You know, it's pretty disgusting to see all the troll like behavior in 
this group as well as the other GRC groups. I thought that when ten-
forward.pchelp was shut down, that would be the end of it but it looks 
like the trolls have moved on to these other groups.

Steve, I have a suggestion on how to handle it. People may not like it 
but I think it's time has come. Is there some way to "register" people 
before allowing them to post? They would have to use a real name and real 
email address and then be given some type of password in order to allow 
posting and at the first sign of troll like behavior you could either 
warn them or better yet, cut them off altogether. Persistant trolls may 
keep trying to re-register but that would force them to get a new valid 
email each time. Maybe you have other ideas how to do it. 

All I know is that it's getting to the point where everyone has to wade 
through a bunch of garbage in order to find anything meaningful. If 
allowed to continue, it will only get worse.

Thanks for listening.

-- 
OverSoul 

Imagination is more important than Knowledge. 

	   --Albert Einstein--

				
					
				

Well said Oversoul...

I can recognise the threads now and keep away from them, other newbie visitors
may not and will get the wrong impression of what these news groups are about.

--
Remove "zzzz" to reply to sender.

i'm pretty new to these news groups, and i find it pretty disgusting myself

marc

Here, Here!

I've gotten some help at Techtalk and Security but I admit I'm tired of
wading and I've only been a subscriber for a week.

"Tom" <trthornberry@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3B48AE1B.6D523D2D@hotmail.com...
> Here, Here!
>
> I've gotten some help at Techtalk and Security but I admit I'm tired
of
> wading and I've only been a subscriber for a week.

For those of you who use OE, there is a very easy way to avoid posts
like this.  From the Messages pull-down, just select Block Sender and
you will never see another post from that person until they change email
addresses.  Other newsreaders have the same feature.

Then when you read the news group, there will be *no* troll posts to
skip over or wade through.
--
�
--
Robert
grc.com forum FAQ - http://grc.com/discussions.htm
grc.com forum quick reference - http://grc.com/nntpquickref.htm

In article <Xns90D888D046E0Fsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194>, OverSoul � 
said...
> You know, it's pretty disgusting to see all the troll like behavior in 
> this group as well as the other GRC groups. 

Yep.

> I thought that when ten-
> forward.pchelp was shut down, that would be the end of it but it looks 
> like the trolls have moved on to these other groups.

Not from .pchelp, which has been largely troll-free for some time.
 
> Steve, I have a suggestion on how to handle it. People may not like it 
> but I think it's time has come. Is there some way to "register" people 
> before allowing them to post? [...] Persistant trolls may 
> keep trying to re-register but that would force them to get a new valid 
> email each time. 

Trivially easy to do.

Everyone would have to jump through hoops, whilst trolls could, and for 
the 'challenge' probably would, persist. 

> Maybe you have other ideas how to do it. 

No doubt.

> All I know is that it's getting to the point where everyone has to wade 
> through a bunch of garbage in order to find anything meaningful. If 
> allowed to continue, it will only get worse.

I dunno. It ebbs and flows. 

-- 
Milly

"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90D888D046E0Fsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...
> You know, it's pretty disgusting to see all the troll like
behavior in
> this group as well as the other GRC groups. I thought that
when ten-
> forward.pchelp was shut down, that would be the end of it
but it looks
> like the trolls have moved on to these other groups.

snipped

I think every reasonable member of this NG shares your
opinion in regard to trolls. However, I for one, disagree
w/your proposed solution. I think Registering is the wrong
way to go not just for security reasons but also because
it's simply too heavy handed.
Furthermore, registering w/a false name and addy would still
get them in.
The only effective solutions are;
1) Don't respond
2) Put them in a kill file so their posts no longer appear.

--
Finger, Probe, Crack, Hack, Sniff
What kind of person thinks all this stuff up?
pgregory@lostmymedsctel.net

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001 18:26:55 +0000 (UTC), "OverSoul �"
<oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote:
<all snipped>

If you are using Agent you can mark the threads "Ignore".  

Judicious use can greatly reduce the reading load. ;-}

I have to admit that I sometimes read them for the humor.

"xyz" <tralfaz@total.spamnet> wrote in news:9iacec$2ok2$1@news.grc.com:

> that is a good suggestion . i hate registration , then i can no
> longer be "supersecret xyz "

Well, maybe Steve can set it up so once you register, you can then post 
using whichever nick you like. 

-- 
OverSoul 

Imagination is more important than Knowledge. 

	   --Albert Einstein--

				
					
				

"Robert Wycoff" <rwycoff@houston.rr.com> wrote in
news:9iabna$2not$1@news.grc.com: 

 
> Then when you read the news group, there will be *no* troll posts to
> skip over or wade through.

Killfiling is only a temporary solution. The trolls still waste Steve's 
bandwidth. We need more prevention (ban them) instead of reaction 
(killfiling.)

-- 
OverSoul 

Imagination is more important than Knowledge. 

	   --Albert Einstein--

				
					
				

In article <9iabna$2not$1@news.grc.com> Robert Wycoff wrote:
> "Tom" <trthornberry@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3B48AE1B.6D523D2D@hotmail.com...
> > Here, Here!
> >
> > I've gotten some help at Techtalk and Security but I admit I'm tired
> of
> > wading and I've only been a subscriber for a week.
> 
> For those of you who use OE, there is a very easy way to avoid posts
> like this.  From the Messages pull-down, just select Block Sender and
> you will never see another post from that person until they change email
> addresses.  Other newsreaders have the same feature.
> 
> Then when you read the news group, there will be *no* troll posts to
> skip over or wade through.
> 
Netscape doesn't have a built-in kill file, but a cool 502K freeware
add-on can be found at http://www.desisoft.com/fixnews/download.html.

Enjoy.
-- 
Alan
(at work on 21st century Energy Theory)
Energy and Energetics:
< http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Xns90D888D046E0Fsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...

> You know, it's pretty disgusting to see all the troll like behavior in
> this group as well as the other GRC groups.

    I agree.

> Steve, I have a suggestion on how to handle it. People may not like it
> but I think it's time has come. Is there some way to "register" people
> before allowing them to post? They would have to use a real name and real
> email address and then be given some type of password in order to allow
> posting and at the first sign of troll like behavior you could either
> warn them or better yet, cut them off altogether. Persistant trolls may
> keep trying to re-register but that would force them to get a new valid
> email each time. Maybe you have other ideas how to do it.

   How about requiring legit ip addresses and ISP's ?

Posted by PhilGreg, in article news:9iabms$2nof$1@news.grc.com:

>  I think Registering is the wrong
> way to go not just for security reasons but also because
> it's simply too heavy handed.

I also think registering is a bad idea, but I disagree with your reasons.  
I don't think it's too heavy handed to say 'you've got to register with 
me before posting in my domain.'  And people don't trust Steve can't to 
set up a system that keeps personal info secure, I've got no problem with 
those people denying themselves access.

> Furthermore, registering w/a false name and addy would still
> get them in.

The suggestion was that a valid addy be required, and it's easy enough to 
validate them.  Otoh, it would take about ten seconds of my time each day 
to get a new valid addy.  Dedicated trolls wouldn't blink at that.

And people who want to post legitimately might decide not to if they had 
extra hoops to jump through to get here.  E.g., I doubt R.Rosenberger 
would have wanted to resgister with fellow 'messiah' Gibson before coming 
to his domain.

> The only effective solutions are;
> 1) Don't respond

This is particularly difficult to do in a place where there is a strong 
sense of community.  There's such a sense of community at 
alt.comp.freeware, and there was a serious infestation of trolls there a 
while back;  it took the regulars *months* to stop trying to 'defend' 
each other by posting.  With the sense of community at GRC, and the egos 
here, I think it'll take a lot of 'don't feed the trolls' preaching to 
get everybody to stop.  But it can be done.

> 2) Put them in a kill file so their posts no longer appear.

I've never liked this solution, because there are trolls who will simply 
post misinformation.  Misinformation can do a lot of damage, especially 
to newbies, and it needs to be countered with clear, concise, unemotional 
responses.

-- 
�Q�

Luck is the residue of design.
     - B. Rickey

Thank you specifically to Robert Wycoff and Hermital.  But thank you all
as well because I've gotten some good tips on grc.com.  I'd say you're a
pretty good bunch.

Comments inline below

--
maggie@tcsn.net
"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90D888D046E0Fsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...
> You know, it's pretty disgusting to see all the troll like behavior in
> this group as well as the other GRC groups (snip)

I was surprised when I saw it.

> Steve, I have a suggestion on how to handle it. People may not like it
> but I think it's time has come.
>Is there some way to "register" people
> before allowing them to post?

You're right about people not liking it.

>They would have to use a real name and real
> email address and then be given some type of password in order to allow
> posting   (snip)

This is a pretty drastic suggestion.  Make everyone jump through hoops
because of a few posts by an abnoxious one or two people whose total posts
make up such a very small percentage of the total postings?

> All I know is that it's getting to the point where everyone has to wade
> through a bunch of garbage in order to find anything meaningful. If
> allowed to continue, it will only get worse.

The paragraph above is not only an exaggeration,  the writer is attempting
to predict the future.

> Thanks for listening.
> OverSoul

I followed the flame war from beginning to end.  I found it amusing,
obnoxious and enlightening all at once.

I felt a lot of respect and admiration for the way it was handled.  We'll
see soon enough if that is sufficient.   I've heard that the full moon
brings out crazies.  There WAS a full moon out last night.   I say give it
some time.  I think what has been done is sufficient for now..  If it gets
worse, more severe measures can always be taken.


maggie@tcsn.net

"�Q�" <DodgeballCircusAct@usa.net> wrote in message news:Xns90D89952FD8DEitsmeitsQ@127.0.0.1...

> The suggestion was that a valid addy be required, and it's easy enough to
> validate them.  Otoh, it would take about ten seconds of my time each day
> to get a new valid addy.  Dedicated trolls wouldn't blink at that.

   There is a difference between a dedicated troll , and someone
   posting to a -security newsgroup-  using hacking techniques to produce
   semi-phony ip addresses without ISP's.

   I have allready confirmed this with network security administrators
   at Level 3 Communications, Inc. , as well as others.

In Netscape the equivalent of killfile is called message filters. Very 
adequate for any kind of blocking.

Hermital wrote:
> 
< prior msg snip >
> Netscape doesn't have a built-in kill file, but a cool 502K freeware
> add-on can be found at http://www.desisoft.com/fixnews/download.html.
> 
> Enjoy.
> --
> Alan
> (at work on 21st century Energy Theory)
> Energy and Energetics:
> < http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

"maggie" <maggie@tcsn.net> wrote in news:9iagap$2tck$1@news.grc.com:

> 
> The paragraph above is not only an exaggeration,  the writer is
> attempting to predict the future.
> 
Well Maggie, not sure how long you've been hanging out on these 
newsgroups but past history has already shown what will happen. I used to 
read the posts in ten-forward.pchelp. The flamewars that went on there 
lasted for months.....yes MONTHS before I finally unsubscribed. Maybe it 
got better after I left, I don't know, but from what I remember, the 
majority of the posts there were nothing but a troll-fest. I would also 
take a gamble and say that played a big part in Steve's decision to shut 
it down.

I've gradually seen this type of behavior slowly growing in the other GRC 
groups and I'd hate to see these groups destroyed also. Sure it's not as 
bad as ten-forward.pchelp was but I'd like to see Steve nip it in the 
bud at this early stage. As far as "predicting the future" have you ever 
heard the old saying "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to 
repeat it" (or something like that). That wasn't so much "predicting the 
future" as it was "common sense".

By the way, what suggestions do you have that would keep the trolls under 
control?

-- 
OverSoul 

Imagination is more important than Knowledge. 

	   --Albert Einstein--

				
					
				

Comment inline
--
maggie@tcsn.net
"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90D8A31897E52sevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...
> "maggie" <maggie@tcsn.net> wrote in news:9iagap$2tck$1@news.grc.com:
>
> >
> > The paragraph above is not only an exaggeration,  the writer is
> > attempting to predict the future.
> >
> Well Maggie, not sure how long you've been hanging out on these
> newsgroups but past history has already shown what will happen>
(snip)
> By the way, what suggestions do you have that would keep the trolls under
> control?

You didn't read the rest of my post?

> OverSoul
>

maggie@tcsn.net

"maggie" <maggie@tcsn.net> wrote in news:9iaij8$2vul$1@news.grc.com:

 
> You didn't read the rest of my post?
> 
Just re-read it. I guess I missed how it was handled. Were the posts 
simply deleted? I supposed I'll have to go re-read them to find out.

-- 
OverSoul 

Imagination is more important than Knowledge. 

	   --Albert Einstein--

				
					
				

In article <3B48C8BD.2AA4FBE0@bellsouth.net> MaxM wrote:
> 
> In Netscape the equivalent of killfile is called message filters. Very
> adequate for any kind of blocking.
> 
Drat!  Thanks for bringing it to my attention, MaxM.

There's another old fix that's obsolete.  You're right, of course.  I
have a few e-mail spam filters set, but have never used news filters.

Thanks again.
-- 
Alan
Energy has an objective, independent physical existence and exists 
in the absence of matter, but matter is entirely dependent upon energy 
and cannot exist in the absence of energy.  - A.T. Williams

How you going to require or enforce a real name and real e-addy? I have a
million of them.

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90D888D046E0Fsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...
> Steve, I have a suggestion on how to handle it. People may not like it
> but I think it's time has come. Is there some way to "register" people
> before allowing them to post? They would have to use a real name and real
> email address and then be given some type of password in order to allow

I don't know about you OverSoul, but I want to keep any censorship in my
control and not give it to Steve or anyone else.  If Steve wants to
eliminate them from his server, it is Steve's server.   But I have
eliminated them from my computer.  No danger of me feeding them.  A troll
that isn't fed will soon die.
--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90D89874D1B9Asevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...

> Killfiling is only a temporary solution. The trolls still waste Steve's
> bandwidth. We need more prevention (ban them) instead of reaction
> (killfiling.)

Salaam!

Sarah wrote:

> How you going to require or enforce a real name
> and real e-addy? I have a million of them.

   Send an email to the email address containing an activation code. 
It's done all over the place.  Dead address --> nonreceipt --> no
activation code --> no write access.

   But Steve has already said that he can selectively block individual
users from write access.  I think it would be delightful to have certain
people attempt to post, only to read a popup saying something like "You
have read-only access to these newsgroups."  I, too, am tired of wading
through garbage.

> Sarah

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

I've been using several versions of Netscape for a few years, and
I find their *message filters* pretty versatile. Although I've
only used them for spam, it appears they could also be used in
the newsgroups, as they go through Messenger in the first place.
(Yes, I just looked at Message filters, and they come up for
whatever section of Messenger you are in when you call them up.
In other words, they just now came up defaulted to
grc.news.feedback. You can select where they apply right there at
a drop-down menu.) Although they don't appear to be global in
nature, it's not much work to add them to each section you wish
to filter. My current version is 4.7 with 128-bit encryption.

Personally, I don't block any posters here, as even the worst
ones 'accidentally' put out something of value on occasion. Add
to that, even if you blocked somebody, you haven't necessarily
stopped their stuff in a reply to them. Blocking whole threads I
see as counterproductive, as you miss the good parts too.
Disgusting, some may be, but it can keep you in stitches
sometimes, that they'd behave that way in front of others. Think
of it as 'online Jerry Springer'. After all, there are a couple
I've been betting on for about a year. Quite handy and lucrative.
Electron streams can make some do funny things, eh?

However...if Fixnews works well, I may go that route...but only
if my temper gets the best of me.

HTH

Waldo

Hermital wrote:
>
> >
> Netscape doesn't have a built-in kill file, but a cool 502K freeware
> add-on can be found at http://www.desisoft.com/fixnews/download.html.
> 
> Enjoy.

Salaam!

Sarah wrote:

> I want to keep any censorship in my control ...

   To have that, you'd have to have control over the entire Web.  Joe
Troll can post whatever he wants -- not necessarily wherever he wants. 
That's not censorship, he's free to speak out all over Usenet, no one's
silencing him.  But he can't do it in my house.

   I always invite Jehovah's Witnesses missionaries in, offer them
coffee or coke, and then show them what the Bible foretold about Islam,
using their New World Translation.  For some reason they never come back
for the discussion of the vision of Daniel and Constantine.  So are they
censoring me?

> Sarah

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

"Sarah" <s.oriley@hotpop.invalid> wrote in message news:9iajh8$3154$1@news.grc.com...

> How you going to require or enforce a real name and real e-addy? I have a
> million of them.

   That's the problem. Name and e-mail addy are relatively useless.
   An IP address that is required to *respond* to an echo-request at
   the time of posting, would work much better.

that is a good suggestion . i hate registration , then i can no longer be
"supersecret xyz "
"Robert Wycoff" <rwycoff@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9iabna$2not$1@news.grc.com...
>
> "Tom" <trthornberry@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3B48AE1B.6D523D2D@hotmail.com...
> > Here, Here!
> >
> > I've gotten some help at Techtalk and Security but I admit I'm tired
> of
> > wading and I've only been a subscriber for a week.
>
> For those of you who use OE, there is a very easy way to avoid posts
> like this.  From the Messages pull-down, just select Block Sender and
> you will never see another post from that person until they change email
> addresses.  Other newsreaders have the same feature.
>
> Then when you read the news group, there will be *no* troll posts to
> skip over or wade through.
> --
> �
> --
> Robert
> grc.com forum FAQ - http://grc.com/discussions.htm
> grc.com forum quick reference - http://grc.com/nntpquickref.htm
>
>

I have no problem with registering to post.

I register to vote, and to do anything else worthwhile.

Usenet can be a mess because anyone, using a made-up identity, can 
disrupt without accountability.  GRC is not usenet, and usenet protocol, 
when it is abused, may prove to be inappropriate here.

Fred
-- 

____________________________________________________________
bluemule

>"abujamal" < wrote in message
>    I always invite Jehovah's Witnesses missionaries in, offer them
> coffee or coke, and then show them what the Bible foretold about Islam,
> using their New World Translation.  For some reason they never come back
> for the discussion of the vision of Daniel and Constantine.

hehe Good idea!
Nanell

I agree mr oversoul i also think people should learn to agree to disagree
without a war of words and be adult about disagreements.

Abujamal-

You are quite a character.  I would love to be a fly on the wall in one of
your meetings with those Jehovah's Witnesses.  I might even learn something.

I've also been curious - do you find a lot of other people of your faith
using your salutations in emails and NG posts like you do?  And what do they
mean, if other than hello and goodbye?

Thanks for keeping these groups civilized, fun, and diverse.

Aloha,

Kalei

abujamal <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B48D46E.6BB7419A@earthlink.net...
> Salaam!
>
> Sarah wrote:
>
> > I want to keep any censorship in my control ...
>
>    To have that, you'd have to have control over the entire Web.  Joe
> Troll can post whatever he wants -- not necessarily wherever he wants.
> That's not censorship, he's free to speak out all over Usenet, no one's
> silencing him.  But he can't do it in my house.
>
>    I always invite Jehovah's Witnesses missionaries in, offer them
> coffee or coke, and then show them what the Bible foretold about Islam,
> using their New World Translation.  For some reason they never come back
> for the discussion of the vision of Daniel and Constantine.  So are they
> censoring me?
>
> > Sarah
>
> was-salaam,
> abujamal
> --
> news://news.pchelpers.org

"�Q�" <DodgeballCircusAct@usa.net> wrote in message
news:Xns90D89952FD8DEitsmeitsQ@127.0.0.1...
> Posted by PhilGreg, in article news:9iabms$2nof$1@news.grc.com:
> > The only effective solutions are;

> > 1) Don't respond
> This is particularly difficult to do in a place where there is a
strong
> sense of community.  There's such a sense of community at
> alt.comp.freeware, and there was a serious infestation of trolls
there a
> while back;  it took the regulars *months* to stop trying to
'defend'
> each other by posting.  With the sense of community at GRC, and the
egos
> here, I think it'll take a lot of 'don't feed the trolls' preaching
to
> get everybody to stop.  But it can be done.

It'll blow over, it always does.
It's the sense of community that appeals to me and most of the lurkers
I'd imagine.
Of course we all have our 'favourites' amd it is true that the more
belligerent can and very often do come up with valid and insightful
information.
How to stop feeding trolls, I dunno what about crossposting to
alt.flamers or alt,fanclubxxx - only joshing :-)

> > 2) Put them in a kill file so their posts no longer appear.
> I've never liked this solution, because there are trolls who will
simply
> post misinformation.  Misinformation can do a lot of damage,
especially
> to newbies, and it needs to be countered with clear, concise,
unemotional
> responses.

> �Q�

Heh heh, I never thought of that side of it.  Who is responsible
enough though to keep him/herself unemotionally involved when their
friends and the innocents are getting maligned.  Aw shucks it's only
words after all ain't it, and paper never refused ink !

One thing that bothers me though, unless one were a politician, or
bishop, or heh heh, worked in MS, why is there such a great big fuss
about staying so hidden.  I have this idea that one of the regulars
here might be Bill Gates hisself, now wouldn't that be one for the
urban legend site :-)
Cheerio and godbless
Tommy

From your house to my house they must be shaking in their boots.  LOL

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B48D46E.6BB7419A@earthlink.net...
>    I always invite Jehovah's Witnesses missionaries in, offer them
> coffee or coke, and then show them what the Bible foretold about Islam,
> using their New World Translation.  For some reason they never come back
> for the discussion of the vision of Daniel and Constantine.  So are they
> censoring me?
>
> > Sarah

I simply do no put my real identity online except in legal situations such
as registering software or using my credit card.

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns90D898381344Bsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...
> "xyz" <tralfaz@total.spamnet> wrote in news:9iacec$2ok2$1@news.grc.com:
>
> > that is a good suggestion . i hate registration , then i can no
> > longer be "supersecret xyz "
>
> Well, maybe Steve can set it up so once you register, you can then post
> using whichever nick you like.
>
> --
> OverSoul

I know what you are saying, but that is not a real ID.  You can sign up for
hotmail with a fictitious name and address, zip code.  It is still a live
email that can be responded to but a fake name.  I still think that garbage
is in the eye of the beholder...your trash is another's treasure etc, etc,
etc.  I hope this NG does not become like a list serve with discussion
approved by a moderator. I know it won't happen, but control belongs at the
users terminal.  If I had a newsgroup I would not allow abuse or gutter
language.  :-)  I would be alone I think.

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B48D322.E3E198EC@earthlink.net...
> Salaam!
>
>
>    Send an email to the email address containing an activation code.
> It's done all over the place.  Dead address --> nonreceipt --> no
> activation code --> no write access.
>

Salaam!

   [Followups set]

Kalei Awana wrote:

> I would love to be a fly on the wall in one of
> your meetings with those Jehovah's Witnesses.

   Haven't seen any in years.  I think I'm on a list somewhere.

> I might even learn something.

   Most people educated in the West are missing about a thousand years
of history, for starters, called "The Dark Ages" -- Europe was dark,
while the civilized world, particularly the Holy Land, was doing things
like federalism, pharmacy, glass-making and plumbing, astral navigation,
completely eliminating poverty ... it's a pretty surprising list.

   And it's interesting to notice that the entire focus of the Bible is
The Holy Land until shortly after Jesus came, and then the focus of
eschatology shifts utterly and entirely to Europe and never looks at the
Holy Land again to see what happened there.  Might make one wonder why
suddenly the birthplace of three major religions suddenly became
irrelevant (until lately).

> I've also been curious - do you find a lot of other people of
> your faith using your salutations in emails and NG posts like
> you do?  And what do they mean, if other than hello and goodbye?

   "Peace" ... "and peace."

   In "Islamic" Usenet newsgroups (where 97% of all traffic is trolls
and missionaries), yes, usually, transliterated Arabic is very common. 
At partisan, missionary, and lavishly funded "leadership" muslim
websites, well of course, the verbiage gets exuberant, and on some
mailing lists it gets quite competitive with writers deploying Arabic
words (mostly the latter-day priesthood's technical terminology) to
dismiss questioners not so apparently fluent.  The politicians and
would-be priests are an exception, however:  Arabic is the language of
understanding and clarity so we all seek it.  Assimilation of common
Arabic phrases for personal religious reasons is pretty automatic
irrespective of a muslims's usual daily tongue, and reading
understanding, if not verbal fluency, in Arabic, is commonly developed.

   However, muslims in places where we are a minority are quite
literally under seige and physical attack (the far majority of the
world's refugees are muslims driven from their homes), as today in the
UK, France, Palestine, and Algeria, for example.  And many muslims who
have left their homelands and found durable sanctuary elsewhere, being
strangers in a strange land, keep to themselves and do not wish to draw
attention to cultural differences in their new homes or among their new
working companions and associates, so do not use Arabic outside their
ethnic communities.  (And of course certain secret societies having
little or nothing to do with muslims do the same thing, concealing the
Arabic "unwritten ritual" of their fraternal bonds, but that's another
subject.)

   America is something of a curious exception, in the sense that
bombing, arson and personal assault have been relatively rare, and we
are <g> merely systematically demonized in media, education,
entertainment, and politics, and otherwise only locally visible.  But
America is a special case, it received specific institutional attentions
concerning Islam like no other place on the planet, from long before
Columbus' voyage through today.  Locally, actually, such overwhelming
propagandizing and assiduous suppression of information gives us an
advantage of surprise when people discover what muslims are really
like.  Americans just aren't used to religious people who don't try to
cram their faith down someone else's throat.  We are also admonished
"Speak to people according to their understanding," so use of Arabic in
intercourse with non-muslims is not common.

   So no, I don't find a lot of other muslims using Arabic salutations
in emails and NG posts like I do.  I think most do not realize how
readily it causes hostile readers to identify themselves, on the one
hand, and how effectively it draws attention to the notion that muslims
might be human, too, on the other.  Even if we all have two heads, green
scales, breathe fire, and ride camels in our billions and billions of
oncoming invaders blah blah blah.

> Thanks for keeping these groups civilized, fun, and diverse.

   My son, interested in astronomy, vulcanology, and deepsea marine
biology, tells me that you live in a place rich in diversity.  Seems
there was only one place he could possibly enjoy college, though, and
apparently we haven't been demonized enough to prevent him from being
accepted on scholarships.

> Aloha,
> Kalei

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

Sarah wrote:

> I simply do no put my real identity online except
> in legal situations such as registering software
> or using my credit card.

   So your name is really Frank and you're a Pinkerton detective?

> Sarah

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

tommy_kins wrote:

>> Misinformation can do a lot of damage, especially
>> to newbies, and it needs to be countered with clear,
>> concise, unemotional responses.

   That's about the only good reason to respond to some writers.

> I have this idea that one of the regulars here might
> be Bill Gates hisself, now wouldn't that be one for
> the urban legend site :-)

   Bill's allowed to relax and enjoy himself?  Can he afford that?

> Cheerio and godbless
> Tommy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

"tommy_kins" <tommy_kins@ntlworld.ie> wrote in message
news:9iau9k$9ej$2@news.grc.com...

> One thing that bothers me though, unless one were a politician, or
> bishop, or heh heh, worked in MS, why is there such a great big fuss
> about staying so hidden.  I have this idea that one of the regulars
> here might be Bill Gates hisself, now wouldn't that be one for the
> urban legend site :-)

Heh heh heh that's funny

(crap they're on to me!)


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

Yes, something like that....LOL* Actually I am female with a opinion.  I
would not want to fear for my safety if I angered someone in a religious or
political discussion.   That is the practical side of being sort of
anonymous, though no one is really anonymous online.  Also if I post
something online with my real name it can be picked up by any search engine.
I am well known in a relatively small town which has a lot of computer nerds
:-).

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B49008D.12E6D679@earthlink.net...
> Salaam!
>
> Sarah wrote:
>
> > I simply do no put my real identity online except
> > in legal situations such as registering software
> > or using my credit card.
>
>    So your name is really Frank and you're a Pinkerton detective?
>
> > Sarah
>
> was-salaam,
> abujamal
> --
> news://news.pchelpers.org

you're bill gates' wife and live in redmond, right?

"Sarah" <s.oriley@hotpop.invalid> wrote in message
news:9ib3rk$ge6$1@news.grc.com...
> Yes, something like that....LOL* Actually I am female with a opinion.
I
> would not want to fear for my safety if I angered someone in a
religious or
> political discussion.   That is the practical side of being sort of
> anonymous, though no one is really anonymous online.  Also if I post
> something online with my real name it can be picked up by any search
engine.
> I am well known in a relatively small town which has a lot of computer
nerds
> :-).

