computer expert and
> leaving aside whether or not he is capable of such actions
> there is no way he'd be so stupid as to leave such an easily
> tracked trail behind, when so easily he could have posted
> but stayed untraceable. So Truong surely was set up, and the
> trojan that allowed his pc to be used as a relay is the only
> way I can think of. Who put it there, when(2005?) and how is
> to be determined if possible. But even if it is not, the oft
> proposed action against expert Mottershead must proceed as
> he never even mentioned the possibility PT was a victim, his
> "findings" represent terrible defamation of Paul's character
> if untrue and there is old BINFO data to suggest BM is
> anything but judgment-proof.
>
> Truong writes perfectly and proofs Susan's writings. This
> makes the obviously vietinglish errors in the Fake Sam Sloan
> articles, not just one but in many of them, a deliberate
> red herring. I read in rgcp that BM candidly admits to his
> dislike of PT. All in all, in the incredible circumstance
> that the action makes it to court, one would imagine that
> an associate could be persuaded for an appearance fee to
> provide the clearest demonstration of how malware is to be
> surreptitiously injected into a mark's PC via his innocent
> surfing, and thereafer the trojan is used to remotely post
> via google using the victim's PC as a relay. Cost of trojan,
> $0.00 via bit-torrent, which suits a pocket or two. A demo
> of the technique may be arranged at the offices 1 Newark
> Center for a smaller fee. A forensic examination of a tablet
> PC currently in Lubbock shall provide such corroboration
> as is desired.
>
> I don't need to sign this as you can see I was able to read
> <55ed70db07cf49bbf72355a582b48b10@dizum.com> which is your
> private message encrypted to me and cancelled by me. I saw
> that you also encrypted it to a second key as well which is
> registered on the keyservers as issued to a Sam Sloan. Can
> you be more explicit where you found the public key for SS?
> I am not aware of him admitting to using PGP, which is why
> this may be of potential (if small) beagle significance.
> Please can someone archive the post I reference below, which
> comprised the PGP message encrypted to my (trfss) key and to
> one purportedly issued by the Real Sam Sloan?
>
> On 11/25/2007, <some fake email address> had written in
> 55ed70db07cf49bbf72355a582b48b10@dizum.com:
> - -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
> Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.3
>
> hQCMA7H/ kLl1fGJZAQQAhuc2Io8P3L43e2XOrIzKgKXZyCnI
icZp7MKr+WF2nj2S
> ||snip||
>
> Expanding for the benefit of some other NG character-
> You do not understand what is a trojan, then. It is subject
> to a remote control, and the self-annihilate button was no
> doubt pressed by its controller as soon as he became aware
> of his trap being sprung (here, by the unfortunate BM). By
> the time the victim, PT, got to hear of the sting, I think
> malware had erased itself and many traces of its existence.
> As The Carpenters sang in 1970, ........
> That may be your estimate of the value of the Real Sam
> Sloan's reputation, but it is not my estimate. Sui generis,
> it is unconscionable that the defendants wish to give the
> plaintiff the satisfaction of his first bona fide victory in
> court as a pro se or otherwise. Even for five lousy bucks.
> No. I never suggested he was. Neither is mad.
> But SS did not, so the question is irrelevant. Whoever had
> inserted the trojan in PT's 60-80 Gb drive (just a guess)
> has had 30 months to obscure any trail that maybe existed.
> Stop thinking that SS is the perp.
>
> OK, now I am logging out of this NG. I helped enough. Hope
> Denny does not have to waste time with this type of material.
> It is more suitable for Judge Robby Restaino.
> Saludos+Sheesh
> trfss,which does not stand for what you thought it stood for
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: n/a
>
> iQA/ AwUBR0yPtMyEjS8GcTJfEQJZ8QCgg9zBeQq1n3eW
srBqaKavbi8iOOEAnAlt
> 5wBDtd+03bDJminXlYscX7Jo
> =/OFg
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

The only one gullible enough to believe you is George The Turnip Arndt over
on the USCF Issues Forum.

Guy Macon

2007-12-01, 7:14 pm

(Note: I am NOT offering an oppinion on the overall case being
made, just this one aspect of it, and my interest is purely from
a logical puzzle "what can be proved" standpoint.)

(somebody -- I don't know who) wrote:

>Second do a pgp (posting-gap-protocol, not PGP), which is
>the best way to proceed when there are dense postings.
....
>Third one needs to comprehend the pgp above.
>Look at the second line of the dataset. That means there
>was a vacation of 110 continuous days from Jul 19 to Nov
>5 2005 when EFSS did not post
....
>Truong writes perfectly and proofs Susan's writings. This
>makes the obviously vietinglish errors in the Fake Sam Sloan
>articles, not just one but in many of them, a deliberate
>red herring.

On what basis did you decide that:

[1] Evidence based on writing style is a deliberate red herring

[2] Evidence based on posting gaps is not a deliberate red herring

?

I can set my computer to send posts whenever I choose, and if I
was trying to avoid being identified, would have the fake posts
sent while I was out of town. Likewise, if I wanted to frame
someone else, I would set up a process to track that person's
posts and have the fake posts stop and start when the real
posts did.

Again, I have no dog in this fight, other than curiousity about
what can and cannot be proven from examining posting histories.

--
Guy Macon
<http://www.guymacon.com/>

Chess One

2007-12-01, 7:14 pm

"Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com/> wrote in message
news:cKCdncgZtoqvLszaRVn_vwA@giganews.com...

>
> On what basis did you decide that:
>
> [1] Evidence based on writing style is a deliberate red herring
>
> [2] Evidence based on posting gaps is not a deliberate red herring

) he does not write perfectly, and I accused him of the same on the phone
recently. he had the decency to agree with me, and with good humoir. when
susan had a ny times article in prospect, i proofed it, not paul

when she writes to me for publication she asks me to correct her syntax, as
necessary... not paul [natural enough, i would correct it anyway, as good
manners]

every week i see non-americanisms at the blog site - the sense is most
usually clear enough, but the somewhat mannered articulation is all too
common for ESL speakers - its well enough, and really lacks no sense at all,
but not native expression! you have to be damned good to /fake/ that for
such a long period of time

whereas the FSS is a native american who doesn't ever put a foot wrong, even
in the linguistically complex area of 'proper abuse' - and in some [is it?]
2,455 cases, is cultural-trope perfect - what a paragon! and what a
give-away!!

either paul truong hides his light under a bushel, or something very much
larger than a bushel, or he is better at syntactical expression of american
euphemistic allusion than me, which he ain't

he never say, that dog doan hunt, and doesn't understand it immediately, nor
any immediate or similar expressions which are entirely native

tso!

> ?
>
> I can set my computer to send posts whenever I choose, and if I
> was trying to avoid being identified, would have the fake posts
> sent while I was out of town. Likewise, if I wanted to frame
> someone else, I would set up a process to track that person's
> posts and have the fake posts stop and start when the real
> posts did.
>
> Again, I have no dog in this fight, other than curiousity about
> what can and cannot be proven from examining posting histories.

that is a fair approach [!] from the technical side of things. i hope that
in the court case real experts will be deposed to their opinion - and
intensely interrogated on this very point. far from wanting to bury this
affair, i want the perp to be exposed and prosecuted to the full extent of
the law

phil innes

> --
> Guy Macon
> <http://www.guymacon.com/>
>