Goodness,

Sarah have opinions?, get out of here!<G>  A small town with nerds?
What do you guys talk about at the corner drugstore?

Geek..

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:13:03 -0400, "Sarah" <s.oriley@hotpop.invalid>
wrote:

>Yes, something like that....LOL* Actually I am female with a opinion.
 
>I am well known in a relatively small town which has a lot of computer nerds
>:-).
>
>--
>
>Sarah

>
>

i don't even have a resl identity ! :-)
"Sarah" <s.oriley@hotpop.invalid> wrote in message
news:9iarn3$6da$1@news.grc.com...
> I simply do no put my real identity online except in legal situations such
> as registering software or using my credit card.
>
> --
>
> Sarah
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> "OverSoul �" <oversoul_seven@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns90D898381344Bsevenoversoulnet@207.71.92.194...
> > "xyz" <tralfaz@total.spamnet> wrote in news:9iacec$2ok2$1@news.grc.com:
> >
> > > that is a good suggestion . i hate registration , then i can no
> > > longer be "supersecret xyz "
> >
> > Well, maybe Steve can set it up so once you register, you can then post
> > using whichever nick you like.
> >
> > --
> > OverSoul
>
>
>

There are many reasons not to reveal one's true identity in a forum like
this.  I live in a very small community and have an very uncommon last name.
To put it simply -- some of the folks that post here are crazy (not many,
but a few).  It would be irresponsible to put myself, my wife and my
children at risk by essentially giving crazy people directions to my house.

I do my best to behave myself even though I am pretty much anonymous.  I
don't use the fact that I choose not to identify myself as an excuse to
behave badly and would not like to be banned from these groups because I
have made that choice.

I do, however, understand your frustration.  I wish there were a solution
other than registering.

P N

On Sun, 08 Jul 2001 14:45:18 -0700, abujamal <muslims@earthlink.net>
wrote:


>   I always invite Jehovah's Witnesses missionaries in, offer them
>coffee or coke, and then show them what the Bible foretold about Islam,
>using their New World Translation.  For some reason they never come back
>for the discussion of the vision of Daniel and Constantine.  So are they
>censoring me?
>
>was-salaam,
>abujamal
 HaHa I always greet them with some Babtist handouts and the warm
eager statement "Are you saved?". I am not a Babtist but its still
effective. I swear they have painted something on my gatepost that
says. "Beware dangerous woman within" As I haven't seen any in a
couple years.  I for one like your greetings and goodbyes and hope you
don't change.
For the trolls  and flamers I have marked quite a few threads to be
ignored and I have reached the point where 4 or 5 peoples names show
up on a post I don't bother to read but go on to the next one.  Life
is way to short to waste any of it on pointless anger.

jude

"�Q�" wrote:
> 
> And people who want to post legitimately might decide not to if they had
> extra hoops to jump through to get here.  

I already post less due to the hoops I need to jump thru to get by
Steve's new posting guidelines... :-(

Corey

They probably talk about "the patch(es)"... but, in their case, they
don't mean Nicoderm
(or whatever it's called) <bg>
--  NNG
***  I Hate SPAM (from the can or via e-mail)  ***
Resistance is futi.... ohhhh cookies!!  --MS of Borg

"Geek" <handyman@firstaid.org> wrote in message
news:3b491bce.113904281@news.grc.com...
: Goodness,
:
: Sarah have opinions?, get out of here!<G>  A small town with nerds?
: What do you guys talk about at the corner drugstore?
:
: Geek..
[...]

Pseudo,

> I do, however, understand your frustration. I wish there
> were a solution other than registering.

I would *NEVER* require a loss of anonymity. I hold that option to be 
very important.

And since the "true identity" of the person is not important anyway
-- only the ability to effectively block any reconfigurations of 
their system or newsreader -- I can't see that it would ever be 
possible.

Since we can, if we are forced to and must, tie posting prohibition 
to a user's hard drive serial number -- which I can trivially extract 
from any IDE or SCSI drive -- we will never need to know their name, 
and I, for one, would just as soon not.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Salaam!

Steve Gibson wrote:

> Since we can, if we are forced to and must, tie posting prohibition
> to a user's hard drive serial number -- which I can trivially extract
> from any IDE or SCSI drive -- we will never need to know their name,
> and I, for one, would just as soon not.

   Yes, yes, yes.  Not by being forced but because it's a sensible thing
to do, knowing as we all do that this nonsense will be recurrent if not
contiuous.  Yes, yes, yes -- lock it up, send me the app that will
incorporate all four of my hard drives' serial numbers, I'll run it
tonight.

   What's worse than bad manners is doing nothing about it.

> Steve Gibson, at work on: < a million loose ends >

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Abujamal,

> > and I, for one, would just as soon not.
> 
> Yes, yes, yes.  Not by being forced but because it's a sensible
> thing to do, knowing as we all do that this nonsense will be
> recurrent if not contiuous.  Yes, yes, yes -- lock it up, send
> me the app that will incorporate all four of my hard drives'
> serial numbers, I'll run it tonight.
> 
>    What's worse than bad manners is doing nothing about it.

err ... what I meant by "I, for one, would just as soon not" was 
speaking of knowing or caring about some miscreant's real name.  Who 
cares.

As for implementing this system ...

<<sigh>>

I have SO MUCH to do already.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b318b63e7d49f59899db@207.71.92.194...
> Abujamal,

<snip>

> As for implementing this system ...
>
> <<sigh>>
>
> I have SO MUCH to do already.
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >


Please, please, please make that a million and one loose ends; with whip
cream on top?!  :-))

Salaam!

Steve Gibson wrote:

> As for implementing this system ...
> <<sigh>>
> I have SO MUCH to do already.

   They're not going to stop other than as a temporary tactic, Steve.

> Steve Gibson, at work on: < a million loose ends >

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b318b63e7d49f59899db@207.71.92.194...
> Abujamal,

[...]
> As for implementing this system ...
>
> <<sigh>>
>
> I have SO MUCH to do already.
>
Steve, maybe it's time to hire some more people to help you out. I
can't tell to what degree you are satisfied or dissatisfied with your
productivity level but it's a thought.

--
Live Long and Prosper,
CRH 8^)>

Oh absolutely.  You found me out.

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"John Truk" <spam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:9ib68o$jf4$1@news.grc.com...
> you're bill gates' wife and live in redmond, right?
>
> "Sarah" <s.oriley@hotpop.invalid> wrote in message
> news:9ib3rk$ge6$1@news.grc.com...
> > Yes, something like that....LOL* Actually I am female with a opinion.
> I
> > would not want to fear for my safety if I angered someone in a
> religious or
> > political discussion.   That is the practical side of being sort of
> > anonymous, though no one is really anonymous online.  Also if I post
> > something online with my real name it can be picked up by any search
> engine.
> > I am well known in a relatively small town which has a lot of computer
> nerds
> > :-).
>
>
>

No corner drug store but we have two ISPs across the street from each other.
:-) Town is population 15,000. :-)

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Geek" <handyman@firstaid.org> wrote in message
news:3b491bce.113904281@news.grc.com...
> Goodness,
>
> Sarah have opinions?, get out of here!<G>  A small town with nerds?
> What do you guys talk about at the corner drugstore?
>
> Geek..
>

no hoops just a secret way of counting....LOL

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
<nospam@myaddress.invalid> wrote in message
news:3B4932EF.E0E2E5FD@cybrsolutions.com...
> "�Q�" wrote:
> >
> > And people who want to post legitimately might decide not to if they had
> > extra hoops to jump through to get here.
>
> I already post less due to the hoops I need to jump thru to get by
> Steve's new posting guidelines... :-(
>
> Corey

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> Pseudo,
> 
> > I do, however, understand your frustration. I wish there
> > were a solution other than registering.
> 
> I would *NEVER* require a loss of anonymity. I hold that option to be
> very important.
> 
> And since the "true identity" of the person is not important anyway
> -- only the ability to effectively block any reconfigurations of
> their system or newsreader -- I can't see that it would ever be
> possible.
> 
> Since we can, if we are forced to and must, tie posting prohibition
> to a user's hard drive serial number -- which I can trivially extract
> from any IDE or SCSI drive -- we will never need to know their name,
> and I, for one, would just as soon not.
> 
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Its still a trackable Id to my system. Just as bad in my eyes as the
assorted 'cookies' that a variety of nefarious software companies use.
If you start doing that Steve im gone, and I doubt i'll be the only
non-troll to feel the same. I came here to get AWAY FROM all the various
forms of tracking, and if you start similar things here I cant wait to
see the fallout when those whom youve previously exposed for similar
behaviour get wind of it.

Exactly!!  You and I know we are not really anonymous to people who need to
find a person who harasses someone online.  It is the "Pseudo" cyber geeks
with a little bit of knowledge that are the dangerous ones. :-)  The people
at my ISP know me by my first name. <G>  I have to behave myself.  In my
fantasies I would have the cyber power to knock off a few jerks online.  You
know the ones who think they are so great because they can send a few
packets and hide their IP.

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Pseudo Nym" <jawbone@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9ib974$nde$1@news.grc.com...
> There are many reasons not to reveal one's true identity in a forum like
> this.  I live in a very small community and have an very uncommon last
name.
> To put it simply -- some of the folks that post here are crazy (not many,
> but a few).  It would be irresponsible to put myself, my wife and my
> children at risk by essentially giving crazy people directions to my
house.
>
> I do my best to behave myself even though I am pretty much anonymous.  I
> don't use the fact that I choose not to identify myself as an excuse to
> behave badly and would not like to be banned from these groups because I
> have made that choice.
>
> I do, however, understand your frustration.  I wish there were a solution
> other than registering.
>
> P N
>
>

I had no idea that could be done.  Is that done by web sites?  By ISP?
--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b30dcd5ca3100b9899d5@207.71.92.194...
> Pseudo,
>
> Since we can, if we are forced to and must, tie posting prohibition
> to a user's hard drive serial number --

Steve Gibson wrote:

> 
> As for implementing this system ...
> 
> <<sigh>>
> 
> I have SO MUCH to do already.
> 


Then don't. :)

Verner

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 01:40:14 -0700, Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>
wrote:

<snip>

>to a user's hard drive serial number -- which I can trivially extract 
>from any IDE or SCSI drive -- 

How? Remove the blue water for email.

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 01:40:14 -0700, Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>
wrote:

<snip>
>a user's hard drive serial number -- which I can trivially extract 
>from any IDE or SCSI drive
<snip>

Are you are talking about the number obtained from a dir command or
the actual "printed on the drive" serial number?

mc,

> Its still a trackable Id to my system. Just as bad in my eyes
> as the assorted 'cookies' that a variety of nefarious software
> companies use. If you start doing that Steve im gone, and I
> doubt i'll be the only non-troll to feel the same. I came here
> to get AWAY FROM all the various forms of tracking, and if you
> start similar things here I cant wait to see the fallout when
> those whom youve previously exposed for similar behaviour get
> wind of it.

As I've said before, when you've threatened to leave us, your 
contributions would be missed, but we'd manage to go on without you. 
You would, of course, still be able to read the groups, only not 
post.

But you're 100% right -- it's an ID tag -- no two ways about it. 
However the technology would be designed so that it ONLY had meaning 
to GRC and was ONLY accessible to GRC. And it would NEVER be 
"retargeted" and used for any other purpose.

Given those criteria, if this comes to pass, you'll need to decide 
what you want to do.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

> I had no idea that could be done.  Is that done by web sites?
> By ISP?

For the VAST majority of Windows users with wide-open "nbname" 
service (UDP port 137) it's possible for sites and ISP's to get their 
MAC serial numbers ... just as ShieldsUP! demonstrates when it calls 
it a next-generation privacy violation.

But some custom-code would need to run on the machine in order to 
pickup the drive's serial numbers.

HOWEVER... any little ActiveX gizmo *COULD* do this, and many sites 
depend more and more on little ActiveX gizmos ... which *are* enabled 
by default.  So ... yes ... it's entirely possible for web sites to 
do this using ActiveX or Netscape "plug-ins".

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

El Gato,

> Are you are talking about the number obtained from a dir
> command or the actual "printed on the drive" serial number?

The actual printed on the drive serial number.  That serial number is 
also recorded on an special 'read-only' sector at the factory and is 
available through to Windows through the use of some IOCTL commands 
to read the drive's identification information.  Nothing to it.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> mc,
> 
> > Its still a trackable Id to my system. Just as bad in my eyes
> > as the assorted 'cookies' that a variety of nefarious software
> > companies use. If you start doing that Steve im gone, and I
> > doubt i'll be the only non-troll to feel the same. I came here
> > to get AWAY FROM all the various forms of tracking, and if you
> > start similar things here I cant wait to see the fallout when
> > those whom youve previously exposed for similar behaviour get
> > wind of it.
> 
> As I've said before, when you've threatened to leave us, your

No 'threats' involved. I'll leave. But I dont make this, nor previous
statements for the purpose of altering your direction. We all know that
you have your own ideas, reasons, etc and most of us, myself included,
respect that. Its called integrity. My reason for posting my obviously
strong opinions is to encourage others who feel the same way, but are 
afraid of being flamed, to post their opinions as well.

> contributions would be missed, but we'd manage to go on without you.
> You would, of course, still be able to read the groups, only not
> post.

At such time as you require, in ANY way, ANY form of unique identifyier
to access these groups im out, no reading, no sending, no subscription.
Period. And from other posts in one of the threads related to this I can
see im not alone.

> 
> But you're 100% right -- it's an ID tag -- no two ways about it.
> However the technology would be designed so that it ONLY had meaning
> to GRC and was ONLY accessible to GRC. And it would NEVER be
> "retargeted" and used for any other purpose.

Neither, who, which, what, where, when, why, or how matters. Its
tracking, and IMHO little different from those bits of software you have
previously exposed.

> 
> Given those criteria, if this comes to pass, you'll need to decide
> what you want to do.

No decision to make. Open and shut case.

> 
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Care to share?

cybrsol@netscape.net

Sarah wrote:
> 
> no hoops just a secret way of counting....LOL
> 
> --
> 
> Sarah
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> <nospam@myaddress.invalid> wrote in message
> news:3B4932EF.E0E2E5FD@cybrsolutions.com...
> > "�Q�" wrote:
> > >
> > > And people who want to post legitimately might decide not to if they had
> > > extra hoops to jump through to get here.
> >
> > I already post less due to the hoops I need to jump thru to get by
> > Steve's new posting guidelines... :-(
> >
> > Corey

I have a few throw away hotmail accounts. Since I have my computer setup to
notify me if ActiveX is on a site, hotmail always gives me ActiveX warnings.
Recently I logged onto an old account and received a warning of that there
was a possible attempt to access my account by someone other than me.  It
said one of the possibilities that may have triggered the warning is I may
be on a different computer than when I set up the account.  That account was
so old it could be that I have not been there with my new computer.  I am
wondering if hotmail uses a modem ID or other computer ID as part of their
security.  I see no reason for Hotmail to use ActiveX.  I always say no to
them but can get my mail just fine.
--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b38ba6d28b5d349899e0@207.71.92.194...
>
> > I had no idea that could be done.  Is that done by web sites?
> > By ISP?
>
> For the VAST majority of Windows users with wide-open "nbname"
> service (UDP port 137) it's possible for sites and ISP's to get their
> MAC serial numbers ... just as ShieldsUP! demonstrates when it calls
> it a next-generation privacy violation.
>
> But some custom-code would need to run on the machine in order to
> pickup the drive's serial numbers.
>
> HOWEVER... any little ActiveX gizmo *COULD* do this, and many sites
> depend more and more on little ActiveX gizmos ... which *are* enabled
> by default.  So ... yes ... it's entirely possible for web sites to
> do this using ActiveX or Netscape "plug-ins".

In article <MPG.15b38e164205073b9899e1@207.71.92.194>, 
support@grc.com says...

> The actual printed on the drive serial number.  That serial number is 
> also recorded on an special 'read-only' sector at the factory and is 
> available through to Windows through the use of some IOCTL commands 
> to read the drive's identification information.  Nothing to it.
> 

I think think perhaps it needs to be made clear that this 
*is* a trivial piece of information to acquire...
but only so long as a piece of code is allowed to run on 
that persons computer. Be it an ident daemon, or whatever. 
And this can no question be enforced on a private news 
server.
But as it stands, today, now, posting to any grc newsgroup 
does not reveal your hdd serial.
-- 
Bloated Elvis
Search the Box Network
http://astalavista.box.sk

I'm more than willing to register with thee,

I have nothing to hide with an ID tag on me...

To cut back on trolls or whatever need be,

I'll sign up and post for all to see.

Agree as you may, disagree as you might,

BUT STAY AND HELP S.G. FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT!

HARK! A troll lurks yonder in the tall grass

PUMMEL AND POUND AND KICK HIS....butt

> I have a few throw away hotmail accounts. Since I have my
> computer setup to notify me if ActiveX is on a site, ...

Right, but you're security-aware and those warnings are NOT the IE 
defaults.  So while YOU are certainly (or probably) okay ... the rest 
of the herd is certainly taggable ... and has no idea.  :(

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

> I think think perhaps it needs to be made clear that this 
> *is* a trivial piece of information to acquire...
> but only so long as a piece of code is allowed to run on 
> that persons computer. Be it an ident daemon, or whatever. 
> And this can no question be enforced on a private news 
> server.
> But as it stands, today, now, posting to any grc newsgroup 
> does not reveal your hdd serial.

Absolutely right.  Thanks for reinforcing the point.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

mc wrote:
> 
> Steve Gibson wrote:
> >
> > mc,

     <cut>

> My reason for posting my obviously strong opinions is to encourage others who feel the same way, but are
> afraid of being flamed, to post their opinions as well.

Well, I can see your point of view very well mc. 

 
> > contributions would be missed, but we'd manage to go on without you.
> > You would, of course, still be able to read the groups, only not
> > post.


You almost sound rude, Steve.  You don't mean to sound so *cold*, do
you?

 
> At such time as you require, in ANY way, ANY form of unique identifyier
> to access these groups im out, no reading, no sending, no subscription.
> Period. And from other posts in one of the threads related to this I can
> see im not alone.

I can very much see your point of view mc.  This "unique identifier"
thing is ABSURD!  Why it goes against everything I've learned up to this
point ... in *these* groups!  It is quite CONTRARY.  I'm getting very
dizzy from all of this, ya know.  Because.  When I came here 3/4 of a
year ago, I picked up quite quickly on the need to have to protect one's
privacy ... firewalls, av/trojan scanners, proxies, cookie and referrer
blockers and Steve was the leader of the pack in this.  I find it
*impossible*, yes, IMPOSSIBLE to believe that he would actually DO
this.  In fact, I think his post must have been hijacked and
"some*thing* in-the-middle" rewrote it. 

> > But you're 100% right -- it's an ID tag -- no two ways about it.
> > However the technology would be designed so that it ONLY had meaning
> > to GRC and was ONLY accessible to GRC. And it would NEVER be
> > "retargeted" and used for any other purpose.


But, that's what they all say.  Just because it "ONLY" has "meaning to
GRC and was ONLY accessible to GRC" doesn't make it any different than
any of the other people who try to do this to us ... the very people we
talk about in these groups and try to *protect* ourselves from.  WHY is
it *ok* for you to do it Steve?  To go against the very ethos-grain of
grc?  Privacy.  

And, I read what you would use is ACTIVE-X !!!!!!!!!!  (Getting out
cross and holding it up to monitor ... )  You jest, no?  If STEVE G.
uses ACTIVE-X, then everybody will think it's ok to turn on ACTIVE-X
!!!!!  Then what?!  Catastropy!  Why, there'll no place to go ... no
place to hide ... we'll have to uninvent the computer ... we'll
implode!  

 
> Neither, who, which, what, where, when, why, or how matters. Its
> tracking, and IMHO little different from those bits of software you have
> previously exposed.

Yes, you are absolutely 100% correct.  AFAIK.


> > Given those criteria, if this comes to pass, you'll need to decide
> > what you want to do.


Hmmmm.  IF "this comes to pass" you say.  Say it ain't so ...  tell me
it's a ...

 
> No decision to make. Open and shut case.

I'm glad you can be so certain.  But, you wouldn't be one of those
people who would appear to disappear, but then come back in another
guise, would you?  Could you?  Should you?

*Hey*, what's goin' on here?  There are two *spirts* here.  One FOR and
one AGAINST.  Tagging, that is.  The tagging FOR *spirit* leaves me
feeling just a little bit uneasy ... how can they be FOR what the whole
of these discussion groups are supposedly AGAINST?  

HOW can it OK HERE, but not OK out THERE?

waves,

Take it easy, please.

I did *not* say that I would use ActiveX (and I certainly would not).  

I a different thread I said that ActiveX *could* be used in that way 
by web sites.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

If this comes to fruition, I too will no longer read this group.

That will be a sad day for me, but I believe there is a higher
principal here and once we allow this to happen, we all will
have crossed over to the dark side.

It's bad enough about not being able to quote all text, and a real
pain in the arse.  Since the attacks, things have changed, and=20
regardless of which pair of rose color glasses you use, it feels
like the bad guys have won, they have forced changes upon us
by Steve's capitulation, is it all about Steve and what he wants?
Or do the MANY users who have participated and followed grc
have any say?  Is grc just Steve Gibson?  As his flock, are we going
to always allow ourselves to be lead blindly down whatever road
he happens to travel at the moment?

How about actually listening to your followers for a change?  Deep down
many of you must know this is a terrible idea.

--=20
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
 mgbaker@bellsouth.net
 mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________

waves wrote:
> 
> mc wrote:
> >
> > Steve Gibson wrote:
> > >
> > > mc,
> 
>      <cut>
> 
> > My reason for posting my obviously strong opinions is to encourage others who feel the same way, but are
> > afraid of being flamed, to post their opinions as well.
> 
> Well, I can see your point of view very well mc.
> 
> 
> > > contributions would be missed, but we'd manage to go on without you.
> > > You would, of course, still be able to read the groups, only not
> > > post.
> 
> You almost sound rude, Steve.  You don't mean to sound so *cold*, do
> you?

Just to note, I took no offense. Steve was simply stating things as he
sees them, much as I do. Thats what most of us respect about Steve.

> 
> > At such time as you require, in ANY way, ANY form of unique identifyier
> > to access these groups im out, no reading, no sending, no subscription.
> > Period. And from other posts in one of the threads related to this I can
> > see im not alone.
> 
> I can very much see your point of view mc.  This "unique identifier"
> thing is ABSURD!  Why it goes against everything I've learned up to this
> point ... in *these* groups!  It is quite CONTRARY.  I'm getting very
> dizzy from all of this, ya know.  Because.  When I came here 3/4 of a
> year ago, I picked up quite quickly on the need to have to protect one's
> privacy ... firewalls, av/trojan scanners, proxies, cookie and referrer
> blockers and Steve was the leader of the pack in this.  I find it
> *impossible*, yes, IMPOSSIBLE to believe that he would actually DO
> this.  In fact, I think his post must have been hijacked and
> "some*thing* in-the-middle" rewrote it.

Hehe, my my, and I thot ~I~ was voiciferous. <G>

> 
> > > But you're 100% right -- it's an ID tag -- no two ways about it.
> > > However the technology would be designed so that it ONLY had meaning
> > > to GRC and was ONLY accessible to GRC. And it would NEVER be
> > > "retargeted" and used for any other purpose.
> 
> But, that's what they all say.  Just because it "ONLY" has "meaning to
> GRC and was ONLY accessible to GRC" doesn't make it any different than
> any of the other people who try to do this to us ... the very people we
> talk about in these groups and try to *protect* ourselves from.  WHY is
> it *ok* for you to do it Steve?  To go against the very ethos-grain of
> grc?  Privacy.

Personally I dont doubt that what Steve says is true, the the id's would
be used exclusively for the stated purpose. But it's STILL tracking.

> > Neither, who, which, what, where, when, why, or how matters. Its
> > tracking, and IMHO little different from those bits of software you have
> > previously exposed.
> 
> Yes, you are absolutely 100% correct.  AFAIK.
> 
> > > Given those criteria, if this comes to pass, you'll need to decide
> > > what you want to do.
> 
> Hmmmm.  IF "this comes to pass" you say.  Say it ain't so ...  tell me
> it's a ...
> 
> 
> > No decision to make. Open and shut case.
> 
> I'm glad you can be so certain.  But, you wouldn't be one of those
> people who would appear to disappear, but then come back in another
> guise, would you?  Could you?  Should you?

I would indeed feel strongly pulled to rejoin here even under the
restrictions. However that is specificly why I would not just cease to
post but still read, but rather totally unsubscribe from these groups
and this server.

> 
> *Hey*, what's goin' on here?  There are two *spirts* here.  One FOR and
> one AGAINST.  Tagging, that is.  The tagging FOR *spirit* leaves me
> feeling just a little bit uneasy ... how can they be FOR what the whole
> of these discussion groups are supposedly AGAINST?
> 
> HOW can it OK HERE, but not OK out THERE?

Very good question. Reminds me of lemmings. Which reminds me of M$.

MICHAEL wrote:
> 
> If this comes to fruition, I too will no longer read this group.
> 
> That will be a sad day for me, but I believe there is a higher
> principal here and once we allow this to happen, we all will
> have crossed over to the dark side.
> 
> It's bad enough about not being able to quote all text, and a real
> pain in the arse.  Since the attacks, things have changed, and=20

Actually thats one 'innovation' that I agree with. Not sure I like it
much, but I can easily see why Steve made it so. Storage space is
expensive, cheaper than a year ago, but still expensive.

> 
> How about actually listening to your followers for a change?  Deep down
> many of you must know this is a terrible idea.

Lemmings.

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> waves,
> 
> Take it easy, please.
> 
> I did *not* say that I would use ActiveX (and I certainly would not).
> 
> I a different thread I said that ActiveX *could* be used in that way
> by web sites.
> 

<grin>, I think waves went 'tidal'. ;)

It is so simple. Just think simple and you can figure it out.

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
<nospam@myaddress.invalid> wrote in message
news:3B49F320.63F8C5EF@cybrsolutions.com...
> Care to share?
>
> cybrsol@netscape.net
>
* Sarah wrote:
**
**no hoops just a secret way of counting....LOL
**
**--
**
**Sarah
**~~~~~~~~~~~
> * <nospam@myaddress.invalid> wrote in message
> * news:3B4932EF.E0E2E5FD@cybrsolutions.com...
> **"�Q�" wrote:
> ***
> ***And people who want to post legitimately might decide not to if they
had
> ***extra hoops to jump through to get here.
***
***I already post less due to the hoops I need to jump thru to get by
***Steve's new posting guidelines... :-(
***
***Corey

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message news:MPG.15b38ba6d28b5d349899e0@207.71.92.194...

> HOWEVER... any little ActiveX gizmo *COULD* do this, and many sites
> depend more and more on little ActiveX gizmos ... which *are* enabled
> by default.  So ... yes ... it's entirely possible for web sites to
> do this using ActiveX or Netscape "plug-ins".



Steve if this is true would having the TIF directory on a seperate partition
prevent the ActiveX gizmos from doing just as you describe? For example
Windows on the C:\ but the Temporary Internet Files on D:\ partition.

Also would an extended with volumes be any different?

Rob

mc wrote:
> 
> MICHAEL wrote:
> >
> > If this comes to fruition, I too will no longer read this group.
> >
> > That will be a sad day for me, but I believe there is a higher
> > principal here and once we allow this to happen, we all will
> > have crossed over to the dark side.
> >
> > It's bad enough about not being able to quote all text, and a real
> > pain in the arse.  Since the attacks, things have changed, and=20
> 
> Actually thats one 'innovation' that I agree with. Not sure I like it
> much, but I can easily see why Steve made it so. Storage space is
> expensive, cheaper than a year ago, but still expensive.

Yeah, I don't think it is too much to ask people to think a little bit
before they post.


> > How about actually listening to your followers for a change?

Reminds me of a song, the Kinks:  "...he's a dedicated follower of
fashion...".


> >  Deep down many of you must know this is a terrible idea.

What's a "terrible idea"?  "Actually listening to your followers"?  Is
that what you mean?


> Lemmings.

Let's say there were these lemmings, right?  And they were all following
their leader.  And the leader decided to go in a circle.  Eventually,
the leader would be right behind a lemming. So the leader is now
following the lemming.  Do leaders go in circles?  Hope not.  I don
wanna be followin' no lemmin'!!!

In article <9id22t$1heg$1@news.grc.com>, MICHAEL said...
> If this comes to fruition, I too will no longer read this group.
> 
> That will be a sad day for me, but I believe there is a higher
> principal here and once we allow this to happen, we all will
> have crossed over to the dark side.
> 
> It's bad enough about not being able to quote all text, and a real
> pain in the arse.  Since the attacks, things have changed, and
> regardless of which pair of rose color glasses you use, it feels
> like the bad guys have won, they have forced changes upon us
> by Steve's capitulation,

What changes have happened? (Apart from the QED filter).

> is it all about Steve and what he wants?

Yes. 

Though what he sometimes wants is to please us, even when whatever that 
takes isn't his own preference. The Google thing, for example. Having 
posters IP's showing for another.

> Or do the MANY users who have participated and followed grc
> have any say?  

When have we not?

> Is grc just Steve Gibson?  As his flock, are we going
> to always allow ourselves to be lead blindly down whatever road
> he happens to travel at the moment?

Sheesh, where have you been?

> How about actually listening to your followers for a change?  

For a change?! Wimbledon has just finished, so "You CANNOT be SERIOUS!!" 
comes to mind ;)

> Deep down many of you must know this is a terrible idea.

I think so too, but it may be the only answer. We'll see.

-- 
Milly

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message news:MPG.15b38e164205073b9899e1@207.71.92.194...

> The actual printed on the drive serial number.  That serial number is
> also recorded on an special 'read-only' sector at the factory and is
> available through to Windows through the use of some IOCTL commands
> to read the drive's identification information.  Nothing to it.


On my HP Pavilion I have an application called "dllapp.exe"
when executed brings up all my serial numbers and software IDs.
I wonder could someone run this from the internet without me
knowing it?

"HP Pavilion Support Information"

"Model #: "
"Serial #: "
"Support ID #: "
"Software Build #: "
"Product #: "
"Hardware BOM #: "
"Software BOM #: "
"Service ID #: "

On Sun, 8 Jul 2001 19:44:34 +0100, "Padraig"
<padraig@zzzzmoggies.co.uk> wrote:

>Well said Oversoul...
>
>I can recognise the threads now and keep away from them, other newbie visitors
>may not and will get the wrong impression of what these news groups are about.

I am one of those newbie visitors ( since last Saturday) but I think
by lurking one may see who are the Trolls and who arent. 

Wading thru tons of messages, has just  become an addition ot using 
the Internet

Zeus 
:) 

mc wrote:
> 
> Steve Gibson wrote:
> >
> > waves,
> >
> > Take it easy, please.
> >
> > I did *not* say that I would use ActiveX (and I certainly would not).

I stand corrected on the 8nit* I should have said "could" instead of
"would" but then *I* meant implied that if you DID go ahead with it that
is what *IS* used and you hinted at by using the word "gizmo" as applied
to your past tricks that you were going to do this in the future.  :) 


> > I a different thread I said that ActiveX *could* be used in that way
> > by web sites.

As above.


> <grin>, I think waves went 'tidal'. ;)

*'tidal'*?  I was very laid back when I wrote that post.  "cALM
dOWN"???  Why, I'm at peace, man.  I can't get no calmer, else I'll be
departed.  Ok?

"CRH" <commandrdata@do_you_uhmmm_yahoo?.com> wrote in message
news:9ic140$634$1@news.grc.com...
>
> "Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.15b318b63e7d49f59899db@207.71.92.194...
> > Abujamal,
>
> [...]
> > As for implementing this system ...
> >
> > <<sigh>>
> >
> > I have SO MUCH to do already.
> >
> Steve, maybe it's time to hire some more people to help you out. I
> can't tell to what degree you are satisfied or dissatisfied with your
> productivity level but it's a thought.

If you like, Steve, I can send you my resume. I'd love nothing more than the
chance to work for Gibson Research Corporation.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

Gang,

Change is often difficult.  We see this all the time here.  Virtually 
every change I've made has been the subject of great "flying fur" ... 
but once things have settled back down the *vast* majority have been 
pleased with the result.

So I recognize that implementing some sort of "Troll-Guard" is going 
to cause dissension.  That's not even a question.  It's non-data 
since it's a non-event.  But it does provide valuable feedback 
nonetheless ... and it keeps my "thinking cap" humming.

For example ... one possibility (among millions) would be for only 
designated newsgroups to have have "Troll Protect".  For example, I 
am truly annoyed by all of the nonsense in 'news.feedback'.  I'd like 
it cleaned up.

So it would be entirely possible to have only 'news.feedback' 
protected by some form of "Troll-Guard".  Those who objected to my 
means for implementing it would still be welcome to read what goes on 
here, and they could of course post elsewhere.  But they would be 
unable to post here.

Then if, as time goes by, and people get used to "the change", and 
more and more people are running the "Troll-Guard" system for posting 
access to the various groups I am active in, there might be mounting 
requests for similar Troll protection for the other groups ... and it 
could easily be provided.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Another somewhat-related issue to consider ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------

I have been thinking about and looking for some way to manage future 
large beta programs. 

When we begin working on the details of Spoofarino, it's not at all 
clear to me that I want to have a fully open Beta.  Ultimately, of 
course, it will be freeware for everyone.  But there are people here 
who do not have my or grc's best interests at heart -- Torinak's 
"finking" to Pournelle comes to mind since it just occurred, but 
there are ample additional examples.

So I have been wondering for some time how I might have a LARGE beta, 
and allow people to retain their anonymity, while allowing *me* to 
also exercise some control over who is able to participate. After 
all, it is MY beta to manage ... to a somewhat greater degree than 
this being "my" newsgroup server since the public content here is 
entirely communal.

Participation in such an early-development program would help me a 
GREAT DEAL, but individual participation would be a privilege earned 
here through a history of CONSTRUCTIVE participation.  I'm not 
looking for a pool of "yes-men", but a degree of demonstrated sanity 
would be a welcome prerequisite.

So ... *if* I had a robust anonymous ID system, which allowed people 
to retain total anonymity, while being simultaneously recognized for 
their contributions here over time -- in a fashion that would not 
allow their identity and contributions to be hijacked by anyone else 
-- that would be a huge benefit to me, to this community, and 
ultimately to those worthy contributors.

In other words, it may well be that some form of anonymous tag will 
be a prerequisite for future controlled beta programs.  I would 
COMPLETELY understand and respect the feelings of those persons who 
would object on principle to anything like that, while at the same 
time being quite content to employ such a system.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

mc wrote in message <3B49F260.DE355C6D@mctech.org>...
>>
>At such time as you require, in ANY way, ANY form of unique
identifyier
>to access these groups im out, no reading, no sending, no
subscription.
>Period. And from other posts in one of the threads related to
this I can
>see im not alone.
>


<snipped....>

>Its
>tracking, and IMHO little different from those bits of software
you have
>previously exposed.
>


Im afraid I'd have to agree. It would be tantamount to selling
ones soul to the devil. I would reluctantly have to join you in
exile. (Maybe we need an alt.grc.exiles ?)

The reason some of us in the computer industry are happy to post
here but not in public newsgroups is (a) the absence of large
scale trolling, spam and other rubbish, and (b) Steve Gibsons
(apparently former?) opinions on tracking and privacy which
currently provide an umbrella for those of us with similar
views.

I'd ask is all this really necessary? Given that what has
occurred is more like a school playground squabble perhaps
sending in the SAS is a bit over the top.....

regards,
Zippy.

Ogden Computer Guy wrote:
> "CRH" <commandrdata@do_you_uhmmm_yahoo?.com> wrote in message
> news:9ic140$634$1@news.grc.com...
> > "Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.15b318b63e7d49f59899db@207.71.92.194...
> > > Abujamal,
> > > As for implementing this system ...
> > > <<sigh>>
> > > I have SO MUCH to do already.
> > Steve, maybe it's time to hire some more people to help you out. I
> > can't tell to what degree you are satisfied or dissatisfied with your
> > productivity level but it's a thought.
> 
> If you like, Steve, I can send you my resume. I'd love nothing more than the
> chance to work for Gibson Research Corporation.

Same here, Id love to do r&d like Steve does. ;)

And before anyone says anything, just because I disagree with Steve on
occasion doesnt mean I dont like or respect him. If everyone agreed with
everyone we'd all be Microsoft Zombies ... wait a sec ... we are anyway
arent we. <<grin>>

MC

In article <MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194>, support@grc.com 
says...
> Gang,
> 
> Change is often difficult.  We see this all the time here.  Virtually 
> every change I've made has been the subject of great "flying fur" ... 
> but once things have settled back down the *vast* majority have been 
> pleased with the result.
> 
I must admit you must do something to correct this silliness. I'm for one 
willing to try the new system because i care about grc of old.
We all have an option to participate or not in your attempt to better 
this site.

Regards,

Krilati

 
| So ... *if* I had a robust anonymous ID system, which allowed people 
| to retain total anonymity, while being simultaneously recognized for 
| their contributions here over time -- in a fashion that would not 
| allow their identity and contributions to be hijacked by anyone else 
| -- that would be a huge benefit to me, to this community, and 
| ultimately to those worthy contributors.

Perhaps the 'archives' would be an aid to you in this regard.
___
Ted

May I suggest if there is some sort of "Troll Guard" implemented, that some
sort of rules be posted concerning the "Troll Guard".  For example in
ten-forward.politics, I defended my opinions which were often like swimming
upstream, so to speak.  I was accused of trolling because I was not
politically correct or of the same opinion as a vocal majority there.
Figured that in a group called politics, strong opinion one way or the other
is acceptable.  But that same posting would not be acceptable in feedback or
other newsgroups that would be off topic.  I am still not sure of when a
participant become a "troll."

--

Sarah
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194...
> Gang,
>
> So I recognize that implementing some sort of "Troll-Guard" is going
> to cause dissension.  That's not even a question.  It's non-data

Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>  Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:22:34 -0700 : 

>
>For example ... one possibility (among millions) would be for only 
>designated newsgroups to have have "Troll Protect".  

Excellent. The sooner the better.

>For example, I 
>am truly annoyed by all of the nonsense in 'news.feedback'.  I'd like 
>it cleaned up.

To halve the amount of nonsense would be a big step.

Hans

Analogy time (inline):

"MICHAEL" <mgbaker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9id22t$1heg$1@news.grc.com...
> If this comes to fruition, I too will no longer read this group.
> That will be a sad day for me, but I believe there is a higher principal
here and once we allow this to happen, we all will have crossed over to the
dark side.

***WE allow this to happen? Since when did this become a WE situation
regarding the expense, time and aggravation involved in maintaining OUR
server?
>
> It's bad enough about not being able to quote all text, and a real pain in
the arse.  Since the attacks, things have changed, and regardless of which
pair of rose color glasses you use, it feels like the bad guys have won,
they have forced changes upon us by Steve's capitulation, is it all about
Steve and what he wants?

***Do you feel the same about laws against drinking and driving? Finding a
designated driver is probably also a pain in the ass. Additionally, many
laws have been passed regarding this which have been foisted upon us because
of "the bad guys," and yet, we have had to capitulate to the State because
that's they way it has to be. Hell, try passing the written portion of a
driver's license exam today as compared to 10-15 years ago. S**t happened!

In your home, you have rules. Guests in your home are expected to abide by
same. A guest asks if he may use your bathroom and you allow him to use the
full bath upstairs as opposed to the downstairs powder room. The guest,
while upstairs, rummages through your medicine cabinet, the drawers in your
bedroom dresser, etc. He takes some small thing, of immaterial monetary
value, but of significant value to you, nonetheless. This creates havoc for
you in that not only is that possession missing, he has also created a
mistrust and the trust can never be replaced. It wasn't an earth-shattering
loss, merely important and valuable to you and no one understands why you
are in such misery; it was a small thing afterall. The fact that the guest
abused the privilege of the trust, instilled by an on-going friendship, by
performing a small act of mistrust, is sometimes more devastating than a
larger loss which can be replaced. If this were my server and those people
who visited here began to post beyond my rules, created havoc, and broke
something, I'd be feeling the same. I offered you the space (bathroom), you
came in (to the medicine cabinet) and you took something (meds, money,
whatever) and left, still acting the friend. Do I look at you differently
now? Positively. And, although I have a problem with you, I want to somehow
maintain the friendship so what do I do? Next time, you use the downstairs
powder room where I know I can keep an eye on your activities (you have no
other place to go to rummage and pilfer) and I know that you can do no
damage of any consequence. Simple, really.

> Or do the MANY users who have participated and followed grc have any say?
Is grc just Steve Gibson?  As his flock, are we going to always allow
ourselves to be lead blindly down whatever road he happens to travel at the
moment?

***Flock, as in sheep? No one lead you down a road you didn't choose to
take. While I may not like or agree with the methods which may become
necessary, no one is tying my hands to the keyboard. I'll make a choice to
stay or leave depending upon how intrusive or obnoxious, or partially
either, I find the restrictions to be.
>
> How about actually listening to your followers for a change?  Deep down
many of you must know this is a terrible idea.

***Had you spent enough time here, Michael, you would already know that he
does. That is what makes this group so democratic. I'm no ass-kisser and
this is probably my first post in feedback, but I have read hundreds of
threads in here and I have no doubt that SG will do what he has to do after
taking all opinions into consideration. The thing you must remember,
however, is that you are a guest on this server. You have no more, and no
less, right to post than anyone else. If you disagree with the host, leave
the party. I hope it doesn't come to that but the mans gotta do what the
mans gotta do
>
> --=20
> Michael
> Charlotte, NC  USA

Pat

Ted,

> 
> Perhaps the 'archives' would be an aid to you in this regard.
> 

They might be indeed *if* we had a non-spoofable ID being added
to headers back then.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:22:34 -0700, Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>
wrote:

>So ... *if* I had a robust anonymous ID system, which allowed people 
>to retain total anonymity, while being simultaneously recognized for 
>their contributions here over time -- in a fashion that would not 
>allow their identity and contributions to be hijacked by anyone else 
>-- that would be a huge benefit to me, to this community, and 
>ultimately to those worthy contributors.
>
>In other words, it may well be that some form of anonymous tag will 
>be a prerequisite for future controlled beta programs.  I would 
>COMPLETELY understand and respect the feelings of those persons who 
>would object on principle to anything like that, while at the same 
>time being quite content to employ such a system.

Steve,

While I am rather new here (and I almost define "lurker" - only one
other post so far) it would seem that an anonymous system is basically
already in place - the Cecil-ID.  It's not fully anonymous in that the
tag is linked to a specific poster configuration and is
reused/persistent, however it is anonymous in that there is no real
personal data behind the tag.  Perhaps Beta testers could be invited
to establish a new Cecil-ID (or Cecil-ID-like) tag specifically for
Beta test response and participation in a newsgroup setting? or ported
over to an SMTP system for email participation?  With the generation
of a new tag, the ID sign up process could request system information
(e.g., OS, RAM, NIC, Router, Software firewall, AV, and the like)
which would then be cross-referenced to each beta post/bug report.

Anyway, I enjoy continued browsing of your site and the newsgroups you
maintain (and I am becoming better informed - wait.. rephase.. make
that "I am becoming better informed and more paraniod" <g>); and I
especially enjoy reading many of the arguments on both sides (all
three, four and five sides?!!?!?) of an issue.

Diebolus

"The light at the end of the tunnel is a muzzle flash!"

Sometimes it's necessary to cut off your own finger in order to save your
own arm.  LET'S GO FOR IT!

Thank you.
I did not realize that one's MAC address was available to anyone on the
other side of a router.

I performed an NBScan on my test LAN and captured the resulting UDP port 137
packets. Lo and behold, there was the target's MAC address in the return
packet within the packet payload, and not just in the Ethernet header. Of
course, this information could survive traversing a router.

Though I haven't considered the privacy implications of this, I do
appreciate being better informed.


"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b38ba6d28b5d349899e0@207.71.92.194...

snip

> For the VAST majority of Windows users with wide-open "nbname"
> service (UDP port 137) it's possible for sites and ISP's to get their
> MAC serial numbers ... just as ShieldsUP! demonstrates when it calls
> it a next-generation privacy violation.
>
snip
_________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

The like it or leave it mouth piece has spoken.

I was wondering how long before one of you invoked
that cry.

Since I mostly read and I am open as to my identity, the
posting tag would not affect me much.

It's just something I thought Steve was against and if
most of the folks in these groups would SIMPLY STOP
FEEDING THE TROLLS, things would calm down without
tagging.

--=20
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
 mgbaker@bellsouth.net
 mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________

Steve -

I am a lurker and a learner. What you are proposing I think is a great idea.
I liken what you are providing to a classroom where great debates and
exchange of info takes place. When food fights breakout no one can learn.
Normally in other newsgroups when the flame wars start I simply killfile the
trolls and filter out the noise. The problem here is that so many of the
people involved are also those that I have learned from in the past.

In order for as many people to benefit from your knowledge and contributions
as well as others that come here I think you are fully justified in doing
whatever is necessary to keep the "classroom" under control.

my two cents and thanks.

In article <9id9r3$1s97$1@news.grc.com>, bc_acadiaNIX@THEhotmailJUNK.com 
says...
> Sometimes it's necessary to cut off your own finger in order to save your
> own arm.  LET'S GO FOR IT!

At the risk of sounding preachy:

"If they right eye offends thee, pluck it out, cast it from thee, better that 
one part of thee should perish that the whole"

Regards

- Teddybear Hugger - aka Anthony

> "If they right eye offends thee, pluck it out, cast it from thee, better that 
> one part of thee should perish that the whole"

Typomonster! "If THY right eye" "perish than the whole"

Regards

Ares :P

On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 18:03:11 -0400, Diebolus <dummy_name@hotmail.com>
wrote:

<snip>
>>In other words, it may well be that some form of anonymous tag

Like a number? I'm not Jewish but that is one seriously bad sounding
idea.

<snip>
>With the generation >of a new tag, the ID sign up process could request system information (e.g., OS, RAM, NIC, Router, Software firewall, AV, and the like)
>which would then be cross-referenced to each beta post/bug report.
<snip>

I'm trying to get people a little fired up over PhoenixNet and now I
see this?

Diebolus,

In order to be able to use the Cecil-ID system as a non-spoofable 
identifier we would need to add a layer of encryption or hashing 
during posting.  In other words, the user's Cecil-ID would NOT show 
up, but rather an encrypted version of the same thing would.

The advantage of this is that it would not be possible for someone to 
steal another person's Cecil-ID from their postings in order to gain 
privileged access.

The problem with this system is that, if we were to deny access based 
upon a Cecil-ID, people would always be able to generate a new Cecil-
ID in order to "re-enable" their access.

We could use it as a "granting" system, where access would be granted 
based upon their Cecil-ID, but a "granted user" could always give 
their private ID to a non-granted user (to use until they abused the 
privilege) then get a new ID and get it authorized claiming to have 
"forgotten" their old ID.  (Although then I suppose that old ID could 
be immediately terminated.)

But in any event, I *MUCH* prefer the default of allowing everyone to 
have permission by default and only removing permission in the event 
of abuse of the posting freedom here.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

So far as I know, Bill Gates hasn't Authored any significant code in his life.

Regards

Ares

Bargepole ...

> Thank you.
> I did not realize that one's MAC address was available to
> anyone on the other side of a router.

Right, normally the Ethernet-layer wouldn't cross past the local 
layer, but for some unknowable reason (and I've never known why) 
Microsoft chose to add that info to the NBName reply.  Go figure.

> Though I haven't considered the privacy implications of this,
> I do appreciate being better informed.

In the case of a NIC connection, it uniquely identifies the adapter 
and, by extension, the user.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> Ted,
> 
> >
> > Perhaps the 'archives' would be an aid to you in this regard.
> >
> 
> They might be indeed *if* we had a non-spoofable ID being added
> to headers back then.

Seems to me most of the serious contributers are and were easily
identifyable by their style, 'handle', signature, and/or email address.
For example every one of my posts to these groups should be easily
identifyable by all the above (well my posts of the last few days are
missing a sig *sigh*). In fact, most of the 'trolls' and other 'hangers
on' should also be easily identifyable in the same way.

And FWIW while my true identity isnt in any way revealed by any post,
there is quite sufficient material in the archives to find my full name,
mailing address, home address, phone number(s), etc. And in fact at
least two people have done so. I know there are at least two other
people who can be located the same way.

MC

"WebGuy" <ssgg86@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9icsud$19lj$1@news.grc.com...
: I'm more than willing to register with thee,
:
: I have nothing to hide with an ID tag on me...
:
: To cut back on trolls or whatever need be,
:
: I'll sign up and post for all to see.
:
: Agree as you may, disagree as you might,
:
: BUT STAY AND HELP S.G. FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT!
:
: HARK! A troll lurks yonder in the tall grass
:
: PUMMEL AND POUND AND KICK HIS....butt

Very good poetry, WebGuy! Reminds me of a song I have in MP3 (or it may
be WAV) format on my Hard Drive.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

"Ares" <sk_tigerk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b4d06474827c109896bd@news.grc.com...
: So far as I know, Bill Gates hasn't Authored any significant code in
his life.

On the contrary, he authored a very significant piece of code. It was
controlling a device designed (by Gates) to control traffic lights.

During the demonstration the controller crashed.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

"Krilati" <green@delonghi.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b434de17f2703498968a@news.grc.com...
: In article <MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194>, support@grc.com
: says...

: I must admit you must do something to correct this silliness. I'm for
one
: willing to try the new system because i care about grc of old.
: We all have an option to participate or not in your attempt to better
: this site.

I agree on both counts, and if this is a call for beta testers, count me
in.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b3d18ef7542c949899ee@207.71.92.194...
: Diebolus,
:
: In order to be able to use the Cecil-ID system as a non-spoofable
: identifier we would need to add a layer of encryption or hashing
: during posting.  In other words, the user's Cecil-ID would NOT show
: up, but rather an encrypted version of the same thing would.

How about a 2-part CECIL-ID? The pass phrase generates a Private
CECIL-ID which is then placed into the post in the manner that the
public CECIL-ID is now. As part of the same process that moves it to the
custom CECIL-ID header, it would be encrypted to a public version of
that CECIL-ID. The effect is that 1) we'd all need new CECIL-IDs, 2)
they'd be mandatory for posting in Troll-proofed groups, and 3) you'd be
using an established system with minor changes for hugely different
effect.

: The advantage of this is that it would not be possible for someone to
: steal another person's Cecil-ID from their postings in order to gain
: privileged access.
:
: The problem with this system is that, if we were to deny access based
: upon a Cecil-ID, people would always be able to generate a new Cecil-
: ID in order to "re-enable" their access.

You could require a username and pass phrase, with the username taking
the form of a valid email address. The email address could be used to
send the information as to what the Private CECIL-ID is--thereby
verifying its validity. The encryption process could also incorporate
the email address, to avoid the circumstance where there would be two
posters with the same pass phrase (and therefore the same private
CECIL-ID).

: We could use it as a "granting" system, where access would be granted
: based upon their Cecil-ID, but a "granted user" could always give
: their private ID to a non-granted user (to use until they abused the
: privilege) then get a new ID and get it authorized claiming to have
: "forgotten" their old ID.  (Although then I suppose that old ID could
: be immediately terminated.)
:
: But in any event, I *MUCH* prefer the default of allowing everyone to
: have permission by default and only removing permission in the event
: of abuse of the posting freedom here.

As do I.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

> On the contrary, he authored a very significant piece of code. It was
> controlling a device designed (by Gates) to control traffic lights.
>
> During the demonstration the controller crashed.

As did half the traffic?

Actually, I think I've satisfied myself with a plausible explanation. NBName
is to Netbios what ARP is to IP. So, the NBName reply provides the
interrogating host with "parsible" info within the packet payload. And
Netbios is non-routable because it only uses MAC addresses.

Anyone with security sense would disable internet-wide communication on the
NBName service. In the case of uninformed users, should a hosts' NBName
service be fully exposed to the internet, I think that host would have much
more pronounced and egregious security and privacy vulnerabilities than that
of  MAC address exposure. N'est pas?

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b3d597fec76c169899f1@207.71.92.194...
> Bargepole ...
>
> > Thank you.
> > I did not realize that one's MAC address was available to
> > anyone on the other side of a router.
>
> Right, normally the Ethernet-layer wouldn't cross past the local
> layer, but for some unknowable reason (and I've never known why)
> Microsoft chose to add that info to the NBName reply.  Go figure.
>
> > Though I haven't considered the privacy implications of this,
> > I do appreciate being better informed.
>
> In the case of a NIC connection, it uniquely identifies the adapter
> and, by extension, the user.
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:9idera$23e6$1@news.grc.com...
:
: > On the contrary, he authored a very significant piece of code. It
was
: > controlling a device designed (by Gates) to control traffic lights.
: >
: > During the demonstration the controller crashed.
:
: As did half the traffic?

No, fortunately this demonstration was conducted at his mother's house
on her kitchen table.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

I'm all for a little change.  The recent rash of garbage here has
almost made me delete all the groups because the amount of trash is
way over the amount of knowledge gained  and "fun" had while hanging
out here.
 
It seems a lot of people will NOT resist from feeding the trolls!   I
have killfiled more people over this past week than I've had to do in
almost a year!  [I don't feel it necessary to publish their name(s)]

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:22:34 -0700, Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>
wrote:

>Gang,
>
>Change is often difficult.  We see this all the time here.

Steve,

Why not just remove offending posts?

There are quite a few regulars here that you know and can be trusted,
in other words, a sort of moderated group.

You are going to make this a censored group one way or another.
How about doing without making all of us jump through hoops and
punishing the masses for some rotten eggs, which are made worse
by some "regulars".


--=20
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
 mgbaker@bellsouth.net
 mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________

Steve
I disagree with you on some things, agree with you on others and am
waiting for further data before I reach a conclusion on others.  On
this, I disagree with you.
I will miss the pleasures  of reading here, of posting here,
and of testing any software you might create.
The day that your Tagging system comes into effect will be a sad day.
Little yellow triangles, little stars, permanent numbers, no I think
not.  For a privacy advocate this is apostasy.
CK

Steve Gibson <support@grc.com> wrote:

>.......... I am truly annoyed by all of the nonsense in 'news.feedback'.
> I'd like it cleaned up.

You, me, and MANY others, I'm sure!

>So it would be entirely possible to have only 'news.feedback' 
>protected by some form of "Troll-Guard".  Those who objected to my 
>means for implementing it would still be welcome to read what goes on 
>here, and they could of course post elsewhere.  But they would be 
>unable to post here.

Steve,

it's YOUR news server, and you are absolutely empowered to do with it
as you please.  But as long as you're asking our opinions, mine is to
GO FOR IT, and the SOONER the BETTER.

Nonsense, indeed.

"Ogden Computer Guy" <iamkristoffer@hotsmell.com> wrote in message
news:9idfdb$243v$1@news.grc.com...
> No, fortunately this demonstration was conducted at his mother's house
> on her kitchen table.
If she was anything like my Mother then he'd have been told "Bill, I don't
know why you don't go an play football with the other boys instead of
messing about with that, you'll never get a job that way...."

Charlie

Turn left at the third coffee cup past the ketchup...

Ditto 

:)

Ares

Salaam!

Old White Hat wrote:

> Steve Gibson wrote:
>> ... I am truly annoyed by all of the nonsense in
>> 'news.feedback'.  I'd like it cleaned up.
> You, me, and MANY others, I'm sure!

   The trolls come to where you're posting, Steve, along with quite a
few others including myself, who imagine that our two cents is worth
something.

>> So it would be entirely possible to have only 'news.feedback'
>> protected by some form of "Troll-Guard."  Those who objected
>> to my means for implementing it would still be welcome to
>> read what goes on here, and they could of course post elsewhere.
>> But they would be unable to post here.

   I think that's the best solution I've heard yet.  Sign me up, please,
and for the beta stuff, too, which I missed in the weeks before I
discovered these newsgroups.

> it's YOUR news server, and you are absolutely empowered to
> do with it as you please.  But as long as you're asking our
> opinions, mine is to GO FOR IT, and the SOONER the BETTER.

   Finally a place to toss in my druthers.  I agree.

> Nonsense, indeed.

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Does anybody here remember the Nanoprobe testing?  As Steve was developing
it, hundreds of people tested the beta versions and posted their results so
Steve could see all the problems with different hardware/software
configurations.  Steve said that this helped him ernormously.  (I got a kick
out of it, too).

I see the feedback newsgroup as serving that same purpose - feedback (as its
name implies).  This particular newgroup is mainly for Steve's benefit, not
ours. There are a couple of dozen other newsgroups that Steve has kindly
created for "us".

Steve:  My choice is to use the anonymous ID for the feedback group and
leave the others as they are.  If you later create new groups for feedback
on specific projects, you could make them ID-required groups if you thought
it necessary.

Ed

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194...
> Gang,
<snip>
> So it would be entirely possible to have only 'news.feedback'
> protected by some form of "Troll-Guard".  Those who objected to my
> means for implementing it would still be welcome to read what goes on
> here, and they could of course post elsewhere.  But they would be
> unable to post here.

"MICHAEL" <mgbaker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9idgj5$25ou$1@news.grc.com...
> Steve,
>
> Why not just remove offending posts?

Kelly is out there, I'm sure...........

--
Live Long and Prosper,
CRH 8^)>

Steve Gibson wrote:

 
>> Are you are talking about the number obtained from a dir
>> command or the actual "printed on the drive" serial number?
> 
> The actual printed on the drive serial number.  That serial
> number is also recorded on an special 'read-only' sector at the
> factory and is available through to Windows through the use of
> some IOCTL commands
> to read the drive's identification information.  Nothing to it.
> 
HI Steve

        How about Linux or one of the other OS's?  Most of the 
Trolls use Windows xxx.

-- 
        DaR

Remove the spam to reply.

In article <MPG.15b4d06474827c109896bd@news.grc.com>, 
sk_tigerk@hotmail.com says...
> So far as I know, Bill Gates hasn't Authored any significant code in his life.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Ares
> 
Show me your code. (couldn't resist)I really don't have the 
energy to go dig for links, suffice it to say, he has. You 
can either go look for yourself or disbelieve me.
-- 
Bloated Elvis
Search the Box Network
http://astalavista.box.sk

Yep, I recall the traffic lights demo being mentioned on a how Bill Gates
started life sort of documentary.

And I believe he developed a rudimentary "Basic" for his little machine. Had
to be rudimantary because of system constraints and had to be authored in
assembler (or direct machine code) for the same reasons.

"Bloated Elvis" <thel8elvis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b43d3f25a1802d9896fd@news.grc.com...
> In article <MPG.15b4d06474827c109896bd@news.grc.com>,
> sk_tigerk@hotmail.com says...
> Show me your code. (couldn't resist)I really don't have the
> energy to go dig for links, suffice it to say, he has. You
> can either go look for yourself or disbelieve me.

> On the contrary, he authored a very significant piece of code.
> It was controlling a device designed (by Gates) to control
> traffic lights.
> 
> During the demonstration the controller crashed.

Yeah ... the company went by the catchy name of "Traff'O'Data".


But, of course, that was a long time ago.  :)   However, they did 
stop letting Bill name their products.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

> Anyone with security sense would disable internet-wide
> communication on the NBName service. In the case of uninformed
> users, should a hosts' NBName service be fully exposed to the
> internet, I think that host would have much more pronounced and
> egregious security and privacy vulnerabilities than that of MAC
> address exposure. N'est pas?

Right.

But in the typical case the user is just the typical Windows user.  
They *all* have NetBIOS flapping in the breeze across the Internet. 
What does that tell you about their security?

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve Gibson wrote:

> In other words, it may well be that some form of anonymous tag will
> be a prerequisite for future controlled beta programs.  I would
> COMPLETELY understand and respect the feelings of those persons who
> would object on principle to anything like that, while at the same
> time being quite content to employ such a system.

I have tremendous respect for others' privacy, but little for most
aspects of my own. My name and e-mail address are real on every post as
is the URL of my site which carries address and phone number (among
other things).

Whatever you do will be fine with me and I hope you'll let me play in
that sandbox.

Mike
-- 
mrichter@cpl.net
http://www.mrichter.com/

Same here Mike

"Mike Richter" <mrichter@cpl.net> wrote in message
news:3B4A7839.3036A8FB@cpl.net...

> I have tremendous respect for others' privacy, but little for most
> aspects of my own. My name and e-mail address are real on every post as
> is the URL of my site which carries address and phone number (among
> other things).

> > So far as I know, Bill Gates hasn't Authored any significant code in his life.
> > 
> Show me your code. (couldn't resist)I really don't have the 
> energy to go dig for links, suffice it to say, he has. You 
> can either go look for yourself or disbelieve me.
> 

Dis being why uhm always putting 'so far as i know' on da tings uhm posten.

Me knowledge only go say him buying dat dere MSDOS softwarez from two udder 
guyz. To me knowledge, Billy Gates, him being ruteless business man, but not 
him being significant softwarez autor.

(im having de shot as de spell chekar, becoz it tellin I spell tings wrong all 
de time, becoz him american spell chekar, wherez me bein Auzzie man! - Dis 
learn him bigtime!)

Regards

Anthony

> But, of course, that was a long time ago.  :)   However, they did
> stop letting Bill name their products.

And promptly wrote the first of many disclaimers?

Hmm... how would they display their famous BSOD trademark with only Red
Amber and Green?

xyz wrote:
> 
> i don't even have a resl identity ! :-)

"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog."

(attribution long since forgotten, I'm sure Dogbert used but did not
invent it)

Mal-2
-- 
"You should wash before and after you prepare food, eat, go to the
bathroom, have sex, wipe your nose, cough, or sneeze." So if you have
sex with a chicken while sneezing, you had better scrub until those
hands bleed.                                              -- Cecil Adams
Orquesta Guayao Online http://www.geocities.com/orqguayao * ICQ:11401527

 
 wrote:
> 
>    I have allready confirmed this with network security administrators
>    at Level 3 Communications, Inc. , as well as others.

Level 3 is usually a dialup leased out to NetZero. Getting a replacement
NZ account is trivial (just like getting another AOL account, except
that no money is involved).

I use a NZ dialup, and they don't even have my real name and a badly
outdated address (it was outdated when I gave it to them). They don't
confirm anything.

Because of this, I'm afraid stopping trolls with level3.net domains in
their path is next to impossible -- as bad as Altopia but for completely
different reasons.

Mal-2
-- 
"You should wash before and after you prepare food, eat, go to the
bathroom, have sex, wipe your nose, cough, or sneeze." So if you have
sex with a chicken while sneezing, you had better scrub until those
hands bleed.                                              -- Cecil Adams
Orquesta Guayao Online http://www.geocities.com/orqguayao * ICQ:11401527

Michael,

> Why not just remove offending posts?
> 
> There are quite a few regulars here that you know and can
> be trusted, in other words, a sort of moderated group.
> 
> You are going to make this a censored group one way or another.
> How about doing without making all of us jump through hoops and
> punishing the masses for some rotten eggs, which are made worse
> by some "regulars".

Yes, and that is, of course, what we've been doing so far.  :)

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

CK,

> I disagree with you on some things, agree with you on others and am
> waiting for further data before I reach a conclusion on others.

That's pretty much how I feel about you too, so I guess we're at 
parity there.  :)

> On this, I disagree with you.

And on this I'm ambivalent and merely stating what is technically 
feasible.  I never said that I was GOING to implement it -- never -- 
I was just frustrated last night with all of the nonsense which has 
been consuming what little time I have.

> I will miss the pleasures  of reading here, of posting here,
> and of testing any software you might create.
> The day that your Tagging system comes into effect will be a
> sad day. Little yellow triangles, little stars, permanent
> numbers, no I think not.  For a privacy advocate this is
> apostasy.

Well, in that we disagree.  But I would miss the benefit of your 
testing.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Ed,

Thanks for your thoughts. That's very much along the lines mine are 
taking.  But my "thinking cap" is still on.  :)

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

DaR,

OUCH!!!

You're *completely* correct! ... I would also need to create the same 
thing for Linux and other Unix-like systems otherwise we would be 
denying posting to all non-Windows users.  :(

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve,

You know you can always count me in on any beta testing.  Love playing
with new things.<G>

It's seems so sad that it finally came down to this.  However, I don't
blame you.  Just seemed to d/l and wade to a bunch of hoya tonight
just to get to this point.  Especially since some of the trolls have
contributed in the past.  Amazing what a few people can do..

On Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:22:34 -0700, Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>
wrote:

>Gang,
>
>Change is often difficult.  We see this all the time here.  Virtually 
>every change I've made has been the subject of great "flying fur" ... 
>but once things have settled back down the *vast* majority have been 
>pleased with the result.
>

Change is not only inevitable, but also necessary. Frank Zappa

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b417157ebe81a79899f8@207.71.92.194...

: Yeah ... the company went by the catchy name of "Traff'O'Data".
:
:
: But, of course, that was a long time ago.  :)   However, they did
: stop letting Bill name their products.

Only AFTER he came up with "Microsoft"...


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

Steve,I've pondered long and hard on whether to add to the traffic on
this issue and finally decided to throw my 2c into the ring.

You've provided a remarkably friendly,helpful and quite unique place
on the Internet for as long as I've owned a computer.

I've personally learned nearly *all* I know about the workings of my
computer while lurking here and watching the "best show in town".

Since the traffic over the past year has grown and the information
overload has reached Herculean proportions,the idea of a few "traffic
lights" is not a question of *if*.

Simply when,where and how. 

The idea of placing a filter around this small section of *YOUR* NG's
to benefit *ALL* participants,seems like a perfectly reasonable idea
to me. 

Merely sitting on one's hands,as vandals deface these NG's and render
them less than they could and should be,seems a tragic waste.

Some posters have already stated that they don't feel comfortable with
*any* form of "tagging",but unfortunately,I've not noticed them
offering a reliable alternative:-(
 
Cheers Paddy.
BTW.
Do try and make sure you get *some* sleep.<g>

In article <MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194>, support@grc.com 
says...
> Gang,

<snip>

Grabbing your HDD serial number is no problem.  Software Gaming 
companies have been using that sort of technology to help protect 
themselves against pirate copies and hacked copies for years.

As a reader of this forum and one who is concerned about privacy
I understand some concerns by readers.  As a business man I also 
clearly see and understand Steve's point of view.

For two years I ran a internet based post board web site.  In that
two years I also ran up my fill of "trolls" and other unfriendly
visitors to our web site.  So I understand Steve's frustration as
well as his reasons for protecting the GRC community.  

We tried virtually everything, from cookies, registration, moderators,
and some rather wild filters to try and limit the amount of troll
damage done to the post boards while trying to maintain as much
freedom that we possible could.  Sometimes they worked and then 
again sometimes often times they did not.  

Two things that worked very well for us.

Time based admittance - in other words, the longer you stayed the 
more access you were granted.  "Trolls"  thankfully usually don't last
long as they soon change their identity.  Good solid members had the 
most access even ones that did not agree with me, but spoke their 
point of view without offending the community. The only thing I had
do (and what Steve does from time to time) was to moderate "Troll"
behavior. This is just what you do when hosting any community.

Each board had a certain time limit as to when you were given read, 
and/or posting privileges. From immediate to as long as a year. It 
depended upon the subject of those particular boards. Since it could
take as long as a year to get admittance back posters tend to watch 
how they said something and "trolls" and "troll feeders" was not a 
problem. 

Restricted Tread Lengths -  This trick worked very well especially
when used with some filters.  We would limit the amount of posting
any one poster could make to a particular thread using a particular
id. The longer you had been with the community the more post you could
make in any particular thread.  

These two ideas greatly eased the management of the small post board 
web site.  {we had less than 5000 total users with 300 to 500 posts 
daily to contend with.}

Now please remember all of this was web based using primarily PERL
scripts with a dash of C++ mostly for speed to accomplish what we were 
doing so I am no expert at news readers and news group servers but 
maybe these suggestions might help Steve with his problem and still 
retain the great GRC community he currently has. It worked for us.

I also noted in this thread that Steve talked about a contribution
type system.  I would beg him to reconsider this.  We tried it. It
simply became too much to handle.  For example what do you consider
a contribution?  How many times must a reader contribute before he/she 
is granted access to the GRC Troll Free Zone.  Who makes this 
decision? and who moderates the moderators?  How are moderators chosen
and what criteria will limit their actions?  And what about the great 
people who may not contribute, but are always there for you should 
they be denied access simply because they don't have the chance to 
contribute in some fashion or maybe can't contribute because of lack 
of technical knowledge, experience, or equipment. Should you deny them 
the right to participate? The details of such a system will soon over 
whelm you.

This community (very much like the one I both participated in and 
hosted) has so many fantastic people in it.  I think Steve is 
definitely on the right track here.  But I would like for him to also 
consider how he plans to manage such a zone.  He mentioned that time 
was his most precious asset.  I for one would really rather not see 
him waste it trying to manage a overly complex news group.

Trying to be helpful

Cavre

"Cavre" <cavreblue@1259nodomain.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b48ae96e47cef5989694@news.grc.com...
> In article <MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194>, support@grc.com

> This community (very much like the one I both participated in and
> hosted) has so many fantastic people in it.  I think Steve is
> definitely on the right track here.  But I would like for him to also
> consider how he plans to manage such a zone.  He mentioned that time
> was his most precious asset.  I for one would really rather not see
> him waste it trying to manage a overly complex news group.
>
> Trying to be helpful

Well, lots of good ideas, but I have one that's worked great for me:

1. Read through the subject lines, read the ones of interest, then
    push the "mark all threads read".

Now sure, that's deleting one huge pile of good information, but
like SG says, it's costly to read all the stuff out there and if you can
see some valid points in a few posts, great, if not, well, you might
see them again some time... or maybe you already saw them before.

I did (as an experiment) track part of a thread about how someone
had said something adverse, etc.. about someone else,. and it's just
the same old stuff, no reason to bother with it.

"Cavre" <cavreblue@1259nodomain.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b48ae96e47cef5989694@news.grc.com...

Some great ideas, Cavre.

Regards,
Sam
--
Welcome to Earth. A subsidiary of Microsoft�.

Steve:
(I will inline my responses)


"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b4253b92bce5c29899fb@207.71.92.194...
| CK,
|
| > I disagree with you on some things, agree with you on others and am
| > waiting for further data before I reach a conclusion on others.
|
| That's pretty much how I feel about you too, so I guess we're at
| parity there.  :)

Only way to be,  some of the things I think I know are probably wrong,
or out of date or about to be outdated.
The wonder of the internet is that it moves so fast,  Moore's law is a
wonderful law and I hope it is never repealed

|
| > On this, I disagree with you.
|
| And on this I'm ambivalent and merely stating what is technically
| feasible.  I never said that I was GOING to implement it

I realize you did not say you were going to implement it, I was stating
what my response would have to be if you were to implement it.  I
assumed you were "blueskying" some ideas and tried to give a response
appropriate, should this particular idea become actuality.

 -- never --
| I was just frustrated last night with all of the nonsense which has
| been consuming what little time I have.

In Australia they call it the tall poppy syndrome, you stick your head
up above the rest of the poppy field and there will immediately be folks
trying to cut it off.  ( this is a ref to the T-1 thread)  or folks
trying to appropriate your means to their ends ( The Carlene/NacyDrew/
thread)
or folks just trying to vampire your time for their own reflected
aggrandizement.  It comes with becoming a tall poppy whether you want it
or not.


|
| > I will miss the pleasures  of reading here, of posting here,
| > and of testing any software you might create.
| > The day that your Tagging system comes into effect will be a
| > sad day. Little yellow triangles, little stars, permanent
| > numbers, no I think not.  For a privacy advocate this is
| > apostasy.
|
| Well, in that we disagree.  But I would miss the benefit of your
| testing.

Some betas I have been on have turned out extremely successfully ( 98,
98se), some ( Packrat 5 for those with long memories and a strong
stomach) abominably, and some are not yet finished.


|
| --
| _________________________________________________________________
| Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Add to your system.ini file the following lines at the end of the
[386Enh] section
MessageBackColor=4
MessageTextColor=E
this will give you a screaming RED with bright Gold  BSOD instead of the
traditional While letters on Blue that we all know and love.
If you set the two values the same, legibility becomes questionable.
CK

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:9idtv0$2o4e$1@news.grc.com...
| > But, of course, that was a long time ago.  :)   However, they did
| > stop letting Bill name their products.
|
| And promptly wrote the first of many disclaimers?
|
| Hmm... how would they display their famous BSOD trademark with only
Red
| Amber and Green?
|
|

The operative word here is "own".
These are your news groups Steve.
Please DO whatever is necessary to make them work.

--
Don McCallum

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b3c07477986ea09899eb@207.71.92.194...
> Gang,
>
> Change is often difficult.
<snip>

> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

mc,

With all due respect, you have repeated your threat to leave so many times
it has become obnoxious.

If you don't stop I'll hold my breath until I die. Then you'll be sorry!

;-0

Respectfully,
Bob Vanderveen

"Mike Richter" <mrichter@cpl.net> wrote in message
news:3B4A7839.3036A8FB@cpl.net...
> Steve Gibson wrote:
>
> > In other words, it may well be that some form of anonymous tag
will
> > be a prerequisite for future controlled beta programs.  I would
> > COMPLETELY understand and respect the feelings of those persons
who
> > would object on principle to anything like that, while at the same
> > time being quite content to employ such a system.

> I have tremendous respect for others' privacy, but little for most
> aspects of my own. My name and e-mail address are real on every post
as
> is the URL of my site which carries address and phone number (among
> other things).
> Whatever you do will be fine with me and I hope you'll let me play
in
> that sandbox.
> Mike
> --
> mrichter@cpl.net
> http://www.mrichter.com/

Steve,
I'm prolly the most sensible person around here lately (a joke -
relax), and I always wanted to say "me too" - would it be beyond
reason to reconstitute feedback to only carry posts 'in reply' to
posted items on grc.news.  Only replies to a thread in news could be
diplayed, would be displayed.  Okay that would mean a job for a
moderator (or a script) of sorts.  Otherwise, go for the HD 'ID'.  Not
worth much in today's money IR�0.02p
Tommy K (Dublin)

tommy_kins,

> I'm prolly the most sensible person around here lately (a joke -
> relax), and I always wanted to say "me too" - would it be beyond
> reason to reconstitute feedback to only carry posts 'in reply' to
> posted items on grc.news.  Only replies to a thread in news could be
> diplayed, would be displayed.  Okay that would mean a job for a
> moderator (or a script) of sorts.  Otherwise, go for the HD 'ID'.
> Not worth much in today's money IR�0.02p
> Tommy K (Dublin)

That's entirely possible, but it would only stop people from starting 
a new thread here.

In frustration people might, I imagine, follow-up any existing 
posting with a new subject.

But it's a neat idea in principle!  :)

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> DaR,
> 
> OUCH!!!
> 
> You're *completely* correct! ... I would also need to create the same
> thing for Linux and other Unix-like systems otherwise we would be
> denying posting to all non-Windows users.  :(

Eh? What makes you think anyone is going to run your personal brand of
spy/authentication software? <lol> I don't think you actually took that
couple of days break did you? 
roy

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001 11:23:30 -0700, Steve Gibson enlightened us all
with:

>In frustration people might, I imagine, follow-up any existing 
>posting with a new subject.

Steve, I hope you don't mind if I point out that your news groups are
now sufficiently well known to attract the same sort of merchants  who
pester usenet.

The only feasible solution is for folk to use a killfile and, above all,
learn not to feed the trolls. If you ignore them, they soon go someplace
else. T'is a bit like the raincoats who merchant bank in public -- they
are looking for the shock/horror reaction. A derisory hoot of laughter
works wonders :-)

-- 
Mitch

Oops! You're not going to try and impliment this afterall!! <lol>
roy


roy wrote:
> 
> Steve Gibson wrote:
> >
> > DaR,
> >
> > OUCH!!!
> >
> > You're *completely* correct! ... I would also need to create the
> same
> > thing for Linux and other Unix-like systems otherwise we would be
> > denying posting to all non-Windows users.  :(
> 
> Eh? What makes you think anyone is going to run your personal brand of
> spy/authentication software? <lol> I don't think you actually took
> that
> couple of days break did you?
> roy

-- 
http://website.lineone.net/~roy_gant/keys.html
81 63 F8 C3 20 CE D9 21 27 68 ED 4E 49 62 81
C5A 1B40DB11BB8212430F93F5EB906E57442E747

Most of the time a little time cures most injuries. Ignore the trolls. If
they don't melt, killfile & delete . Please no registration.

--
Gene Barnes
When in doubt press Delete !
"bc_acadia" <bc_acadiaNIX@THEhotmailJUNK.com> wrote in message
news:9id9r3$1s97$1@news.grc.com...
> Sometimes it's necessary to cut off your own finger in order to save your
> own arm.  LET'S GO FOR IT!
>
>

Steve Gibson wrote:

> DaR,
> 
> OUCH!!!
> 
> You're *completely* correct! ... I would also need to create
> the same thing for Linux and other Unix-like systems otherwise
> we would be
> denying posting to all non-Windows users.  :(
> 
Hi Steve

        Please do that for the other OS's. I don't want to go back to 
Windows.  I know that you do not use "cookies" but is there 
something which we could put into the "cookie jar" or some where 
safe that would be our ID, encripted for sure. Something that I 
could not hack to change my ID.  This would stop most trolls.
Something that I could save a copy on a disk if I have to 
reinstall my OS. Just a thought.

-- 
        DaR

e-mail address not working now.

> Eh? What makes you think anyone is going to run your personal brand of
> spy/authentication software? <lol> I don't think you actually took that
> couple of days break did you? 
> roy

Spy software by its very nature collects data about the activities of the user 
and returns that information to the server - Steve's plan is therefore not spy 
software. As for would anyone use it? I would, I know many others have already 
voiced their support. Of course it won't be mandatory if you want to read, and 
probably there would be areas that anyone could post, but for areas designated 
Troll-Free, it's as good a plan as you will find.

Perhaps you are concerned about Steve knowing the serial-numbers on your hard-
drive? Okay, so don't OPT-IN :) Your choice. IMO it's a Question of Trust - the 
same as if I was giving him my credit card details (which are infinitely more 
useful than my serial numbers). I have to trust Steve to not misuse the 
information I give him - and I do. 

Finally, These newsgroups have proven their worth again and again. I would be 
willing to pay a membership to use them - if they aren't that valuable to you, 
then hey, you are free to go.

Oh, and I agree, Steve does need sleep, but I haven't seen him make rash or 
faulty judgements because of it.

BTW Steve, I use Linux and Windoze, so if you do go ahead and implement this 
for future needs, I'll need a copy of the little serial number extractor for 
both OS's

Regards

Anthony John
(Hey Look - My name is personally Identifiable Too!)

Mitch,

> Steve, I hope you don't mind if I point out that your news
> groups are now sufficiently well known to attract the same
> sort of merchants who pester usenet.

With ALL DUE RESPECT to those who will hate me if I implement a 
posting enabling ID tagging system ...

.... if we begin getting the sorts of spam and merchant crap in here 
that afflicts the Usenet there will be an unspoofable posting 
restrictor in place faster than we can blink.

That is NOT something that I'm going to tolerate.

> The only feasible solution is for folk to use a killfile and,
> above all, learn not to feed the trolls. If you ignore them,
> they soon go someplace else.

That's true for individual trolls, but it's NOT TRUE for any sort of 
commercial posters.  The only feasible solution for THEM will be my 
Spoof-Proof Posting Authenticator.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Charlie Tame wrote:
> 
> "Ogden Computer Guy" <iamkristoffer@hotsmell.com> wrote in message
> news:9idfdb$243v$1@news.grc.com...
> > No, fortunately this demonstration was conducted at his mother's house
> > on her kitchen table.
> If she was anything like my Mother then he'd have been told "Bill, I don't
> know why you don't go an play football with the other boys instead of
> messing about with that, you'll never get a job that way...."
> 
> Charlie
> 
> Turn left at the third coffee cup past the ketchup...

And his father said, "Ya know, son ,,, you certainly lack any conscience
to keep you from selling all these things that don't work properly. I'm
proud of you!

> 
> Well quit playing your toys and get on it!
> 

Huh??

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

On Tue, 10 Jul 2001 21:32:53 -0700, Steve Gibson enlightened us all
with:

>Mitch,
>
>> Steve, I hope you don't mind if I point out that your news
>> groups are now sufficiently well known to attract the same
>> sort of merchants who pester usenet.
>
>With ALL DUE RESPECT to those who will hate me if I implement a 
>posting enabling ID tagging system ...

Depends why ...

>... if we begin getting the sorts of spam and merchant crap in here 
>that afflicts the Usenet there will be an unspoofable posting 
>restrictor in place faster than we can blink.

By 'merchant', I was using rhyming slang ..
<coughs>
merchant --> merchant banker--> wanker

So I wasn't referring to commercial spam, just the sort of idiot stuff
that Carlene and TD-1 have been posting recently.


-- 
Mitch

Ares wrote:
> 
> Perhaps you are concerned about Steve knowing the serial-numbers on your hard-
> drive? Okay, so don't OPT-IN :) Your choice. IMO it's a Question of Trust - the
> same as if I was giving him my credit card details (which are infinitely more
> useful than my serial numbers). I have to trust Steve to not misuse the
> information I give him - and I do.
> 

To the contrary, it has, at least for me, absolutely nothing to do with
trust, but everything to do with principle. In principle the idea of
using information specific to me or my machine is NO DIFFERENT from what
Real and others do/did. Yes its use is different, and the user (steve)
is different, and tho I trust Steve, but that does NOT change the
principle of it. Its not Steve having this info, in whatever form, that
I object to, its the principle. And I think the others which have
objected feel the same.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

Ares wrote:
> 
> > Eh? What makes you think anyone is going to run your personal brand of
> > spy/authentication software? <lol> I don't think you actually took that
> > couple of days break did you?
> > roy
> 
> Spy software by its very nature collects data about the activities of the user
> and returns that information to the server - Steve's plan is therefore not spy
> software. As for would anyone use it? I would, I know many others have already
> voiced their support. Of course it won't be mandatory if you want to read, and
> probably there would be areas that anyone could post, but for areas designated
> Troll-Free, it's as good a plan as you will find.
> 
> Perhaps you are concerned about Steve knowing the serial-numbers on your hard-

That's not why. It's the principle of the thing. Where will it end. You
have to put your foot down from the very beginning. How many users here
run cookie cleaners and web cache cleaners?
Well, there really isn't much difference between
authentication/identification in cookies than in serial number tagging.
It would certainly turn news.grc.com into a laughing stock if
authentification/id were introduced.

> drive? Okay, so don't OPT-IN :) Your choice. IMO it's a Question of Trust - the
> same as if I was giving him my credit card details (which are infinitely more
> useful than my serial numbers). I have to trust Steve to not misuse the
> information I give him - and I do.
> 
> Finally, These newsgroups have proven their worth again and again. I would be
> willing to pay a membership to use them - if they aren't that valuable to you,
> then hey, you are free to go.

You bet i am.
 
> Oh, and I agree, Steve does need sleep, but I haven't seen him make rash or
> faulty judgements because of it.
> 
> BTW Steve, I use Linux and Windoze, so if you do go ahead and implement this
> for future needs, I'll need a copy of the little serial number extractor for
> both OS's
> 
> Regards
> 
> Anthony John
> (Hey Look - My name is personally Identifiable Too!)

So is mine and i have a better email addie too! <lol>
roy

Salaam!

mc wrote:

> ... it has ... everything to do with principle. ... It's not
> Steve having this info, in whatever form, that I object to,
> it's the principle.

   Steve has a way to uniquely identify those who post to these
newsgroups.  Could you explain, please, just exactly what "principle" is
involved here?

> And I think the others which have
> objected feel the same.

   I think you're right -- and I think it's "feel" that is the right
term.  However, it's being advanced as "principle," which is presumably
a rational thing susceptible to articulation.  Please explain what
"principle" is involved in a host being able to recognize his guests.

   I'd really like to see the reasonable and rational basis for all
these "feelings."

>  _ __  __ 
> | '  \/ _|
> |_|_|_\__|

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> You have to put your foot down from the very beginning.

   From the sudden flurry of posts that compare privacy warrior Steve
Gibson to data miner Real Networks, apparently unable to differentiate
between white hats and black hats, perhaps the best place for all of you
"nip it in the bud" folks to "put your foot down" would be just outside
the door.

> roy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> roy wrote:
> 
> > You have to put your foot down from the very beginning.
> 
>    From the sudden flurry of posts that compare privacy warrior Steve
> Gibson to data miner Real Networks, apparently unable to differentiate
> between white hats and black hats, perhaps the best place for all of
> you
> "nip it in the bud" folks to "put your foot down" would be just
> outside
> the door.

Oh so you are for selection now?

roy

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> Oh so you are for selection now?

   My reading comprehension skills don't quite reach being able to see
what you're talking about with that.

> roy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Ares{a} wrote:
> 
> *grins*
> 
> Well Said!
> 
> Regards
> 
> Ares

Exactly, you would all be able to congratulate each other all day long.
roy

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> roy wrote:
> 
> > Oh so you are for selection now?
> 
>    My reading comprehension skills don't quite reach being able to see
> what you're talking about with that.
> 

Well, those of us that are unable to differentiate so called white hats
(what ever they are) from black hats (whatever they are) ought, quote,
"put their foot down oustide the door". So you prefer those of a
different opinion/view to be out. In other words we are not welcome to
express our opinion HERE.
rgds
roy

Ares{a} wrote:
> 
> Roy, I am entitled to my opinion, you are not entitled to tell me I am
> wrong.
> 
> So ner!
> 

<lol>
roy


> Regards
> 
> Airwees

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> Well, those of us that are unable to differentiate so called
> white hats (what ever they are) from black hats (whatever
> they are) ought, quote, "put their foot down oustide the door".
> So you prefer those of a different opinion/view to be out.
> In other words we are not welcome to express our opinion HERE.

   Not at all -- Steve has shown no objection to the expression of
ludicrous opinions.

   And those who *do* object are free to leave.  After all, if Steve,
who is decidedly and demonstrably a privacy advocate of the first order,
is himself one of the bad guys, why would people want to stick around?

> rgds
> roy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:24:21 -0700, abujamal enlightened us all with:

>   I think you're right -- and I think it's "feel" that is the right
>term.  However, it's being advanced as "principle," which is presumably
>a rational thing susceptible to articulation.  Please explain what
>"principle" is involved in a host being able to recognize his guests.

Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers. Full stop.

If a host wants me to provide additional ID, then I ain't gonna accept
the invite to dinner. If the other guests are gonna come out with
comments equivalent to "Don't bang the door on your way out", then folk
like roy and myself are not going to miss the dinner company :-(

< .. and I hope roy won't mind that I've put words in his mouth>

-- 
Mitch

mc <no.spam@mctech.org> wrote:
>Ares wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps you are concerned about Steve knowing the serial-numbers on 
>>your hard-
>> drive? Okay, so don't OPT-IN :) Your choice. IMO it's a Question of 
>>Trust - the
>> same as if I was giving him my credit card details (which are infinitely more
>> useful than my serial numbers). I have to trust Steve to not misuse the
>> information I give him - and I do.
>>
>
>To the contrary, it has, at least for me, absolutely nothing to do with
>trust, but everything to do with principle. In principle the idea of
>using information specific to me or my machine is NO DIFFERENT from what
>Real and others do/did. Yes its use is different, and the user (steve)
>is different, and tho I trust Steve, but that does NOT change the
>principle of it. Its not Steve having this info, in whatever form, that
>I object to, its the principle. And I think the others which have
>objected feel the same.
>

I agree, as far as one can trust a man living on the other side of the 
planet without ever meeting him, I trust Steve. He has proven to be a 
man of principle and one of his word.

He also made it quite clear that he does not like any form of tracking, 
spying or any other form of collecting data how innocent that may 
be/seem.

Running data collecting software on my computer is against anything I've 
learned here in the year I'm around this place. The only reason this 
kind of software would/could be running on my PC is because I don't know 
it's there or because I don't know it does collect things.

Another option for the groups Steve is personally interested in is make 
them require a log in. I think Steve knows who are giving him good 
feedback so he could easily make a list of people he would like to 
participate and make others subscribe on request. Of course subscription 
would be made with valid non free email addresses.

Trolls are a part of the Internet, the only full proof troll filter will 
probably create an environment that I no longer want to be part of.
-- 
Eric Erades
_______________________________________________________________________
  ___   ___  _  _       _
| _ \ / __|| || | ___ | | _ __  ___  _ _  ___
|  _/| (__ | __ |/ -_)| || '_ \/ -_)| '_|(_-<
|_|   \___||_||_|\___||_|| .__/\___||_|  /__/
                          |_|
PCHelpers International:  < http://www.pchelpers.org/ >
news://news.pchelponline.org  mailto:pchelpers@pchelpers.org
_______________________________________________________________________

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:24:21 -0700, abujamal enlightened us all with:

> I think you're right -- and I think it's "feel" that is the right
> term.  However, it's being advanced as "principle," which is presumably
> a rational thing susceptible to articulation.  Please explain what
> "principle" is involved in a host being able to recognize his guests.

Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.  Maybe.

If a host wants me to provide additional ID, then I ain't gonna accept
the invite to dinner. If the other guests are gonna come out with
comments equivalent to "Don't bang the door on your way out", then folk
like roy and myself are not going to miss the dinner company :-(

 .. and I hope roy won't mind that I've put words in his mouth>

-- 
Mitch

Salaam!

Mitch B wrote:

> Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.

   And with or without your knowledge or cooperation, he can identify
you several other ways, too.  Similarly, as T-1 and Carlene have
discovered, he can recognize them, and that's what he needs to do in
order to make these forums a more productive and valuable place for the
rest of us including you.

> If a host wants me to provide additional ID, then I ain't
> gonna accept the invite to dinner.

   Not a problem, sounds rather like a solution.

> If the other guests are gonna come out with comments equivalent
> to "Don't bang the door on your way out", then folks like roy
> and myself are not going to miss the dinner company :-(

   Wonderful.

> Mitch

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

Eric Erades wrote:

> Trolls are a part of the Internet, ...

   Trolls are a part of Usenet.  There are abundant places where there
are no trolls at all.

> ... the only fool-proof troll filter will probably create
> an environment that I no longer want to be part of.

   I think you've underestimated Steve.

> Eric Erades

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> Mitch B wrote:
> 
> > Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.
> 
>    And with or without your knowledge or cooperation, he can identify
> you several other ways, too.

My/most news reader/nntp connection does not supply any uniquely
identifying information. Nothing that cannot be changed easily. 
Tell me/us how "he" can identify us pls. rsvp asap.
roy

And I don't want to know about IP number as mine and most others are
dynamic. They are easily changed by re connecting to our isp.
roy

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 14:07:45 -0700, abujamal enlightened us all with:


>Mitch B wrote:

>> Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.

>   And with or without your knowledge or cooperation, he can identify
>you several other ways, too.

Such as ?

My static IP is in my headers. My ISP domain name is in the path --
placed there by me. The perfectly valid and genuine domain I keep for
usenet is also in my headers. Any info about me can be freely obtained
by acting on -- the info contained in my headers. All there *with* my
knowledge and/or cooperation

-- 
Mitch

Quite a pathetic response.

I for one will not leave until some kind of tagging is put in place.

Until then I will continue to let you, Steve and anyone else know
that I do not like the idea.

I will do so with the same zeal you use to defend it, I am not
going to be quiet on this issue just because you or others say
so.

-- 
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________
"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:3B4CA8CF.5CFB4BD1@earthlink.net...
> Salaam!
> 
> roy wrote:
> 
> > You have to put your foot down from the very beginning.
> 
>    From the sudden flurry of posts that compare privacy warrior Steve
> Gibson to data miner Real Networks, apparently unable to differentiate
> between white hats and black hats, perhaps the best place for all of you
> "nip it in the bud" folks to "put your foot down" would be just outside
> the door.
> 
> > roy
> 
> was-salaam,
> abujamal
> -- 
> news://news.pchelpers.org

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> roy wrote:
> 
> > Well, those of us that are unable to differentiate so called
> > white hats (what ever they are) from black hats (whatever
> > they are) ought, quote, "put their foot down oustide the door".
> > So you prefer those of a different opinion/view to be out.
> > In other words we are not welcome to express our opinion HERE.
> 
>    Not at all -- Steve has shown no objection to the expression of
> ludicrous opinions.
> 

What kind of logic is that? I'm writing about YOU and YOUR opinion.
<lol>


>    And those who *do* object are free to leave.  After all, 

Everyone and anyone is free to leave at any time. We ALL know THAT! 

if Steve,
> who is decidedly and demonstrably a privacy advocate of the first order,
> is himself one of the bad guys, why would people want to stick around?
> 

I merely find it very strange that users at "news.grc.com" can even
entertain the notion of tagging via personal computer hardware serial
numbers!! <rotflmao>
I thought first and above all that the single most pervasive feeling in
these groups was one of principle in rejecting stuff like tagging.
Actually, I would be willing to bet that if it came to a vote then you'd
lose.
roy







> > rgds
> > roy
> 
> was-salaam,
> abujamal
> --
> news://news.pchelpers.org

-- 
http://website.lineone.net/~roy_gant/keys.html
81 63 F8 C3 20 CE D9 21 27 68 ED 4E 49 62 81
C5A 1B40DB11BB8212430F93F5EB906E57442E747

Salaam!

Mitch B wrote:

> abujamal enlightened us all with:
>> Mitch B wrote:
>>> Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.
>> And with or without your knowledge or cooperation,
>> he can identify you several other ways, too.

> Such as ?

   LOL!  ROFL!  As if (1) I know, and (2) I'd say ...

   It is not possible (thank God!) or necessary to know everything.  I
would be hard pressed to make a list of things that I do *not* want to
know, it's quite long.  And in fact, the list of things that I *do* know
is a few items too long.

   However, included among those "too many" is at least one way "such
as" will work.  I'd *love* to be able to take credit for figuring it
out, but that I can't take that credit doesn't bother me in the
slightest.

   But how could you imagine in your wildest dreams that I'd lay it out
here in these forums?

   Ask Carlene.  See how long it takes her to post an answer here after
she figures out just *one* of the ways.

> Mitch

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Eric Erades wrote:
> 
<< qed snip >>
> 
> He also made it quite clear that he does not like any form of tracking,
> spying or any other form of collecting data how innocent that may
> be/seem.
> 
> Running data collecting software on my computer is against anything I've
> learned here in the year I'm around this place. The only reason this
> kind of software would/could be running on my PC is because I don't know
> it's there or because I don't know it does collect things.

Thank you for re-expressing that.

> Another option for the groups Steve is personally interested in is make
> them require a log in. I think Steve knows who are giving him good
> feedback so he could easily make a list of people he would like to
> participate and make others subscribe on request. Of course subscription
> would be made with valid non free email addresses.

I would have no problem with any sort of login as long as it was based
ONLY on information which ~I~ provide manually and voluntarily.

> Trolls are a part of the Internet, the only full proof troll filter will
> probably create an environment that I no longer want to be part of.

Agreed

> Eric Erades

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

Mitch B wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 12:24:21 -0700, abujamal enlightened us all with:
> 
> >   I think you're right -- and I think it's "feel" that is the right
> >term.  However, it's being advanced as "principle," which is presumably
> >a rational thing susceptible to articulation.  Please explain what
> >"principle" is involved in a host being able to recognize his guests.
> 
> Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers. Full stop.
> 
> If a host wants me to provide additional ID, then I ain't gonna accept
> the invite to dinner. If the other guests are gonna come out with
> comments equivalent to "Don't bang the door on your way out", then folk
> like roy and myself are not going to miss the dinner company :-(

Add me to the list.

But Im holding on to the hope that Steve will find an alternative to the
'tag generator' software to filter trolls or some other form of
authentication. He's already noted that he understands our concerns, I
think he'll come up with an alternative if he can.

These groups are nearly as valuable to us as they are to steve. I'll
give Steve and these groups every chance I can before I call it quits.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> Mitch B wrote:
> 
> > abujamal enlightened us all with:
> >> Mitch B wrote:
> >>> Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.
> >> And with or without your knowledge or cooperation,
> >> he can identify you several other ways, too.
> 
> > Such as ?
> 
>    LOL!  ROFL!  As if (1) I know, and (2) I'd say ...
> 
>    It is not possible (thank God!) or necessary to know everything.  I
> would be hard pressed to make a list of things that I do *not* want to
> know, it's quite long.  And in fact, the list of things that I *do*
> know
> is a few items too long.

I must assume that you have no answer AND having worked as a computer
scientist myself i just know that you are writing garbage. No offence
meant but pls stick to reality.

roy

roy wrote:
> 
> abujamal wrote:
> >
> > Salaam!
> >
> > Mitch B wrote:
> >
> > > Steve can recognise me by the info contained in my headers.
> >
> >    And with or without your knowledge or cooperation, he can identify
> > you several other ways, too.
> 
> My/most news reader/nntp connection does not supply any uniquely
> identifying information. Nothing that cannot be changed easily.
> Tell me/us how "he" can identify us pls. rsvp asap.
> roy

Anybody with half a dozen working brain cells should be able to identify
EVERY SINGLE post ive ever made in these groups. My 'handle', email,
signature, and style are easily identifyable. Even tho the mail and sig
have changed a few times they have never all changed at once, and with
only a couple exceptions, every post has been made from the same,
identifyable, isp.

While this doesnt make my posts identifyable by software, it would be a
fairly simple task for ANYONE who desired to not only know that I am a
known personality and not someone who is trying to hide, but also my
real name, address, phone, etc are discoverable and have been from not
long after I started visiting here.

Thus Steve could easily 

1) determine that im not a troll, but rather a normal person who
occasionally contributes a usfull bit or two

and 2) email or otherwise contact me and allow me to supply him,
manually and voluntairly, with a login name and password which ~I~
select.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

mc,

> But I'm holding on to the hope that Steve will find an
> alternative to the 'tag generator' software to filter trolls
> or some other form of authentication. He's already noted that
> he understands our concerns, I think he'll come up with an
> alternative if he can.

I *absolutely* will come up with an alternative if I can!

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Mitch, is your e-mail addy valid?

Hilly.

"Mitch B" <nunews@urviles.dyndns.org> wrote in message news:3b4dc7ca.29561675@mitchb.org..
..<snip>

mc,

> I would have no problem with any sort of login as long as it
> was based ONLY on information which ~I~ provide manually and
> voluntarily.

Ah, but therein lies the conundrum.  If the IDentifier is ONLY based 
upon information that is manually and voluntarily provided by the 
user, there is no mechanism (that I've come up with yet) for 
preventing someone from inventing another "nym" for themselves.

You see, that's what it really all boils down to:

It's not ANONYMITY that some people object to losing here -- NO 
ANONYMITY would EVER be lost.  The principle these people are 
defending is that they want to have the RIGHT TO LIE about whether 
they are ONE ANONYMOUS PERSON -- or more than one.  They want to 
eliminate any horizon of responsibility for their past actions.

Now, I *ABSOLUTELY* endorse and defend the right people have out on 
the Internet to shift identities at will.  It is powerful, 
intoxicating, and personally useful.

But when our stated goal HERE is to formally hold INDIVIDUAL 
anonymous people ACCOUNTABLE for their newsgroup postings, 
suppressing the individual's right to arbitrarily change their 
*anonymous* identity seems to be an inescapable requirement.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> I merely find it very strange that users at "news.grc.com"
> can even entertain the notion of tagging via personal
> computer hardware serial numbers!!  <rotflmao>

   It startles you that someone trusts Steve Gibson?

   I've been learning about security in practical terms here in these
newsgroups, from people who know what they're talking about, for over a
year (that means I'm a newbie, by the way).  I've had some opportunity
to take a look at Steve Gibson and the way he does things.  A couple of
times I've wanted to get his attention somehow, and still don't know
whether I did or not.  And don't care.

   He can run anything he wants in my machine.  I'm not worried in the
slightest, there's no "principle" to it other than the principle of
having confidence also in someone other than myself, whether in terms of
capacity or character.  I can appreciate that some people continue to
labor under the curse "Go and trust none."  I don't.

> I thought first and above all that the single most pervasive
> feeling in these groups was one of principle in rejecting
> stuff like tagging.

   Actually it's one of practicality, not principle at all.  We are here
for the express purpose of learning how to secure the privacy we have in
our own individual machines and home networks.

   What serves that purpose is legitimate and principled, period, the
end is so intrinsically vital to human existence and essential (right of
independent choice) that there is nothing, not even war and killing and
mayhem, that is not entirely justified for its presevation.  I am
trained, prepared and willing to kill other people for my and others'
right of independent choice.

   That is the principle of these newsgroups, the right of independent
choice.  Across the board in all things, not just computer and network
security, that's just one arena where it needs to be preserved, and it
is an uphill battle and definitely an on-going battle.  In inviting
Steve to install "markers" so that he knows each and every person who
comes here, to this battle, by their machines, is completely consistent
with the principle of the right of independent choice.  There is nothing
whatsoever there of "Who sacrifices a little freedom for a little
security obtains neither freedom nor security."  There is no loss of
choice or freedom or privacy by cooperation, together with Steve, in
rendering amicable and in improving the signal-to-noise ratio and in
improving other ambience factors among those who support Steve in his
championship of the right of independent choice by elimination of
ignorance.

   It happens that there are a few seasoned professionals here, too, who
are learning things about securing vast networks.  One of those seasoned
professionals just passed from among us last week, and his mastery of
Microsoft operating systems and networking appliances will be sorely
missed.

   The thousands of people who populate these newsgroups are not all
teenaged and not all newcomers.  But ludicrous opinions are fair game
wherever they come from, whether they're about technical issues or
"principles" so ambiguous as to lead people to unreason.  Too bad that
"how to think rationally" is something schools don't teach, but then
there are so many avenues to intellectual infirmity in today's media
with its information-overload-supported agendas.

> Actually, I would be willing to bet that
> if it came to a vote then you'd lose.

   You'll find my views on the value of democratic opinion elsewhere. 
I'd lose the vote on consumption of alcoholic beverages and swine, too,
but just in case you hadn't noticed, there is a worldwide view of the
United States as a drunken pig -- except the view from here, of course,
in the belly of the beast, as it were.

   When you elect to apply a Big Brother yardstick to Steve Gibson, it
just doesn't measure up.  Steve's sling has already found quite a few
talking heads, and people with a practical focus on the world their
children will have to deal with have not mistaken Steve for the dragon
we're here to slay.

   Don't trust him yet, 'cause you ain't been around here long enough to
know how you can?  Fine, no problem, that's certainly no "criterion" for
whether or not you might have something to gain or to contribute, either
way.

   Some of us do.  And we'd enjoy a newsgroup where we can discuss the
right of independent choice without all the noise from people who think
it's about some "recipe" for security and that "trust none" is the first
ingredient.  There ain't no recipe like that, or we'd have been using it
centuries ago.

> roy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

MICHAEL wrote Quite a pathetic response:

> I for one will not leave until some kind of tagging is put
> in place.  Until then I will continue to let you, Steve and
> anyone else know that I do not like the idea.

   Along with mc and a few others.

> I will do so with the same zeal you use to defend it

   No, I'm *advocating* it.  I would like Steve to DO it.  I'd enable
cookies or even put Steve's IP addresses in my Local Zone should he wish
to use those means.  You're defending a straw man, it's a non-issue,
doing *whatever* Steve wants in Steve's newsgroups is *not* debatable
with me.

   Steve will do what he wants and let the chips fall where they may,
that's fine, I'll be here no matter what he does (or doesn't do) in this
regard, whatever it takes, as far as I'm concerned Steve can run NetBus
or PCAnywhere in my machine if he wants to.  He could even use my
machine to trace back some of these connection attempts to the Sun
Remote Procedure Call that doesn't happen to be available in my machine,
I'll configure my firewall to allow them to reach Steve's investigative
application, that would work for me.

> I am not going to be quiet on this issue
> just because you or others say so.

   I don't recall seeing anyone telling you or others to be quiet about
it.  All I recall is seeing responses, to "I'll leave if that happens,"
along the lines of "Fine -- you have the right of independent choice."

   Perhaps you'll read something you'll find persuasive.

> Michael

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message news:MPG.15b686d969605bf5989a30@207.71.92.194...
<snip>
> It's not ANONYMITY that some people object to losing here -- NO
> ANONYMITY would EVER be lost.  The principle these people are
> defending is that they want to have the RIGHT TO LIE about whether
> they are ONE ANONYMOUS PERSON -- or more than one.  They want to
> eliminate any horizon of responsibility for their past actions.
<snip>

Now, to me...that's worth a couple of h/d serial numbers.  I've got half a dozen here at home, and
would gladly give up -both- h/d #'s on my ICS gateway...erm -- would I have to post from only that
box?

Hilly.

Hilly,

> Now, to me...that's worth a couple of h/d serial numbers. I've
> got half a dozen here at home, and would gladly give up -both-
> h/d #'s on my ICS gateway...erm -- would I have to post from
> only that box?

No, it would work the OTHER way around.

If someone using a machine were ever to really become a repeat and 
deliberately offensive poster here, the machine (hard drive) from 
which those offensive postings were made would only henceforth be 
able to READ these groups.

Essentially, that hard drive would be identified as belonging to 
someone who had abused our open and anonymous posting privileges. 
They would never be non-anonymous, but they would be prevented from 
coming back (from the same machine) as another person who might 
continue harassing these groups.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

"roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3B4CB0BB.BAF48923@lineone.net...

: Oh so you are for selection now?

I don't presume to talk for Abujamal (and I would think he has already
replied by now) but I took it to mean that you should takee the
conversation somewhere else, off of Steve's server.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message 

>Steve will do what he wants and let the chips fall where they may

Yes he will.

I will offer up my opinion in hopes he listens to all sides.

-- 
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________

"roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3B4CCF3E.72BE0B47@lineone.net...

: I merely find it very strange that users at "news.grc.com" can even
: entertain the notion of tagging via personal computer hardware serial
: numbers!! <rotflmao>

I'm against it; but that doesn't mean I wouldn't entertain the idea. I
have come to find out through the posts here that I may be the most
insecure web user in the group, and while some people find it astounding
that I run around the web with Java(script), ActiveX, cookies, etc. on,
that is how I like it.
I made a suggestion (buried in a ton of other posts) about adapting the
CECIL-ID system for the purpose of anti-trolling. I don't know if Steve
saw it, but I made the suggestion just the same.

: I thought first and above all that the single most pervasive feeling
in
: these groups was one of principle in rejecting stuff like tagging.
: Actually, I would be willing to bet that if it came to a vote then
you'd
: lose.

But news.grc.com is not a democracy, it's a benevolent dictatorship.
Steve WILL take suggestions, but in the end what HE says, goes.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

"roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3B4CC292.E5AF5660@lineone.net...
: And I don't want to know about IP number as mine and most others are
: dynamic. They are easily changed by re connecting to our isp.

I've found that sometimes I get the same IP address when I sign off and
back on to the same access number very quickly. I think that's a feature
of DHCP.

Due to the sudden tangent I've taken us on, followups set to
GRC.techtalk.


---
Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy
When in doubt, do as the Doubtans do ;-)
I'm not a black hat. I'm not a white hat. I'm a Red Hat ;-)

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.264 / Virus Database: 136 - Release Date: 7/2/01

> I've found that sometimes I get the same IP address when I
> sign off and back on to the same access number very quickly.
> I think that's a feature of DHCP.

Yes, it is.   A DHCP client "suggests" an IP to the DHCP server -- 
typically the last one it had.  If that IP is still available the 
server will often assign the same one.  :)

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> I must assume that you have no answer ...

   You are certainly free to assume whatever you wish, but to pretend
that you "must" is laughable.  Whether you believe something or not has
absolutely *no* bearing on whether or not you're correct, it's merely
indicative of your view that if you don't know something, then it must
not exist.  Or is there another element that forces you to assume, from
someone's refusal to answer, that there is no answer?

> AND having worked as a computer scientist myself
> i just know that you are writing garbage.

   Apparently not long enough, because it is not only not garbage, but
has been implemented and demonstrated before your eyes.  In short, you
know not whereof you speak, whether you've spent time in a high school
computer lab or not.

> No offence meant but pls stick to reality.

   LOL!  "Offense" requires that it reach its target in some manner. 
You're miles away from that.

> roy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

Steve Gibson wrote:

> ... suppressing the individual's right to arbitrarily
> change their *anonymous* identity seems to be an
> inescapable requirement.

   Please let's not confuse "capacity" with "right."  I have the
capacity to break my neighbor's windows -- that does not make it a
"right."  I can deceive you today and change identities and deceive you
again tomorrow -- that does not make it a "right."

   These are YOUR newsgroups, serving YOUR purposes.  I have such
"rights" as YOU decide are acceptable things in YOUR domain.  If you
want to bestow on your guests, out of a capacity, a "right" that has
been used to NO purpose other than to harass your guests and disrupt
your efforts, then that's your choice; but I certainly recognize no such
"right" existent anywhere else.

   I urge you to consider YOUR purposes, that many of us share, and what
best serves those purposes and those who support you in them.  I do not
at all consider your allowance of wearing a mask here to imply or
necessitate that you allow me to use another such that you can't
associate the two.  mc can appear in any guise he wishes -- but I do not
in any way expect or demand that you deprive yourself of knowledge of
who is enjoying your hospitality.  I have only such "right" to conceal
myself from my host as you impose upon yourself, and I would hope that
you not give me the "right" to disrupt your efforts and then return,
concealed from you, to do it again.  I don't even want that capacity, I
have no use for it.

> Steve Gibson, at work on: < a million loose ends >

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

Ogden Computer Guy wrote:

> "roy" wrote ...
>> Oh so you are for selection now?

> I don't presume to talk for Abujamal (and I would think he has
> already replied by now) but I took it to mean that you should
> take the conversation somewhere else, off of Steve's server.

   Not at all.  That's apparently all that "roy" could read in it.

   I wrote:

>> From the sudden flurry of posts that compare privacy warrior
>> Steve Gibson to data miner Real Networks, apparently unable
>> to differentiate between white hats and black hats, perhaps
>> the best place for all of you "nip it in the bud" folks to
>> "put your foot down" would be just outside the door.

   Steve implemented a block that uniquely identified a discrete
individual machine.  The "nip it in the bud" folks consider it
illegitimate for Steve to uniquely identify a machine, and protest
loudly and long that they will leave should he do so.  He did so,
effectively, by means that at least one person believes are nonexistent.

   So there's the door:  they've indicated unequivocally their intent to
use it, and the best place for them to "put your foot down" in view of
what Steve HAS DONE is just outside the door.  However, actually, it
appears that some intend to beat a dead horse, here in Steve's
newsgroups.  That's nothing new, it's been done before, and Steve seems
to allow it.  But for consistency with their own expressed desires,
aims, intentions, and forcefully presented demands and complaints, the
"best place" is not standing around a dead horse.

> Kris aka the Ogden Computer Guy

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> Hilly,
> 
> > Now, to me...that's worth a couple of h/d serial numbers. I've
> > got half a dozen here at home, and would gladly give up -both-
> > h/d #'s on my ICS gateway...erm -- would I have to post from
> > only that box?
> 
> No, it would work the OTHER way around.
> 
> If someone using a machine were ever to really become a repeat and
> deliberately offensive poster here, the machine (hard drive) from
> which those offensive postings were made would only henceforth be
> able to READ these groups.
> 
> Essentially, that hard drive would be identified as belonging to
> someone who had abused our open and anonymous posting privileges.
> They would never be non-anonymous, but they would be prevented from
> coming back (from the same machine) as another person who might
> continue harassing these groups.

ANY process which results in the ability to uniquely identify a person
or their machine means loss of anonymity because they (or their machine)
can be singled out from a group of any size. Their actual identity may
not be known, but that is NOT the same as being anonymous.

If I see a thief rob a bank and remember his face, and later pick him
out of a lineup, he is anything but anonymous, even to me, yet I still
dont know his actual identity.

Thus, to answer Steves reply to me a few posts back ... Because it
allows unique identification of me (my machine) the HD tag is ABSOLUTLY
a lost of anonymity, wether it gives my actual identity to you or not.

> 
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Salaam!

root wrote:

> ANY process which results in the ability to uniquely identify
> a person or their machine means loss of anonymity because they
> (or their machine) can be singled out from a group of any size.
> Their actual identity may not be known, but that is NOT the
> same as being anonymous.

  Then there's none to lose here, Steve already did that.  Not just
once, either.

> Thus, to answer Steve's reply to me a few posts back ... Because
> it allows unique identification of me (my machine) the HD tag
> is ABSOLUTELY a loss of anonymity, whether it gives my actual
> identity to you or not.

   Gnats, camels, drowning men and straws all come to mind.

   Steve (and, actually, anyone with commensurate skills, facilities,
and motivation) can identify your machine uniquely.  So while some might
say "There's the door," I don't, I'd rather you stuck around and learned
how to preserve such privacy and security as pragmatically CAN be
preserved.  Instead, I say "There's the plug" -- for the absolutist,
complete anonymity you predicate, that's the *only* solution: 
disconnect.

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b686d969605bf5989a30@207.71.92.194...
> mc,
>
> > I would have no problem with any sort of login as long as it
> > was based ONLY on information which ~I~ provide manually and
> > voluntarily.
>
> Ah, but therein lies the conundrum.  If the IDentifier is ONLY based
> upon information that is manually and voluntarily provided by the
> user, there is no mechanism (that I've come up with yet) for
> preventing someone from inventing another "nym" for themselves.
>
> You see, that's what it really all boils down to:
>

That some people feel that their "rights" out weigh your rights and the
rights of all the other subscribers to these newsgroups.

They presume they have some inalienable right to write to your hard drives.
They presume they have the right to confound any and all efforts on your
part to deny *anyone* the right to do so. It boggles my mind! The only sense
I can make of it is that their experience is with chat rooms and usenet.
They fail to see any difference here and would have us all believe that the
only control available would be to complain to their isp and hope they would
lose their account. Now *that* would be heavy handed. What you propose has a
much lighter touch.

Perhaps they should consider "The Social Contract". I'll even provide a link
for them:
http://www.constitution.org/jjr/socon.htm

If they read it thoughtfully, they may come to see that there may be some
greater good in relinquishing absolute freedom for the benefit of the
community.

Bob Vanderveen

What you say sounds good and this community you speak of
is a fine one indeed.  But is it a community of silent voices? Or
one where discussion on what our King is going to do can be at 
least talked about?  This may be his kingdom, but he is a kind
and gentle king and this discussion is necessary.  It could be a
turning point for grc, good or bad.

This isn't the Collective.  Is it?

-- 
Michael (Anti-Borg)
Charlotte, NC  USA
mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________


"Anonymous Bob" <No.How@No.Way> wrote in message news:9ij5mu$2pau$1@news.grc.com...
 
> Bob Vanderveen

"MICHAEL" <mgbaker@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9ij6pn$2qij$1@news.grc.com...
> What you say sounds good and this community you speak of
> is a fine one indeed.  But is it a community of silent voices?

I don't think you took the time to read it.<g>

Bob Vanderveen

"MICHAEL" <mgbaker@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9ij6pn$2qij$1@news.grc.com...
> What you say sounds good and this community you speak of
> is a fine one indeed.

In your speed reading you may have over looked footnote 35:

It is indeed only malefactors of all estates who prevent the citizen from
being free. In the country in which all such men were in the galleys, the
most perfect liberty would be enjoyed.

Bob Vanderveen

"If, however, it is hard for a great State to be well governed, it is much harder for it to be so by a single man;"

That is why input and various opinions from others are important.

Thanks for the link.  :o)

-- 
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________

"Anonymous Bob" <No.How@No.Way> wrote in message news:9ij9de$2t79$1@news.grc.com...
> 
> "MICHAEL" <mgbaker@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:9ij6pn$2qij$1@news.grc.com...
> > What you say sounds good and this community you speak of
> > is a fine one indeed.
> 
> In your speed reading you may have over looked footnote 35:
> 
> It is indeed only malefactors of all estates who prevent the citizen from
> being free. In the country in which all such men were in the galleys, the
> most perfect liberty would be enjoyed.
> 
> Bob Vanderveen
> 
> 

"MICHAEL" <mgbaker@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:9ijar1$2uqd$1@news.grc.com...
> "If, however, it is hard for a great State to be well governed, it is much
harder for it to be so by a single man;"
>
> That is why input and various opinions from others are important.
>
> Thanks for the link.  :o)
>
> --

Not to worry, Michael. Steve gets more input than any man would need.<g>

I've been hanging out here from the time there was just one newsgroup. To my
knowledge there are only two people that Steve does not want to see posting.
But oh my, weren't both of them disruptive!

Within the bounds of civility, decency and appropriate topic for the
newsgroup, Steve allows free rein.

Bob Vanderveen

"Anonymous Bob" <No.How@No.Way> wrote in message news:9ijc0t$2vvr$1@news.grc.com...

>Within the bounds of civility, decency and appropriate topic for the
>newsgroup, Steve allows free rein.

I know, and I hope it stays that way.

Take care,

-- 
Michael
Charlotte, NC  USA
mgbaker@myrealbox.com
--
__________________________________________________

*grins*

Well Said!

Regards

Ares

Roy, I am entitled to my opinion, you are not entitled to tell me I am wrong.

So ner!

Regards

Airwees

I've been kicking around an idea...let me know if this sounds sane.

- People wanting to post (or later delete) would sign up on a web page with
whatever "REAL name" they want to appear in the news headers
- Upon signing up, they are given a unique, impossible to guess "GRC name"
which they would enter into their news readers "User information" area.
  (I can put different information in for each news server I connect to with
MS Outlook newsreader...I would enter this GRC name *only* for the GRC
server)
- When they post, the news server would do a lookup on their GRC name.  If
they are valid, it would replace the GRC name with the REAL name and post
the article.  If you're not using your active GRC name, no posting (but you
could always read).

The world would see the REAL name but never the GRC name.
GRC or it's moderators could deactivate the GRC name of anyone who trolls,
spams, or any GRC names that are made public.
This would require some specialized coding for the news server (along with a
database) but would allow people to continue to use standard news reader
software.(and continue to be as anonymous as they choose to be)
If you wanted to be nasty, you could put a delay on activating the GRC name.
Users couldn't post for a 12 (or 24 or whatever) hour "cooling off" period.
You might also consider aging the GRC names such that any not used in the
past 30 (or 60 or whatever) days are deleted.

-Tim

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b682effbf60ea6989a2f@207.71.92.194...
> mc,
>
> > But I'm holding on to the hope that Steve will find an
> > alternative to the 'tag generator' software to filter trolls
> > or some other form of authentication. He's already noted that
> > he understands our concerns, I think he'll come up with an
> > alternative if he can.
>
> I *absolutely* will come up with an alternative if I can!
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 18:48:43 -0500, Hilly enlightened us all with:

>Mitch, is your e-mail addy valid?

Yes -- in that it is both an existing and deliverable address.

At delivery, the from address gets a 550 bounce with a 'no such user',
the reply-to address will be accepted  --- and read.

-- 
Mitch

CK wrote:
> 
> The wonder of the internet is that it moves so fast,  Moore's law is a
> wonderful law and I hope it is never repealed

I don't see the connection here, but Moore's law will hold out so long
as the basic technology will allow, which is 10-15 more years at least,
given currently anticipated manufacturing methods.

The other law unlikely to be repealed any time soon is Godwin's Law.
 
Murphy's Law is, of course, etched in stone.

Mal-2
-- 
Some posts are a sad cry for help.  Others are a happy celebration of
psychosis.                                         -- James "Kibo" Parry
Orquesta Guayao Online http://www.geocities.com/orqguayao * ICQ:11401527

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:53:31 -0700, Steve Gibson enlightened us all
with:

>It's not ANONYMITY that some people object to losing here -- NO 
>ANONYMITY would EVER be lost.  The principle these people are 
>defending is that they want to have the RIGHT TO LIE about whether 
>they are ONE ANONYMOUS PERSON -- or more than one.  They want to 
>eliminate any horizon of responsibility for their past actions.

Come off it, that's plain daft reasoning.

Let's use the analogy of criminal laws and trials. For me, a decent
judicial system is one that bends over backwards to ensure that no
innocent person is ever wrongly convicted. I am prepared to accept that,
in order to make that feasible, some guilty folk will be found innocent.
But for anybody to turn that round and try and say that I am defending
the right of guilty people to go free would be daft -- to say nothing of
being insulting.

Steve, nobody is denying your right to make whatever rules you like so
that people can have the privilege -- as distinct from right -- to post
on your private server.Some of us are merely saying that some of the
rules you are proposing are unacceptable and, should you go down that
road, we will regretfully withdraw from the groups.

Take the recent furore over what is, and what is not, a 'necessary'
header. Hilly asked me in another thread whether my email addy is valid.
I gave her an answer, but not the reasons.

1) My from header address exists and is deliverable -- but I bounce
everything addressed to it. The reason it is not a munged address is
because, wherever possible, I try not to screw the system with addresses
where that system would have to faff about making several unnecessary
lookups.

2) My reply-to address exists and is deliverable and mail to it is
accepted. I insist that it is there 'cos, on principle, I never post
anything in public which I am not answerable to in private.

Both of the above involve matters of principle. If you had continued
with your original intention of deleting 'reply-to' headers as
"unnecessary", I would have withdrawn.

Do you understand a little bit better now?

-- 
Mitch

abujamal wrote:
> 
>    Gnats, camels, drowning men and straws all come to mind.
> 

Perhaps, what has come to my mind is "brick wall", and I think i've
banged my head enough. We both obviously have our opinions and hold them
strongly. Some appear to agree strongly with me, and others with you.
Some on both sides appear to take the effort to understand where the
other side is coming from ... and others dont. Brick Wall. So i'll stop
trying to convince a brick wall to move. My opinion, and my reasons for
it, have been sufficiently expressed between myself and others who feel
the same.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

Mitch B wrote:
> 

<<snip good reasoning>>

>
> Take the recent furore over what is, and what is not, a 'necessary'
> header. Hilly asked me in another thread whether my email addy is valid.
> I gave her an answer, but not the reasons.
> 

** covers hilly's eyes ** you didnt see that hilly. <<grin>>

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

Tim,

I've been researching the feasibility of an idea that's simpler and 
solves a different problem, but may be sufficient.  :)  More soon.

Thanks for your note.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> Tim,
> 
> I've been researching the feasibility of an idea that's simpler and
> solves a different problem, but may be sufficient.  :)  More soon.
> 
> Thanks for your note.
> 

Ut oh, Steve's been researching again, better give the magazines a heads
up! Steve, arent you supposed to be trying to make your to-do list
shorter not longer? *lol*

<<grin>>

Always looking forward to the fruits of your research wether I agree
with it or not. Its always educational, which is why I came here in the
first place. =)

-- 
________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and Crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones.

mc,

> Ut oh, Steve's been researching again, better give the magazines
> a heads up! Steve, arent you supposed to be trying to make your
> to-do list shorter not longer? *lol*

Yeah ... I'm really bad at that!

> Always looking forward to the fruits of your research wether I
> agree with it or not. Its always educational, which is why I
> came here in the first place. =)

The idea solves a number of problems.  It OBSOLETES the Cecil-ID 
system by allowing newsreaders to use their built-in article 
cancellation facilities -- while providing full security and spoof 
proofing -- no more need to use a grc web page to cancel posts.

And ... while it doesn't solve the problem of fraudulent anonymous 
identify creation, it *does* solve the present problem of existing 
identity impersonation (theft) and spoofing.  So NO ONE would ever be 
able to IMPERSONATE anyone else.  There would be no question that a 
post was originated from someone who was already well known.

More soon ...

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> roy wrote:
> 
> > I must assume that you have no answer ...
> 
>    You are certainly free to assume whatever you wish, but to pretend
> that you "must" is laughable.

You give me no choice. You refused to answer the question. So i
must assume you have no answer. I mean, there was nothing difficult
about the question, you wouldn't be breaking any secrets or contravening
national security or anything so spit it out or stop pretending you have
some "magic" tech wizardry that will uniquely identify us all via nntp.

  Whether you believe something or not has
> absolutely *no* bearing on whether or not you're correct, 

But in this case I'm quite sure I am correct. Nothing in life is 100%
certain. Look at the area of quantum mechanics, something upon which
most of modern electronics depends, it's just full of statistics,
probabilities so nothing is an absolute certainty. Why don't you
surprise me?

it's merely
> indicative of your view that if you don't know something, then it must
> not exist.  Or is there another element that forces you to assume, from
> someone's refusal to answer, that there is no answer?

No, I don't blv YOU have an answer. I am free to hold this belief as
long as I wish.
Look it goes like this, you say you have a hypothesis (about how you can
identify something). A scientist would then test that hypothesis and if
it passed the test it would become a full fledged theory, something that
we can all rely on. In your case we have not tested your hypothesis
therefore your hypothesis is just so much useless garbage. Go and
consider Occams razor or parsimony and you will see what I mean.

> 
> > AND having worked as a computer scientist myself
> > i just know that you are writing garbage.
> 
>    Apparently not long enough, because it is not only not garbage, but
> has been implemented and demonstrated before your eyes.  In 

In your dreams.

short, you
> know not whereof you speak, whether you've spent time in a high school
> computer lab or not.

University research departments to be sure.

> 
> > No offence meant but pls stick to reality.
> 
>    LOL!  "Offense" requires that it reach its target in some manner.
> You're miles away from that.

Why are you side tracking? Got not real answers? Is this all you can
come up with?
It's simple, tell us the answer, I just aint interested in your
adolescent accounts of what constitutes insults/reality etc.

roy

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> Hilly,
> 
> > Now, to me...that's worth a couple of h/d serial numbers. I've
> > got half a dozen here at home, and would gladly give up -both-
> > h/d #'s on my ICS gateway...erm -- would I have to post from
> > only that box?
> 
> No, it would work the OTHER way around.
> 
> If someone using a machine were ever to really become a repeat and
> deliberately offensive poster here, the machine (hard drive) from
> which those offensive postings were made would only henceforth be
> able to READ these groups.
> 
> Essentially, that hard drive would be identified as belonging to
> someone who had abused our open and anonymous posting privileges.
> They would never be non-anonymous, but they would be 

Name or number what's the difference? I think you have a loose
case for it still being anonymous and that is all. Once a person has his
real name identified (by the authorities for example) then ALL posting
to grc.news can be tied to that individual. That's hardly anonimity.
It's anonimity now but NOT anonimity tomorrow. Another thing, there's
nothing to stop someone reverse engineering an exe that reads the h/d
serial and have it spoof any number they like. 

prevented from
> coming back (from the same machine) as another person who might
> continue harassing these groups.

people are harassing here? 
roy

Mitch B wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:53:31 -0700, Steve Gibson enlightened us all
> with:
> 
> >It's not ANONYMITY that some people object to losing here -- NO
> >ANONYMITY would EVER be lost.  The principle these people are
> >defending is that they want to have the RIGHT TO LIE about whether
> >they are ONE ANONYMOUS PERSON -- or more than one.  They want to
> >eliminate any horizon of responsibility for their past actions.
> 
> Come off it, that's plain daft reasoning.
> 
> Let's use the analogy of criminal laws and trials. For me, a decent
> judicial system is one that bends over backwards to ensure that no
> innocent person is ever wrongly convicted. I am prepared to 

That's very nice Mitch but today society and government are becoming
more severe. Evenn the Americans on here can't fail to notice this.
Innocent citizens beaten to near death by their own police for traffic
violations or for demonstrating opinions in public. No, their and our
government are slowly seeing us as cattle and have their prods at the
ready. Why should anyone with a server be any different. 
Innocent until proven guilty is slowly being withdrawn at least here in
the UK (you surely are aware of proposed changes in the judicial system
here re right to jury. Then there is the RIP bill, now law). 

accept that,
> in order to make that feasible, some guilty folk will be found innocent.
> But for anybody to turn that round and try and say that I am defending
> the right of guilty people to go free would be daft -- to say nothing of
> being insulting.
> 

roy

Roy,

> Name or number what's the difference? I think you have a loose
> case for it still being anonymous and that is all. Once a
> person has his real name identified (by the authorities for
> example) then ALL posting to grc.news can be tied to that
> individual. That's hardly anonimity.  It's anonimity now but
> NOT anonimity tomorrow. Another thing, there's nothing to stop
> someone reverse engineering an exe that reads the h/d serial
> and have it spoof any number they like.

No no no.

I would *NEVER* EVER receive someone's hard drive ID.  Never.

It's a troublesome side effect of the overwhelming amount of info -- 
and even more noise -- in newsgroups that important details are often 
lost.

I would ONLY ever locally generate a one-way cryptographic hash of 
whatever data was used from the user's machine.  This is deliberately 
a non-reversible, information lossy, process ... DESIGNED TO PROTECT 
the original data while creating a "signature" from it.

Therefore ... it could NEVER be used to identify the individual.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> roy wrote:
> 
> > I merely find it very strange that users at "news.grc.com"
> > can even entertain the notion of tagging via personal
> > computer hardware serial numbers!!  <rotflmao>
> 
>    It startles you that someone trusts Steve Gibson?

No, I didn't say that at all. I SAID STRANGE. 
If you can't stop putting words into peoples mouths then I suggest you
give up responding or you will merely be a nuisance.

> 
>    I've been learning about security in practical terms here in these
> newsgroups, from people who know what they're talking about, 
for over a
> year (that means I'm a newbie, by the way).
  I've had some opportunity
> to take a look at Steve Gibson and the way he does things.  A couple of
> times I've wanted to get his attention somehow, and still don't know
> whether I did or not.  And don't care.

I doubt it. That's the trouble with the net, some people think they are
getting more out of it than they really are. You know what they say, get
a life, go down the pub, go and play with your mates on the street, in
the park and stop thinking that you are getting any kind of personal
experience or anything interpersonal of any value off the net.

> 
>    He can run anything he wants in my machine.  I'm not worried in the
> slightest, there's no "principle" to it other than the principle of
> having confidence also in someone other than myself, whether in terms of
> capacity or character.  I can appreciate that some people continue to
> labor under the curse "Go and trust none."  I don't.
> 
> > I thought first and above all that the single most pervasive
> > feeling in these groups was one of principle in rejecting
> > stuff like tagging.
> 
>    Actually it's one of practicality, not principle at all.  
We are here
> for the express purpose of learning how to secure the privacy we have in
> our own individual machines and home networks.
> 
>    What serves that purpose is legitimate and principled, period, the
> end is so intrinsically vital to human existence and essential (right of
> independent choice) that there is nothing, not even war and killing and
> mayhem, that is not entirely justified for its presevation.  I am
> trained, prepared and willing to kill other people for my and others'
> right of independent choice.
> 
>    That is the principle of these newsgroups, the right of independent
> choice.

So it is about principle now! Why don't you make up your mind?
Sheesh there was I thinking that we had a psychopath in our midst ready
to murder for practicalities sake. Now it's alright for principles.
<lol>

  Across the board in all things, not just computer and network
> security, that's just one arena where it needs to be preserved, and it
> is an uphill battle and definitely an on-going battle.  In inviting
> Steve to install "markers" so that he knows each and every person who
> comes here, to this battle, by their machines, is completely consistent
> with the principle of the right of independent choice.

You seem to be talking to yourself! Let me butt in here, we all know
there are choices but principles guide us in making our choice, what we
do. 
THE RIGHT OF INDEPENDANT CHOICE DOES NOT EXIST. The owner of these
servers could easily put in place rules that say, for example, only
ladies may post to tech.talk. Just like he said no excessive quoting is
allowed. Where is your right now!!
No, you have principles and that is all. Rights are slowly being chucked
out of the window AND you don't seem to mind.

  There is nothing
> whatsoever there of "Who sacrifices a little freedom for a little
> security obtains neither freedom nor security."  There is no loss of
> choice or freedom or privacy by cooperation, together with Steve, in
> rendering amicable and in improving the signal-to-noise ratio and in
> improving other ambience factors among those who support Steve in his
> championship of the right of independent choice by elimination of
> ignorance.
> 
>    It happens that there are a few seasoned professionals here, too, who
> are learning things about securing vast networks.  One of those seasoned
> professionals just passed from among us last week, and his mastery of
> Microsoft operating systems and networking appliances will be sorely
> missed.

Shucks! Like no one else can do what he did? No ones skills are
indespensible. 

> 
>    The thousands of people who populate these newsgroups are not all
> teenaged and not all newcomers.  But ludicrous opinions are fair game
> wherever they come from, whether they're about technical issues or
> "principles" so ambiguous as to lead people to unreason.  Too bad that
> "how to think rationally" is something schools don't teach, 

Yes, you might see what I am trying to say.

but then
> there are so many avenues to intellectual infirmity in today's media
> with its information-overload-supported agendas.

No No No No No! You don't even know what is in the news. The news media
invariably get it wrong! It's not overload. There actually isn't enough
science in the news or the TV and when there is they make many errors!

> 
> > Actually, I would be willing to bet that
> > if it came to a vote then you'd lose.
> 
>    You'll find my views on the value of democratic opinion elsewhere.
> I'd lose the vote on consumption of alcoholic beverages and swine, too,
> but just in case you hadn't noticed, there is a worldwide view of the
> United States as a drunken pig -- except the view from here, of course,
> in the belly of the beast, as it were.
> 
>    When you elect to apply a Big Brother yardstick to Steve Gibson, it

You are jumping to conclusions. I object in principle, not to what you
or anyone else might or might not want to do in the privacy of their own
home with some information. I object to
yet more klutz and crap from any quarter. I didn't say anyone was going
to play big brother. You just do not understand the situation if you
think that is ALL it is about.

> just doesn't measure up.  Steve's sling has already found quite a few
> talking heads, and people with a practical focus on the world their
> children will have to deal with have not mistaken Steve for the dragon
> we're here to slay.
> 
>    Don't trust him yet, 'cause you ain't been around here long enough to
> know how you can?  Fine, no problem, that's certainly no "criterion" for
> whether or not you might have something to gain or to contribute, either
> way.
> 
>    Some of us do.  And we'd enjoy a newsgroup where we can discuss the
> right of independent choice without all the noise from people who think
> it's about some "recipe" for security and that "trust none" is the first
> ingredient.  There ain't no recipe like that, or we'd have been using it
> centuries ago.

You have failed to see that you cannot have independant choice without
security and as for "trust none", those are your words
not mine. As such they probably say a lot more about you than me.

rgds
roy

Ogden Computer Guy wrote:
> 
> "roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
> news:3B4CCF3E.72BE0B47@lineone.net...
> 
> : I merely find it very strange that users at "news.grc.com" can even
> : entertain the notion of tagging via personal computer hardware serial
> : numbers!! <rotflmao>
> 
> I'm against it; but that doesn't mean I wouldn't entertain the idea. I
> have come to find out through the posts here that I may be the most
> insecure web user in the group, and while some people find it astounding
> that I run around the web with Java(script), ActiveX, cookies, etc. on,
> that is how I like it.

So do I. There's no point in using the net if you are going to go hide
in a corner. You have to use it's power or you just wont get the
benefit. The thing is to control that power.

> I made a suggestion (buried in a ton of other posts) about adapting the
> CECIL-ID system for the purpose of anti-trolling. I don't know if Steve
> saw it, but I made the suggestion just the same.
> 
> : I thought first and above all that the single most pervasive feeling
> in
> : these groups was one of principle in rejecting stuff like tagging.
> : Actually, I would be willing to bet that if it came to a vote then
> you'd
> : lose.
> 
> But news.grc.com is not a democracy, it's a benevolent dictatorship.

So? There is some divine universal law that says the owner cannot ask
for a vote? 

> Steve WILL take suggestions, but in the end what HE says, goes.

And what's different anywhere else on the net? (with the exception of
the free.uk groups) 
rgds
roy

Ogden Computer Guy wrote:
> 
> "roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
> news:3B4CB0BB.BAF48923@lineone.net...
> 
> : Oh so you are for selection now?
> 
> I don't presume to talk for Abujamal (and I would think he has already
> replied by now) but I took it to mean that you should takee the
> conversation somewhere else, off of Steve's server.

Can you please supply the relevant quotes and explain how you got to
that conclusion.
rgds
roy

Along the technical lines of WPA, using a different mix of hardware
components and a different weighting of the components in the mix.
Maybe a different hashing paradigm than MSFT uses.

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b79f298b1776ee989a43@207.71.92.194...
| Roy,
|
| > Name or number what's the difference? I think you have a loose
| > case for it still being anonymous and that is all. Once a
| > person has his real name identified (by the authorities for
| > example) then ALL posting to grc.news can be tied to that
| > individual. That's hardly anonimity.  It's anonimity now but
| > NOT anonimity tomorrow. Another thing, there's nothing to stop
| > someone reverse engineering an exe that reads the h/d serial
| > and have it spoof any number they like.
|
| No no no.
|
| I would *NEVER* EVER receive someone's hard drive ID.  Never.
|
| It's a troublesome side effect of the overwhelming amount of info --
| and even more noise -- in newsgroups that important details are often
| lost.
|
| I would ONLY ever locally generate a one-way cryptographic hash of
| whatever data was used from the user's machine.  This is deliberately
| a non-reversible, information lossy, process ... DESIGNED TO PROTECT
| the original data while creating a "signature" from it.
|
| Therefore ... it could NEVER be used to identify the individual.


Not to put too fine a point on it, but that is what MSFT is claiming for
its code also.
I thought the basic rule of code was that any code could be broken,
hacked or twisted;
maybe not today, but Moore's law is inexorable.
CK
|
| --
| _________________________________________________________________
| Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

abujamal wrote:
> 
> Salaam!
> 
> Ogden Computer Guy wrote:
> 
> > "roy" wrote ...
> >> Oh so you are for selection now?
> 
> > I don't presume to talk for Abujamal (and I would think he has
> > already replied by now) but I took it to mean that you should
> > take the conversation somewhere else, off of Steve's server.
> 
>    Not at all.  That's apparently all that "roy" could read in it.
> 
>    I wrote:
> 
> >> From the sudden flurry of posts that compare privacy warrior
> >> Steve Gibson to data miner Real Networks, apparently unable
> >> to differentiate between white hats and black hats, perhaps
> >> the best place for all of you "nip it in the bud" folks to
> >> "put your foot down" would be just outside the door.
> 

Well any reasonable person could call that selection or exclusion if you
like (the same thing) based on opinions.
You suggested that anyone of a different opinion ought to leave. I can't
make it cleare than that and to be honest if you can't see that then you
really ought to give up for now and go to some night class and brush up
on english comprehension etc.
Incidently, what any of it has to do with taking the discussion off of
the server is beyond me! Maybe your friend ought to do the same. Unless
we can agree on the basics of english language and comprehension then
there will be nothing but confusion here. Just a suggestion, I;m afraid
I wont be responding to your posts after this as I really don't think
you make much sense. Sorry.

>    Steve implemented a block that uniquely identified a discrete
> individual machine.  The "nip it in the bud" folks consider it
> illegitimate for Steve to uniquely identify a machine, and protest
> loudly and long that they will leave should he do so.  He did so,
> effectively, by means that at least one person believes are nonexistent.
> 

I doubt that you are speaking for everybody here and you most certainly
aren't speaking for me.

>    So there's the door:  they've indicated unequivocally their intent to
> use it, and the best place for them to "put your foot down" in view of
> what Steve HAS DONE is just outside the door.  However, 

I suggest you take some college course on basic computing and the
internet.

actually, it
> appears that some intend to beat a dead horse, here in Steve's
> newsgroups.  That's nothing new, it's been done before, and Steve seems
> to allow it.  But for consistency with their own expressed desires,
> aims, intentions, and forcefully presented demands and 
complaints, the
> "best place" is not standing around a dead horse.

For someone who knows so little you seem to know so much, like I said,
you don't fool me and I wont be moved into taking my (on topic) opinion
elsewhere either. 
rgds
roy

CK,

> Not to put too fine a point on it, ...

Sometimes "fine points" are what we need.

> ... but that is what MSFT is claiming for its code also. I thought
> the basic rule of code was that any code could be broken, hacked
> or twisted; maybe not today, but Moore's law is inexorable.

That's the whole reason why I would use a non-reverisble hash.  
Hashes deliberately DISCARD INFORMATION, making them provably
and forever unreversible.

-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

CK wrote:
> 
> Along the technical lines of WPA, using a different mix of hardware
> components and a different weighting of the components in the mix.
> Maybe a different hashing paradigm than MSFT uses.

It's similar(ish). Microsoft must release a key in some form or other in
order for you to activate the software. It will close down in thirty
days without it. What Steve is doing is authentication but
authentication requires that both parties know something, the same
thing. Whether it is an md5sum of this or that and is exchanged in a
cryptographically secure manner like CHAP for example is not important.
It will still be unique to the machine and can at a future time lock all
the posts together to the same machine and by extension owner. And
anyway there isn't enough unique data released in ordinary nntp from
which to generate anything unique. CHAP methods might be a way forward
but it would entail either a modification to news reader software or a
daemon be run on the users machine that intercepts periodic
authentication requests from the grc server.
roy






> 
> "Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.15b79f298b1776ee989a43@207.71.92.194...
> | Roy,
> |
> | > Name or number what's the difference? I think you have a loose
> | > case for it still being anonymous and that is all. Once a
> | > person has his real name identified (by the authorities for
> | > example) then ALL posting to grc.news can be tied to that
> | > individual. That's hardly anonimity.  It's anonimity now but
> | > NOT anonimity tomorrow. Another thing, there's nothing to stop
> | > someone reverse engineering an exe that reads the h/d serial
> | > and have it spoof any number they like.
> |
> | No no no.
> |
> | I would *NEVER* EVER receive someone's hard drive ID.  Never.
> |
> | It's a troublesome side effect of the overwhelming amount of info --
> | and even more noise -- in newsgroups that important details are
> often
> | lost.
> |
> | I would ONLY ever locally generate a one-way cryptographic hash of
> | whatever data was used from the user's machine.  This is
> deliberately
> | a non-reversible, information lossy, process ... DESIGNED TO PROTECT
> | the original data while creating a "signature" from it.
> |
> | Therefore ... it could NEVER be used to identify the individual.
> 
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but that is what MSFT is claiming
> for
> its code also.
> I thought the basic rule of code was that any code could be broken,
> hacked or twisted;
> maybe not today, but Moore's law is inexorable.
> CK
> |
> | --
> | _________________________________________________________________
> | Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

-- 
http://website.lineone.net/~roy_gant/keys.html
81 63 F8 C3 20 CE D9 21 27 68 ED 4E 49 62 81
C5A 1B40DB11BB8212430F93F5EB906E57442E747

Right,  40 bits is enough for a full Mac address so take 25% of them,
16 bits is probably enough for a harddrive serial number so take 25% of
them,
etc etc
combine through a one way hashing algorhythym gets a X bit irreversible
ID
continue as needed to get quasi unique ID's that are not reversible.
Am I missing a step in the process or in the theory?
Microsoft uses the MD5 message digest algorhythm according to that paper
from Licenturions  to hash its hardware activation value.
I am probably not describing the process exactly the way you are
visualizing it.
CK

"Steve Gibson" <support@grc.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b7afee5dd080b9989a47@207.71.92.194...
| CK,
|
| > Not to put too fine a point on it, ...
|
| Sometimes "fine points" are what we need.
|
| > ... but that is what MSFT is claiming for its code also. I thought
| > the basic rule of code was that any code could be broken, hacked
| > or twisted; maybe not today, but Moore's law is inexorable.
|
| That's the whole reason why I would use a non-reverisble hash.
| Hashes deliberately DISCARD INFORMATION, making them provably
| and forever unreversible.
|
| --
| _________________________________________________________________
| Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> I would *NEVER* EVER receive someone's hard drive ID.  Never.
> 
> It's a troublesome side effect of the overwhelming amount of info --
> and even more noise -- in newsgroups that important details are often
> lost.
> 
> I would ONLY ever locally generate a one-way cryptographic hash of
> whatever data was used from the user's machine.  This is deliberately
> a non-reversible, information lossy, process ... DESIGNED TO PROTECT
> the original data while creating a "signature" from it.
> 
> Therefore ... it could NEVER be used to identify the individual.

Perhaps you are thinking of something along the lines of "pure"
authenication like that used in the CHAP process, no meaningfull data is
transmitted but authentication is achieved.
Sure there is no machine serial number passed up and down but in
principle all posts will have been authenticated as coming from specific
machines and as such will, should anonimity be broken, mean that
everything anyone posted can be tied to them. Anonimity is preserved
untill the feds make the isp give up your id based on the ip number in
the headers.

Actually it IS a good way to stop multiple ids but you will need to
either modify nntp or run a program on our pc's. Incidently, I think you
could use any agreed upon peice of information between user and server,
it doesn't have to be a serial number. Just like CHAP of course. Chap is
not open abuse but everyone would have to have their own unique nickname
or number. In the end it's no different to asking everyone to post with
a pgp signature and have grc.com check them before accepting them. Not
everyone wants all that they write to have the potential of being
subject to the full authority of law. people like to have an escape
route. Sure it's not accepting responsibility but then why should we
always and for everything. It's only a goddam news posting after all.
You'll be bringing on the thought police next! ;-) 

roy

Salaam!

mc wrote:

> My opinion, and my reasons for it, have been sufficiently
> expressed between myself and others who feel the same.

   I reached the same conclusion.

>  _ __  __ 
> | '  \/ _|
> |_|_|_\__|

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 01:19:22 -0400, "Anonymous Bob" <No.How@No.Way>
wrote:

>I've been hanging out here from the time there was just one newsgroup. To my
>knowledge there are only two people that Steve does not want to see posting.
>But oh my, weren't both of them disruptive!

< snip >

No they weren't. What WAS disruptive were the idiots who kept replying
to their posts. 


Again and again and again and again and again and........


Why is nobody here interested in looking at THAT issue ?

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:16:59 -0400, mc <no.spam@mctech.org> wrote:


>But Im holding on to the hope that Steve will find an alternative to the
>'tag generator' software to filter trolls 

< snip >

The way to deal with trolls is to ignore them.

This is the way many threads are here :

Post.
You are a troll.
No he isn't.
Yes he is.
No I am not.
Keep quiet troll.
He isn't.
He is.
Ignore him.
He isn't a troll.
I am plonking him.
Why are you plonking me ?
Keep quiet troll.
He isn't a troll.

etc. etc.

At least 50% of the rubbish in this newsgroup is due to people
debating whether other people are/are not trolls.

If someone is a troll. Fine.
If someone isn't a troll. Fine.
Do we need these never ending debates day after day after...?

All one needs to do to be called a "troll" is to disagree with Steve
on some issue.

Why does Steve need this army of "defenders" here ? Every time someone
even remotely looks like being critical of anything about 50 people
jump on him/her. Doesn't anyone appreciate how stupid this makes
them/Steve look to outsiders ?

Steve doesn't need these baby-sitters. He is big enough to defend
himself if he feels the need. IMO 

Why cannot the critics simply be ignored ? Or if people disagree do so
without the name-calling ? Steve says that he appreciates comments
from everyone. Why try to lock-out/shout down anyone with differing
views ? I can certainly see why visitors to this newsgroup get the
impression that it is only for/populated by "yes" men/women.

IMO a huge number of useless posts could be avoided if debates about
whether people were/were not trolls were made "OT" for this newsgroup.

More useless posts could be avoided if the "knee jerk" defenders
simply ignored the critics.

Regards, John.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 17:33:29 -0700, Steve Gibson <support@grc.com>
wrote:

Hi Steve,

>If someone using a machine were ever to really become a repeat and 
>deliberately offensive poster here, the machine (hard drive) from 
>which those offensive postings were made would only henceforth be 
>able to READ these groups.

< snip >

That sounds like a "neat" solution but ;

It smacks of the paranoid approach by some religions "the devil is out
to get me". In this case "the devil" is the "offensive poster".

Is everyone here shaking in their boots ? Terrified that some
"offensive poster" will arrive ?

Whatever happened to the notion of "education" ? Why aren't people
here being taught to ignore such posters ? How to use killfiles ?

"Offensive posters" will not stay if they are ignored. 

Just about everyone here wants YOU to solve their problems for them.
Rather than exercise some self responsibility.

Why are you encouraging them ?

Regards, John.

On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 23:12:14 +0100, roy <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote:

< snip >

>I merely find it very strange that users at "news.grc.com" can even
>entertain the notion of tagging via personal computer hardware serial
>numbers!! <rotflmao>

>I thought first and above all that the single most pervasive feeling in
>these groups was one of principle in rejecting stuff like tagging.
>Actually, I would be willing to bet that if it came to a vote then you'd
>lose.
>roy

I suspect that there are plenty of people who agree with you Roy. Most
won't however post here. All that gets is a host of people jump on
them.

Anyone who significantly disagrees with Steve on anything is called a
"troll". Many want such "trolls" to be kept away by some tagging
technology that Steve can come up with.

In other newsgroups that approach would simply be called "censorship."

I have learnt heaps from these newsgroups. Some of it from "trolls"
and "critics". It is sad that so many people are promoting a
"sanitised" newsgroup. 

There are better approaches but nobody here seems at all interested 
in them.

Regards, John.

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> I'm quite sure I am correct.  Nothing in life is 100% certain.
> I am free to hold this belief as long as I wish.

   Without doubt.

> roy

was-salaam
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

In article <MPG.15b682effbf60ea6989a2f@207.71.92.194>, support@grc.com 
says from...
> mc,
> 
<snip>
> 
> I *absolutely* will come up with an alternative if I can!
> 
> 
Steve,
	It's your site, you set the rules. If some one breaks them you are 
entitled to bar them totally. That you will only bar posting is very 
generous.

With regard to posting here, hiding behind changing pseudonyms to bait 
or berate others is cowardly and deceitful.

No one should have a "right" that takes away any one else's "right".

If you "NEED" anonymity to post here, ask yourself WHY?

If you don't trust Steve, WHY ARE YOU HERE!
-- 
Trevor.

=================
Trevor Collins
Wagga Wagga NSW
Australia
=================

"John Fitzsimons" <johnf@net2000.com.au> wrote in message
news:tvcsktogual3mafvg1o8fnr9k8e596cloh@4ax.com...
[...]
> Anyone who significantly disagrees with Steve on anything is called a
> "troll".

This has not been my experience whatsoever. And I have disagreed with Steve
on various things, though certainly not (in my eyes) in a trollacious
manner. I have been called a troll once, but it wasn't related to an issue
Steve has brought up.

Can you provide some concrete examples, perhaps?

> Many want such "trolls" to be kept away by some tagging
> technology that Steve can come up with.

If you will recall, however, that this technology will be in _Steve's_
hands, so the group's definition of a "troll" is entirely meaningless. Only
those who are unwelcome by _his_ standards will be kept out.

> In other newsgroups that approach would simply be called "censorship."

I might agree, and why not call it what it is? However, we are in Steve's
house, and really can't protest any such censorship he should choose to
impose on us while we are here.

It is not as though "censorship" is some scary word that will end the world.
After all, isn't deletion of unsuitable posts also a form of censorhip?

> I have learnt heaps from these newsgroups. Some of it from "trolls"
> and "critics". It is sad that so many people are promoting a
> "sanitised" newsgroup.

I have learned much from most posters here, too. That's not to say that
there aren't some I would rather not have spoken with (but that doesn't meen
I would have rather have had them banned, either).

> There are better approaches but nobody here seems at all interested
> in them.

Lets hear them.

Regards,
Sam
--
Welcome to Earth. A subsidiary of Microsoft�.

In article <MPG.15b8f0b8e1cd36a898968d@news.grc.com> Trevor Collins
wrote:
> 
> No one should have a "right" that takes away any one else's "right".
> 
Kind of reminds me of the old saying that your rights stop at the end of
my nose (and vice versa).  <g>
-- 
Alan
(at work on 21st century Energy Theory)
Energy and Energetics:
< http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

In article <3B4CDC6D.9F6FCA15@earthlink.net>, muslims@earthlink.net says...
>    Ask Carlene.  See how long it takes her to post an answer here after
> she figures out just *one* of the ways.

Yes. The "exact" blocking mechanism has eluded all so far, and my
posts (in fact ALL posts as Steve deletes them all as soon as they
come in) that shed any light upon that mechanism, are of those few
I feel are "rightfully" deleted.

And so, the "mechanism" shall remain obscure, until that time as
those trolls who are being EXCEEDINGLY civil and "nice" (for the
moment), are themselves blocked and the "mechanism" is put to a
"swarm test" by them, against grc.

Regards
YouKnowWho

"Whomever" <whomever@whatevermore.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15b819538d4c6218989774@207.71.92.194...
<snip>
> And so, the "mechanism" shall remain obscure, until that time as
> those trolls who are being EXCEEDINGLY civil and "nice" (for the
> moment), are themselves blocked and the "mechanism" is put to a
> "swarm test" by them, against grc.

It speaks.  At least the fingers work.

Hilly.

In article <71fsktou36runfkl55i1mvtq76b8p5gg8p@4ax.com>, John Fitzsimons 
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 01:19:22 -0400, "Anonymous Bob" <No.How@No.Way>
> wrote:
> >I've been hanging out here from the time there was just one newsgroup. To my
> >knowledge there are only two people that Steve does not want to see posting.
> >But oh my, weren't both of them disruptive!
> 
> No they weren't. What WAS disruptive were the idiots who kept replying
> to their posts. 
> 
> Again and again and again and again and again and........
>  
> Why is nobody here interested in looking at THAT issue ?

Because it's pretty pointless, beyond laying down guidelines and a few 
reminders? :-

http://grc.com/discussions.htm

"Please DO NOT FEED the trolls:
Trolls post annoying and abusive messages in order to incite anger and 
in an attempt to force reactions. Difficult as it can be at times, 
PLEASE AVOID REPLYING TO ALL SUCH POSTS and thus feeding the trolls. 
Since trolls exist only for the attention they can generate, they will 
leave only � and always � when they are simply ignored."

But it's human nature not to do so ...

-- 
Milly

Steve Gibson wrote:
> 
> And ... while it doesn't solve the problem of fraudulent anonymous
> identify creation, it *does* solve the present problem of existing
> identity impersonation (theft) and spoofing.  So NO ONE would ever be
> able to IMPERSONATE anyone else.  There would be no question that a
> post was originated from someone who was already well known.
> 
> More soon ...
> 
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Steve Gibson,               at work on: < a million loose ends >

It would be nice to see the PGP stuff disappear in here.  Go for it,
Steve...

Corey

In article <MPG.15b9b9cc4a5d8c9896dd@news.grc.com> Ares{a} wrote:
> 
> > And so, the "mechanism" shall remain obscure, until that time as
> > those trolls who are being EXCEEDINGLY civil and "nice" (for the
> > moment), are themselves blocked and the "mechanism" is put to a
> > "swarm test" by them, against grc.
> 
> Well I guess that rules out Steve sending round the heavies to break your
> fingers :P Unless you have one of the speech to text programs.
> 
Hello, Ares;

Two small settings on your newsreader would greatly help the rest of us
read your posts:

1) Please include the name of the person to whom you are replying.  Not
knowing to whom you are replying is frustrating.  Other Gravity users
include the name as a courtesy to others, so your newsreader does have
the capability.

2) Please set the correct geographical Time Zone on your newsreader. 
Your present setting is *way* off.  Other international users have no
problem setting the TZ in Gravity, so your newsreader does have the
capability.

Thanks.
-- 
Alan
(at work on 21st century Energy Theory)
Energy and Energetics:
< http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

Posted by Ares{a}, in article
news:MPG.15b9b2d060fb8cd59896db@news.grc.com: 

> Not
>> everyone wants all that they write to have the potential of being
>> subject to the full authority of law. people like to have an escape
>> route. Sure it's not accepting responsibility but then why should we
>> always and for everything. 
> 
> Well actually, that is sad! You should always be prepared and willing
> to accept the responsibility for your actions - if not, then you had
> no justification performing them. 

Aw, but that's a simplification.  I used to smoke quite a bit of 
marijuana, and was perfectly happy to accept most of the consequences of 
that (and there are many, good and bad);  I was not willing to accept the 
consequences dictated by law, and so I always hid my pot from cops and 
people I thought might tell cops about it.

There are also clearer cases in which being subject to the 'full 
authority of the law' is an extremely *bad* thing.  If I lived in China, 
I'd have a lot of problems accepting the law.  I'm not an anarchist by 
any stretch, but I recognize that there are times when people 
legitimately feel the need to speak with assurance of anonymity and 
without fear of unjust reprisals.  What's just or unjust is up to each of 
us to figure out for ourselves.  It's abuse of anonymity by those who 
have no reasonable sense of justice that destroys trust and hurts the 
credibility of those who have a legit need to remain 'hidden.'

As far as posting to this GRC server goes, I have a difficult time 
imagining why there would be any need for anyone to post anonymously, but 
I can't discount the possibility that there might be such a need.  

-- 
�Q�

Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.

Ares{a} wrote:

> The same problem exists on IRC - you cannot ban someone in reality because
> identification is based on 4 things - nickname, ident, isp port, isp domain.
> 
> If you ban only on nickname, they can come back by changing their nick.
> 
> If you ban only on ident, again, they can come back by changing their ident.
> 
> If you ban on port, then a new connection and they are back again
> 
> But if you ban on isp domain - you ban EVERYONE from that domain.
> 
> It doesnt help banning on any combination of these, the troll can still get
> back.

Actually its fairly simple to kill all but the most determined trolls on
irc. Ive done it more than once as a channel owner. But in essense you
are correct, all the normal methods of banning are 'fairly' easily
circumvented ~if~ the user knows how the ban works, and how to make the
necessary changes.

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 _ __  __           MicroChip Technical Services - http://mctech.org/
| '  \/ _|            PCHelpers International - http://pchelpers.org/
|_|_|_\__|           Backwoods Communications - http://backwoods.org/

-3- Remember the Legend - Dale Earnhardt
Hackers and crackers and Trojans, oh my! - Ray F. Jones

The only constant in the universe is change.
Always stop and smell the roses.

Salaam!

Ares{a} wrote:

> Steve has a number of ideas and possible solutions to
> prevent a tenacious troll reappearing.  I support it.

   I support it generally (i.e., across all newsgroups) for the simple
reason that they are Steve's, to do with whatever he wants.  I'll do
whatever he considers helpful to achieve whatever purpose he decides.  I
would be happy with some "sanitized" newsgroups with read-only settings
until identification authentication is implemented for individuals, or
with all of the newsgroups set that way.  I'm not here to hide from
Steve or anyone else, and I'm not concerned that my comments will
inspire litigation or other attacks so that I need to worry about that.

   Neither am I so obsessed with purity and perfection, or with Steve's
"image" as "The Compleat Paranoid," that his ability to recognize
visitors is axiomatically some kind of high crime or misdemeanor in my
eyes.  Knee-jerk reactions like "That's what DoubleClick does" just
don't reach me at all, Steve is not DoubleClick.

   Wipe'em out.  Auto-plonk.  Bzzzzt, your time is up.  Take your bad
manners and disruptive crap elsewhere, we have better things to do with
our pay-by-the-minute time.  "Just for the sake of argument" isn't a
topic I care about.

   What -- and Steve's stalwarts object to cleaning up the trash?  Okay,
fine -- do it *without* their help, then.  Just do it.

> Regards
> Ares

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

In article <3B4F3563.2EA364E9@earthlink.net>, abujamal said...
>  "Just for the sake of argument" isn't a topic I care about.

<Splutter!> :)

-- 
Milly

"�Q�" <DodgeballCircusAct@usa.net> schreef in bericht
news:Xns90DD777E5DABEitsmeitsQ@127.0.0.1...
> Posted by Ares{a}, in article
> news:MPG.15b9b2d060fb8cd59896db@news.grc.com:
>
>
> As far as posting to this GRC server goes, I have a difficult time
> imagining why there would be any need for anyone to post anonymously, but
> I can't discount the possibility that there might be such a need.
>

    Good one !

Wimpie.

"�Q�" <DodgeballCircusAct@usa.net> wrote in message
news:Xns90DD777E5DABEitsmeitsQ@127.0.0.1...

> I used to smoke quite a bit of
> marijuana

:-O

> As far as posting to this GRC server goes, I have a difficult time
> imagining why there would be any need for anyone to post anonymously, but
> I can't discount the possibility that there might be such a need.

I'll say! <g>

I agree, though, in that I see no need to post anonymously but I can
understand why someone would want to.

In article <MPG.15b94f1d4bd772829896d6@207.71.92.194> Milly wrote:
> 
> In article <3B4F3563.2EA364E9@earthlink.net>, abujamal said...
> >  "Just for the sake of argument" isn't a topic I care about.
> 
> <Splutter!> :)
> 
There are those who enjoy it.  I don't.
-- 
Alan
(at work on 21st century Energy Theory)
Energy and Energetics:
< http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

In article <3B4F4FC4.C413F92@cox-internet.com>, Hermital said...
> In article <MPG.15b94f1d4bd772829896d6@207.71.92.194> Milly wrote:
> > 
> > In article <3B4F3563.2EA364E9@earthlink.net>, abujamal said...
> > >  "Just for the sake of argument" isn't a topic I care about.
> > 
> > <Splutter!> :)
> > 
> There are those who enjoy it.  I don't.

Yes you do.

-- 
Milly

In article <MPG.15b9c87477bb0f9c9896e7@news.grc.com> Ares{a} wrote:
> 
> > 1) Please include the name of the person to whom you are replying.  Not
> > knowing to whom you are replying is frustrating.  Other Gravity users
> > include the name as a courtesy to others, so your newsreader does have
> > the capability.
> 
> *carefully practised blank statre*
> 
> > 2) Please set the correct geographical Time Zone on your newsreader.
> > Your present setting is *way* off.  Other international users have no
> > problem setting the TZ in Gravity, so your newsreader does have the
> > capability.
> 
> *same blank stare with a hint of drool*
> 
> uh?
> 
Thanks for confirming your intent.  So much for community spirit and
cooperation from Ares(a).
-- 
Alan
Energy and Energetics:
< http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

In article <MPG.15b96102466240859896dd@207.71.92.194> Milly wrote:
> In article <3B4F4FC4.C413F92@cox-internet.com>, Hermital said...
> > In article <MPG.15b94f1d4bd772829896d6@207.71.92.194> Milly wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3B4F3563.2EA364E9@earthlink.net>, abujamal said...
> > > >  "Just for the sake of argument" isn't a topic I care about.
> > >
> > > <Splutter!> :)
> > >
> > There are those who enjoy it.  I don't.
> 
> Yes you do.
> 
8^)
-- 
Alan
Energy and Energetics:
< http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/index.htm >

"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> schreef in bericht
news:3B4F3563.2EA364E9@earthlink.net...
> Salaam!
>
>    I support it generally (i.e., across all newsgroups) for the simple
> reason that they are Steve's, to do with whatever he wants.  I'll do
> whatever he considers helpful to achieve whatever purpose he decides.  I
> would be happy with some "sanitized" newsgroups with read-only settings
> until identification authentication is implemented for individuals, or
> with all of the newsgroups set that way.  I'm not here to hide from
> Steve or anyone else, and I'm not concerned that my comments will
> inspire litigation or other attacks so that I need to worry about that.
>
>    Neither am I so obsessed with purity and perfection, or with Steve's
> "image" as "The Compleat Paranoid," that his ability to recognize
> visitors is axiomatically some kind of high crime or misdemeanor in my
> eyes.  Knee-jerk reactions like "That's what DoubleClick does" just
> don't reach me at all, Steve is not DoubleClick.
>
>    Wipe'em out.  Auto-plonk.  Bzzzzt, your time is up.  Take your bad
> manners and disruptive crap elsewhere, we have better things to do with
> our pay-by-the-minute time.  "Just for the sake of argument" isn't a
> topic I care about.

    I can see, abujamal, that you're getting a bit fed up with all the
reasonings and opinions, and wanting to get a quick solution for the
problem. Partly I'm with you, were it not that you would accept anything to
stop trolling quickly. But that is not in the spirit of our NGs and of SG. I
do feel with you, but don't you think it's a bit rigid to do it the way you
want?

    I'm sure we can trust Steve to come up with a reasonable solution to the
problem. Hasn't he always done that in a gentle manner, without compromising
our members? I for one have always been proud of the way he's solved our/his
problems. Maybe, abujamal, you're a bit hasty, although I *do* understand
why. I'm also in favorite to get just *that* what I want to know out of
anything/anybody, just the very things I would like to know, and no bullshit
to go through to end up that you've waisted your time only to find out that
there was no answer to your question. I sure do know what you mean.

    Just leave it to the master. The way I understand it is that once he has
accumulated enough opinions, he'll make his mind up and eventally will find
a solution that'll suite us all. Just lest's all be a little bit patience.

>
>    What -- and Steve's stalwarts object to cleaning up the trash?  Okay,
> fine -- do it *without* their help, then.  Just do it.
>

    Sorry, abujamal, this is no way a good sentence. If I take it apart it
says: What do it *whithout* their help, then. Just do it.
Maybe you could refrase that sentence, if you don't mind.

    BTW what is 'stalwarts'?

Wimpie.

"roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3B4E0AFA.14ADDCE@lineone.net...

> > But news.grc.com is not a democracy, it's a benevolent dictatorship.
>
> So? There is some divine universal law that says the owner cannot ask
> for a vote?

No, and Steve bears that out in that he does ask for votes, on some things,
and has even reversed a decision he felt strongly about due to adverse
reaction to the idea by the people that post to these groups, namely the
posting of the 474 IPs involved in the first DDoS agains GRC.COM.

> > Steve WILL take suggestions, but in the end what HE says, goes.
>
> And what's different anywhere else on the net? (with the exception of
> the free.uk groups)

I'm not familiar with free.uk, but one would hope it's NOT different
anywhere else than it is on GRC.COM; however, in reality it certainly is. I
don't have any examples but I can certainly look for some if necessary.

"roy" <roy_gant@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3B4E0B50.2B356A07@lineone.net...

> > I don't presume to talk for Abujamal (and I would think he has already
> > replied by now) but I took it to mean that you should takee the
> > conversation somewhere else, off of Steve's server.
>
> Can you please supply the relevant quotes and explain how you got to
> that conclusion.

Since my conclusion was incorrect I think I'll retract it.

"�Q�" <DodgeballCircusAct@usa.net> wrote in message
news:Xns90DD777E5DABEitsmeitsQ@127.0.0.1...
> Posted by Ares{a}, in article
> news:MPG.15b9b2d060fb8cd59896db@news.grc.com:
> Aw, but that's a simplification.  I used to smoke quite a bit of
> marijuana, and was perfectly happy to accept most of the consequences of
> that (and there are many, good and bad);  I was not willing to accept the
> consequences dictated by law, and so I always hid my pot from cops and
> people I thought might tell cops about it.

So to further simplify what you are saying: You were not willing to go to
jail for smoking pot, you knew those were the consequences should you get
caught, but you did it anyway?

Too damned bad. Laws are laws, you break them, you do jail time, get killed,
etc.. That's life.
Sure, there can be bad laws, I disagree with many of them up here in Canada
(except for the equal rights laws here in Ontario). The fact of the matter
is that most people are really not doing much more than reacting to what
life hands them. Very few people go out of their way to make drastic changes
in life.
The Internet gives people a false sense of what they're doing. I've seen
mutual friends of mine get into arguments online and stay stuff online that
they NEVER would have said in person. Sure, you can try and avoid getting
caught, but that is one and the whole of your actions.
If you rob a bank, that is an action that you are responsible for. If you
give millions of dollars to charity, that is also an action you are
responsible for. A person can never truly shirk their responsibility for
their own actions.

> There are also clearer cases in which being subject to the 'full
> authority of the law' is an extremely *bad* thing.  If I lived in China,
> I'd have a lot of problems accepting the law.  I'm not an anarchist by
> any stretch, but I recognize that there are times when people
> legitimately feel the need to speak with assurance of anonymity and
> without fear of unjust reprisals.  What's just or unjust is up to each of
> us to figure out for ourselves.  It's abuse of anonymity by those who
> have no reasonable sense of justice that destroys trust and hurts the
> credibility of those who have a legit need to remain 'hidden.'

Agreed. The key thing is the fear of unjust reprisals. Such as happened to
Steve with the DDoS attacks on GRC.com. The problem is, you still have to
remember that those are your actions. If you are a witness at a murder
trial, you are responsible for what you say and/or do. I generally find
people don't consider all the factors before doing something.

Now, does that mean I think that Steve is responsible for the DDoS attacks?
No. He is responsible for having the GRC webserver and new server up and
running. He is responsible for saying what he said that set some kid off on
a DDoS spree. He is responsible for everything which HE HAS DONE. All of us
are. I guess the real question is whether or not he thinks it's worth it.

> As far as posting to this GRC server goes, I have a difficult time
> imagining why there would be any need for anyone to post anonymously, but
> I can't discount the possibility that there might be such a need.

Same here, however I am one of few people here who doesn't use an alias. Why
do you think that is?

--
Chris Shepherd
Network Administrator
The opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily the opinions of
my employer.
Remove pants to reply.

> THE RIGHT OF INDEPENDANT CHOICE DOES NOT EXIST. The owner of these
> servers could easily put in place rules that say, for example, only
> ladies may post to tech.talk. Just like he said no excessive quoting is
> allowed. Where is your right now!!
> No, you have principles and that is all. Rights are slowly being chucked
> out of the window AND you don't seem to mind.

Posting here is not a right, it is a privilege. One which can be revoked at
any time, I might add.

--
Chris Shepherd
Network Administrator
The opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily the opinions of
my employer.
Remove pants to reply.

Salaam!

Chris Shepherd wrote:

> He is responsible for saying what he said
> that set some kid off on a DDoS spree.

   Please do not be confused about this -- Steve had *not* said what was
elsewhere attributed to him.  Steve did *nothing* that "set some kid off
on a DDoS spree," nothing at all.

> Chris Shepherd

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

Wimpie wrote:

> "abujamal" schreef ...

   [I *did*???]

>> Wipe'em out.  Auto-plonk.  Bzzzzt, your time is up.  Take your
>> bad manners and disruptive crap elsewhere, we have better
>> things to do with our pay-by-the-minute time.  "Just for the
>> sake of argument" isn't a topic I care about.

> I can see, abujamal, that you're getting a bit fed up with all
> the reasonings and opinions, and wanting to get a quick solution
> for the problem.

   No, that's not accurate.  I have *been* fed up with bad manners for
more years than I care to count.  Probably my own complete lack of
anything resembling good manners for at least the first half of my life
may have something to do with my attitude now, I know -- or imagine that
I know -- what would have worked with me early in my life, or in
adolescence, or even in early adulthood -- unfortunately I was older
than that when someone *finally* had the wit to smack me in the mouth. 
My grown and growing sons do not hesitate to dispute something -- but
they do so in a mannerly fashion, and for that reason and that reason
alone, they prevail more often than not.  Here, we see boys and girls
posing as men and women in order to be pricks and bitches.  There is
*no* reason to tolerate it and *every* reason to smash it flat.

   What I find discouraging in this recent discussion series is the
confusion of priorities and values, as well as the dearth of
understanding of the respective roles of host and guest.  Steve's here
for one reason and one reason only:  to help US.  He doesn't need us at
all, look at all he does *without* us.  The least we can do is help each
other, if we don't see a way to help Steve.  Instead we talk him to
death, second-guess everything he does, completely overlook things we're
too ignorant to understand, and expect him to account to us for his
decisions.  That's nonsense.  He's invited those who share his concerns
and purposes, he hasn't invited trolls and spin doctors loaded with
disruption and disinformation, and those who would drive away, with a
disgraceful signal-to-noise component, the very people Steve is trying
to help.

   This isn't a street corner, although some treat it as such.  It's not
a parliament or a decision-making body either.  Nor is it a tabloid or
the Olympics or an after-the-game beer bash.  People come here for
reasons, they don't just happen in the door -- and for the far majority,
the reasons are consistent with Steve's purposes in hosting these
forums, relating to personal privacy and network security on an
immediate practical level.  Legislative and political remedies are *not*
on-topic in these forums; neither are religion and global warming and
sheep.  Steve, and Steve's activities, are of interest because they're
topical -- and with his foibles and exclamation points, he's likeable. 
And most importantly, Steve is worthy of trust and confidence.  That's a
priceless asset that too many disregard or seek to stain somehow.

> Partly I'm with you, were it not that you would accept anything to
> stop trolling quickly.

   I don't care about "quickly."  I care about decisively and most
importantly, *as necessary* -- which in my experience means
*immediately* on discovery, not after three hundred people have
discussed to death whether it's a good idea to do something about it. 
Whatever tools Steve needs to implement that, whatever help I or any of
us can give him, however he wants to structure the solution -- these
things are simply not debatable in my mind, he is completely and utterly
entitled to the tools, the help, and whatever structure he devises with
or without our input.  If it takes another week or a year that's
something we'll all have to suffer with until the problem is solved that
makes these newsgroups inhospitable to those Steve has invited.

   What other obligation do we have, as his guests, than to honor his
wishes at least to the extent of not opposing their accomplishment? 
People have been talking about "Steve's Koolaid" as if he were
dispensing Guyana cocktails or something.  Anything someone *wants* to
keep available that they DON'T USE and WON'T becomes, on some alleged
basis of "it's the principle of the thing," an item of contention.

   How *dare* people instruct Steve on "principle"?  It's Steve's known
and established principles that brings us here!  How incredibly rude it
is to *suggest* that something Steve has considered might be contrary to
the principles that bring us here in the first place.

   I want a cookie.  I want a password and a hardware identifier.  I
want *Steve* to know, *every* time I show up here, that it's me.  And
should someone come along pretending to be me, I want Steve to know who
that person is, too, and never, ever forget him or her or fail to
recognize them should they show up again.  That goes equally for
*anyone* who comes along to denigrate Steve's character or disrupt these
newsgroups, or otherwise interfere in what Steve is trying to do, that
we are here *because* he's doing -- I want him to know them every time
they reappear, too.

   Now if that's some immense invasion of your (general, all-inclusve
"your") privacy, that's your problem.  But it *sure* isn't some
violation of "principle" or apostasy from his dedication to personal
privacy and network security, on Steve's part.

> But that is not in the spirit of our NGs and of SG.

   What, specifically, is "not in the spirit" and what "spirit" is it
that you're talking about?

> I do feel with you, but don't you think it's
> a bit rigid to do it the way you want?

   What I want is for Steve to *already have* the *complete* capacity to
*at any time* and *for any reason* close the door to his house on
*anyone.*  And no, I don't think that's rigid at all, I think that each
and every person should have such a capacity.  In today's world, many
don't.  But just as anyone here has the complete capacity to "shut the
door" on Steve, I think it should be reciprocal and that we should
facilitate that reciprocity any way he asks.  It's just good manners.

> I'm sure we can trust Steve to come up with
> a reasonable solution to the problem.

   "A solution" is implicitly reasonable.  I'd like it to be complete
and the least possible burden to Steve.

> Just leave it to the master.  The way I understand it is that
> once he has accumulated enough opinions, he'll make his mind
> up and eventally will find a solution that'll suit us all.
> Just let's all be a little bit patient.

   I left that in there for a good laugh.  Several laughs, actually.

>> What -- and Steve's stalwarts object to cleaning up the trash?
>> Okay, fine -- do it *without* their help, then.  Just do it.


> Sorry, abujamal, this is no way a good sentence. If I take it apart
> it says: What do it *without* their help, then.  Just do it.
> Maybe you could refrase that sentence, if you don't mind.

   It's remotely possible that Steve *might* need some specific action
on the part of those who wish to post in order to implement a hard
identifier scheme.  He -- and we -- are not in need of those who would
refuse that.

> BTW what is 'stalwarts'?

   Those who keep faith with Steve and find no cause to be suspicious of
him in things we think we understand differently from his understanding.

> Wimpie.

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Very well said!  I don't think it could have been done better by anyone.
You certainly leave no room for dismantling by prying it apart piece by
piece as is done so often here!  My congratulations to you!

Dean Craft


abujamal wrote in message <3B4F7D7A.58BD0549@earthlink.net>...
>Salaam!
>
>>snip<<
>
>   No, that's not accurate.  I have *been* fed up with bad manners...
>
>was-salaam,
>abujamal

> In the end it's no different to asking everyone to post with
> a pgp signature and have grc.com check them before accepting them. Not
> everyone wants all that they write to have the potential of being
> subject to the full authority of law. people like to have an escape
> route. Sure it's not accepting responsibility but then why should we
> always and for everything. 

Well actually, that is sad! You should always be prepared and willing to accept 
the responsibility for your actions - if not, then you had no justification 
performing them. 


> It's only a goddam news posting after all.

Your point being that its insignificant? I fail to see the difference between 
not accepting responsibility for inciting a riot in a city mall, causing 
thousands of dollars of damage and trauma, and not accepting responsibility for 
an deliberately inflamatory newsgroup posting - which incidentally causes its 
own damage and trauma.

> You'll be bringing on the thought police next! ;-) 

You can think what you like :) However, If you were invited to attend 
discussions at your bosses house and made disparaging remarks about his 
daughters looks and facility in various carnal acts, insulted the other guests 
etc - well, expect to take responsibility for your actions.

Regards

Ares

> And so, the "mechanism" shall remain obscure, until that time as
> those trolls who are being EXCEEDINGLY civil and "nice" (for the
> moment), are themselves blocked and the "mechanism" is put to a
> "swarm test" by them, against grc.

Well I guess that rules out Steve sending round the heavies to break your 
fingers :P Unless you have one of the speech to text programs.

You sound petulant. What makes you think that someone being exceedingly civil 
and nice will be classified as a troll? (Steve being the one who has to 
classify them as such)

Regards

ARes

John,

I feel you are missing the issue. 

When a person visits these newsgroups with the sole intention of posting 
deliberately inflamatory postings - then YES they are a troll. The problem with 
trolls is that you have to keep plonking them, because they WILL keep comming 
back, and they will keep posting responses and posts that are designed to 
incite the other newsgroup readers/posters. So long as they feel they have the 
slightest chance of getting a response, they will keep at it - it doesnt matter 
how many times they are forced to change nicknames. 

The same problem exists on IRC - you cannot ban someone in reality because 
identification is based on 4 things - nickname, ident, isp port, isp domain. 

If you ban only on nickname, they can come back by changing their nick. 

If you ban only on ident, again, they can come back by changing their ident.

If you ban on port, then a new connection and they are back again

But if you ban on isp domain - you ban EVERYONE from that domain.

It doesnt help banning on any combination of these, the troll can still get 
back. 

Now Steve has a number of ideas and possible solutions to prevent a tenacious 
troll reappearing. I support it. You cannot rely on 0% response to stop trolls 
- human nature is human nature. Particularly if the troll is clever enough to 
place their bait with just a small insult, then once the thread is underway, 
flames can fly fully.

In short, the only reason for desiring anonymity on this server, that I can see 
(perhaps you can tell me where this is wrong) is to avoid taking responsibility 
for your posts. If you arent prepared to stand behind what you post, then don't 
post it. 

Analogy:

Let's say you hold discussion at your house every wednesday, for the purpose of 
computer security and privacy. The door is unlocked and open, to encourage any 
and all to come and discuss in a non-judgemental (that is hacker or commong 
user, anyone interested is welcome) enviroment. I turn up one wednesday, and 
start making snide comments about your monetary motives for these discussions, 
the fact that you don't hold a computer science degree, and the sexual 
proclivity/promiscuity of your teenage daughter. Every time someone tries to 
tell me to shut up, I insult them too. I really enjoy myself trying to make 
everyone mad. I then decide to turn up every week. And just for fun, I stone 
your house every now and then, smashing windows. I go off and post those 
comments about your daughter, in a letter to the editor of a newspaper I know 
you read - calling her a teenage hoe, who has slept with every boy at her 
school, and whos morals really call into question her fathers ineptitude. I do 
whatever I like, because you don't know who I am. I turn up any time I want, 
disguised as someone else. 

Now Roy says this is all okay, because we shouldn't have to take responsibility 
for our actions all the time. 

After this has happened for a while, causing trauma and stress to your family 
and guests. You come up with a nifty idea. You'll issue everyone with a card to 
get in, which will have nothing but an ID number on it. Even you wont know who 
they truly are. You hire a bouncer for the door, to check the numbers against a 
black list. You make it so the numbers cannot be forged, and people cannot get 
a new number if their old is black listed. You know that now if I turn up, all 
you have to do is blacklist my number, and the bouncer will refuse me entry. 
Conversations are now back to normal, any time a person like me turns up, you 
blacklist their number and they are gone for good. Or perhaps you give them a 
warning first. Either way, your discussion resume their productive format. 

Regards

Ares

> 1) Please include the name of the person to whom you are replying.  Not
> knowing to whom you are replying is frustrating.  Other Gravity users
> include the name as a courtesy to others, so your newsreader does have
> the capability.

*carefully practised blank statre*
 
> 2) Please set the correct geographical Time Zone on your newsreader. 
> Your present setting is *way* off.  Other international users have no
> problem setting the TZ in Gravity, so your newsreader does have the
> capability.

*same blank stare with a hint of drool*

uh?

Regards

Ares

"Dean Craft" <w4ihk@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9io2iu$28mr$1@news.grc.com...
> Very well said!  I don't think it could have been done better by anyone.
> You certainly leave no room for dismantling by prying it apart piece by
> piece as is done so often here!  My congratulations to you!

To address it (nearly) as a whole then:

I think abujamal is seriously overestimating how often this solution would
be used by Steve to block posters.

I _sincerely_ doubt that Steve will be blocking "rude" (either in verbiage,
topicality or what have you) parties or those who call his
ethics/principles/etc etc into question left right, and center (blocking,
not the questioning :P). If I thought that would be the case (either case) I
would be much more unhappy than I am with the sort of system being proposed.

So far I am aware of a _grand_total_ of THREE (now rescinded to two)
individuals who would qualify for blocking under this technology. For two I
have read Steve state that they would not be welcome, the other is left to
rumors (please, don't bother).

Of course, I could be mistaken, and many will find themselves blocked, as
you seem to desire. Is that what you think will occur (directed to abujamal,
not you, Dean)?

Regards,
Sam
--
Welcome to Earth. A subsidiary of Microsoft�.

Chris Shepherd wrote:
> 
> So to further simplify what you are saying: You were not willing to go
> to jail for smoking pot, you knew those were the consequences should
> you get caught, but you did it anyway?

Let's put it this way:

Nobody here is responsible for making it *easier* for authorities to use
the force of law on them, *especially* when they don't agree with the
law(s) in question. Being a (fairly occasional, compared to most) pot
smoker myself, I don't see a need to go telling every passing motorist
if I've got some in the car. When posting to a public forum, you're
basically making an announcement to the world -- you have NO control
over who reads this information. Therefore, your only defense is to make
it more than trivial to get busted over the head for what you say.

You might say "well don't say it at all"... but there are *plenty* of
times when "incriminating" information might be pertinent to a problem.

For example someone might say "I caught virus X from so-and-so WaReZ
site's distribution of Windows XP." Obviously, downloading XP from a
WaReZ site is illegal (or if it isn't then running it is at least), and
you wouldn't go up to MS HQ and proclaim it loudly in the lobby. But it
still needs to be said if you want to get your problem fixed (and in
this case, prevent it from happening to others).

I'm a rational anarchist -- anarchist because I'm unwilling to blindly
accept the rule of law. Rational because I understand the consequences
if I get caught breaking them. So I try to follow the 11th Commandment
-- don't get caught.

Mal-2
-- 
Some posts are a sad cry for help.  Others are a happy celebration of
psychosis.                                         -- James "Kibo" Parry
Orquesta Guayao Online http://www.geocities.com/orqguayao * ICQ:11401527

abujamal wrote:
> 
>    No, that's not accurate.  I have *been* fed up with bad manners for
> more years than I care to count.  Probably my own complete lack of
> anything resembling good manners for at least the first half of my
> life may have something to do with my attitude now, I know -- or
> imagine that I know -- what would have worked with me early in my
> life, or in adolescence, or even in early adulthood -- unfortunately I
> was older than that when someone *finally* had the wit to smack me in
> the mouth.

So the problem here isn't really the inability to identify someone. It's
the inability to smack them, or at least get in their face when they get
in yours. On this point, I agree with you. However, I don't think making
everyone "leave a key at the door" is the right answer. That said, I
also admit I have yet to come up with an answer that meets all of
Steve's criteria while also meeting all of my own. Maybe we should just
install virtual punching bags that, when sent the right set of commands,
will hit you back. :P

Now where's that stupid parking attendant? I sent him for my car 20
minutes ago... <g>

Mal-2
-- 
Some posts are a sad cry for help.  Others are a happy celebration of
psychosis.                                         -- James "Kibo" Parry
Orquesta Guayao Online http://www.geocities.com/orqguayao * ICQ:11401527

In article <MPG.15ba5a0843c0676e9896e8@news.grc.com>, Ares{a} said...
> > Thanks for confirming your intent.  So much for community spirit and
> > cooperation from Ares(a).
> 
> Perhaps the blank stare was lost on you as an expression of non-comprehension. 
> To whit:
> 
> Point 1) I just click reply, edit and click send - if there is something im 
> missing, please advise how to utilise this feature.

You mean 'Follow-Up' rather than reply, I take it? 

Look in View/Global Options/Replying. Under 'Introduction templates', 
what is in the first 'Follow up introduction:' field? Nothing? 

Try putting this in (without quotes) "In article %i, %n said..."

That should get you what my posts show. Follow the codes at the left 
side of that 'Introduction templates' for any amendments you would like.

> Point 2) I wasn't aware of any such setting in gravity itself. Where is it 
> located? I would have assumed that all time zone information is retrieved from 
> the computer its installed on.

Yes it is. Is your's correct? You do seem to be posting 10 hours out of 
whack.

> PS: This is a trial version of Gravity.

Though it's freeware now. I don't think 2.3 will time out, but 2.5 is 
here anyway :-

<ftp://64.36.132.56/pub/grav25.exe> 

-- 
Milly

Salaam!

Sam Schinke wrote:

> I could be mistaken, and many will find themselves blocked,
> as you seem to desire.  Is that what you think will occur
> (directed to abujamal, not you, Dean)?

   There's no question in my mind that Steve will develop the perfect
solution and let it sit on the shelf until someone beats him over the
head with it.  I am much more acutely sensitive to "nushuz" than he is,
or, I expect, will be in the foreseeable future.  "Nushuz" is a very
specific variety of contention, and sometimes it doesn't look like
contention at all.

   I'll smack a chump up side the head to get his attention a *whole*
lot faster than Steve would, but that's mainly because I was so grateful
when someone finally did it to me.  It opened up entire new worlds to
me, that I had assiduously walled off for all of my previous life up to
that point, quite without realizing that I had been doing that.  I won't
hesitate to help a fella out, if I care a whit about him.  Steve ain't
there yet.

> Regards,
> Sam

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Salaam!

Malaclypse the Younger wrote:

> I don't think making everyone "leave a
> key at the door" is the right answer.

   That's what people have backwards.  It would be "pick up a key at the
door."  It's Steve's door -- Steve's keys.  Steve isn't going to their
house, they're coming to his.  I'll happily accept a key, thanks.

> Mal-2

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

Comments inline for context flow and QED compliance :)
--  NNG
***  I Hate SPAM (from the can or via e-mail)  ***
Resistance is futi.... ohhhh cookies!!  --MS of Borg
"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3B4F7D7A.58BD0549@earthlink.net...
: Salaam!
[]
abujamal wrote:
: >> Wipe'em out.  Auto-plonk.  Bzzzzt, your time is up.  Take your
: >> bad manners and disruptive crap elsewhere, we have better
: >> things to do with our pay-by-the-minute time.  "Just for the
: >> sake of argument" isn't a topic I care about.

By that definition, we'd be seeing fewer of your posts as well, assuming
guidelines would be applied unilateraly rather than an "everyone but me"
criteria.  I'd defer to Steve's judgement rather than yours on this.

Wimpie wrote:
: > I can see, abujamal, that you're getting a bit fed up with all
: > the reasonings and opinions, and wanting to get a quick solution
: > for the problem.
:
:    No, that's not accurate.  I have *been* fed up with bad manners...
[]
: What I find discouraging in this recent discussion series is the
: confusion of priorities and values, as well as the dearth of
: understanding of the respective roles of host and guest.  Steve's here
: for one reason and one reason only:  to help US.  He doesn't need us at
: all, look at all he does *without* us.

I disagree, he does need us.  We are helped by the things that Steve does,
but that help for us is but a side-effect, only part of the result and
certainly NOT his one-and-only reason or purpose.  Steve strikes me as a
very precise individual, one who looks at situations with a 360 degree
prespective; the programmer mindset that strives to understand all of the
IF-THEN-ELSE "loops" of a course of action.  He can strive for that "full
picture", but it's the input of diverse opinions and perspectives of the
group that help him attain his goals.

: The least we can do is help each
: other, if we don't see a way to help Steve.  Instead we talk him to
: death, second-guess everything he does, completely overlook things we're
: too ignorant to understand, and expect him to account to us for his
: decisions.  That's nonsense.

Look at the discussions over Steve's new pages, cecil IDs, divulging IP
addresses, and numerous other topics.  Some of the discussions got very
"heated", but if Steve didn't desire feedback and different perspectives,
then why did he create this newsgroup specifically for that very purpose?
By all means, I agree that invitation to open discussion does NOT condone
rude behavior, but it also should not demand that everyone's viewpoints
agree or else it's nonsense and a waste of time.

: He's invited those who share his concerns
: and purposes, he hasn't invited trolls and spin doctors loaded with
: disruption and disinformation, and those who would drive away, with a
: disgraceful signal-to-noise component, the very people Steve is trying
: to help.

He's invited those who share his concerns, but thankfully he has not
demanded that everyone totally agree with his opinions or ideas.  I agree
with your observations on the negativity of disruption and signal-to-noise
ratio as such.  However, "spin doctors" and "disinformation" seem to be more
your terms for those who would disagree.  Actually "spin doctors" do serve a
purpose, if only to help Steve better present his logic and
counter-arguments to his critics that use some of those very same "spin
tactics" to argue against his viewpoints.  By the time Steve faces his
critics outside of these newgroups, I think he's much better prepared to
handle those situations and in large part due to these newsgroup
discussions, especially some offering dissenting viewpoints.

[]
: Steve's purposes in hosting these
: forums, relating to personal privacy and network security on an
: immediate practical level.  Legislative and political remedies are *not*
: on-topic in these forums; neither are religion and global warming and
: sheep.

We can't discuss legislative issues that are directly concerned with
privacy, public access to private data stored online and Spam, just to name
a few?  We also cannot discuss any possible political or judicial remedies,
per country or world-wide, that relate to online privacy issues?  We
(Americans) cannot even speculate or discuss the roles and responsibilities
of the FCC with regard to the internet?  Or must we throw out *all* babies
with the bathwater because some (mostly Americans, sometimes you abu) were
compelled to subject others ad nauseum to US politics as if they were the
*only* politics?  I'll grant you that religion, global warming and sheep are
off-topic although, for the record, the sheep were polite enough to keep
their sexual habits confined to ten-forward. <g>
[]
:
: > Partly I'm with you, were it not that you would accept anything to
: > stop trolling quickly.
:
:    I don't care about "quickly."  I care about decisively and most
: importantly, *as necessary* -- which in my experience means
: *immediately* on discovery, not after three hundred people have
: discussed to death whether it's a good idea to do something about it.
[]
:    What other obligation do we have, as his guests, than to honor his
: wishes at least to the extent of not opposing their accomplishment?

At what point though does voicing differing opinions become opposition to
Steve's wishes or goals?  This whole thread didn't develop because people
did not want Steve to ban Carlene or a disagreement with his right to do so.
It developed due to the broader implications of proposed technical
solutions, i.e., hardware "tagging" and registration processes that would
affect everyone.
[]
:    How *dare* people instruct Steve on "principle"?  It's Steve's known
: and established principles that brings us here!  How incredibly rude it
: is to *suggest* that something Steve has considered might be contrary to
: the principles that bring us here in the first place.

Exactly!  It's Steve's known and established principles that bring us here,
therefore it's only reasonable that we would analyze his proposed ideas in
light of those very same principles that we hold in high regard.  Rude is in
the context of how a thought is presented, not the thought itself.  Was it
rude for someone to say that if Steve uses a "tagging" system that his
critics might have a field day with a perceived ambiguity or double-standard
in light of his own well-known principles?  That's not rude, it's an
observation and one to take into consideration if action he proposes could
have a negative backlash.  It would be rude *not* to warn of such possible
negative implications, just as it's rude not to tell someone (especially a
friend) that they have toilet paper stuck to their shoe or spinach in their
teeth, so they can avoid possible ridicule by others who would not be so
kind.

:    I want a cookie.  I want a password and a hardware identifier.  I
: want *Steve* to know, *every* time I show up here, that it's me.
[]
:  That goes equally for
: *anyone* who comes along to denigrate Steve's character or disrupt these
: newsgroups, or otherwise interfere in what Steve is trying to do, that
: we are here *because* he's doing -- I want him to know them every time
: they reappear, too.
:
:    Now if that's some immense invasion of your (general, all-inclusve
: "your") privacy, that's your problem.  But it *sure* isn't some
: violation of "principle" or apostasy from his dedication to personal
: privacy and network security, on Steve's part.
:
: > But that is not in the spirit of our NGs and of SG.
:
:    What, specifically, is "not in the spirit" and what "spirit" is it
: that you're talking about?

I can't speak for what Wimpie meant, but I can speak for how what you said
does not coincide with my opinion of the spirit of Steve's newsgroups.  You
cite cookies, passwords and hardware identifiers that can be used for
tracking purposes and that you want Steve to identify and track you, which
is your choice, just as it is your choice not to use an anonomizer service.
However, if others object to tracking or choose to use anonomizer services
they are, in your opinion, questioning Steve's principle's and dedication to
privacy.  The fact that others do not feel the same as you does not make
their opinions any less worthy or their motives any more suspect.  It's
Steve's decision, not yours, that will be final in this matter and
thankfully he is proceeding with caution and deep consideration of the
possible implications.

: > I do feel with you, but don't you think it's
: > a bit rigid to do it the way you want?
:
:    What I want is for Steve to *already have* the *complete* capacity to
: *at any time* and *for any reason* close the door to his house on
: *anyone.*  And no, I don't think that's rigid at all, I think that each
: and every person should have such a capacity.  In today's world, many
: don't.  But just as anyone here has the complete capacity to "shut the
: door" on Steve, I think it should be reciprocal and that we should
: facilitate that reciprocity any way he asks.  It's just good manners.

I totally agree with you about good manners and respect!  Be careful though
that criteria for exclusion are not applied with the purpose of eliminating
any and all who disagree with Steve as that just might make these newsgroups
less valuable to *him*.  Rosenburger (and his ego) might need the deciples;
Steve's ego seems to be mature enough to handle, and even welcome,
thoughtful debate and dissenting viewpoints.  Please don't deprive him of
those opinions.
:
: > I'm sure we can trust Steve to come up with
: > a reasonable solution to the problem.
:
:    "A solution" is implicitly reasonable.  I'd like it to be complete
: and the least possible burden to Steve.
:
: > Just leave it to the master.  The way I understand it is that
: > once he has accumulated enough opinions, he'll make his mind
: > up and eventally will find a solution that'll suit us all.
: > Just let's all be a little bit patient.
:
:    I left that in there for a good laugh.  Several laughs, actually.

I fail to see what made Wimpie's statement laughable, perhaps because I too
have faith in Steve's methods of reaching decisions and his actions, per
Wimpie's statement.

[I've snipped the rest of the dialog because I would just end up repeating
what I've already said]
:
: > Wimpie.
:
: was-salaam,
: abujamal
: --
: news://news.pchelpers.org

> Thanks for confirming your intent.  So much for community spirit and
> cooperation from Ares(a).

Perhaps the blank stare was lost on you as an expression of non-comprehension. 
To whit:

Point 1) I just click reply, edit and click send - if there is something im 
missing, please advise how to utilise this feature.

Point 2) I wasn't aware of any such setting in gravity itself. Where is it 
located? I would have assumed that all time zone information is retrieved from 
the computer its installed on.

No intention to offend, I just do not understand the two features you are 
talking about.

Sorry.

Regards

Ares

PS: This is a trial version of Gravity.

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

Milly <no_sp@m.gov> wrote in
news:MPG.15b9d883fd3aaf9c9896ee@207.71.92.194: 

> Yes it is. Is your's correct? You do seem to be posting 10 hours
> out of whack.

He's 12 hours out of whack. I suspect he has an AM/PM problem not a
timezone problem. IOW, his clock is showing AM when it should read PM
and vice-versa. He just needs to reset his time.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO1B6hUfgWcwXOJwfEQKjVgCgy4h87zpEUESZ0DceeCDxjLdsDvgAoJNV
4IfwixHVNLXnzOB/nIhgk9R0
=V4Co
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

FWI: Clock was correct, timezone was incorrect, I hope that fixed it.

Regards

Ares 

"abujamal" <muslims@earthlink.net> schreef in bericht
news:3B4F7D7A.58BD0549@earthlink.net...
>
>    No, that's not accurate.  I have *been* fed up with bad manners for
> more years than I care to count.

    I agree totally. I'll never forget how shocked I was when I went
'out' on the Internet the first time, some 3 yrs ago.
The language that was used was apalling to me. The lack of good manners
was even worse. If anything, it did add to my vocabulary, which is still
the case now and here WRT the trollings we've experienced.  :)
>
>
> My grown and growing sons do not hesitate to dispute something -- but
> they do so in a mannerly fashion, and for that reason and that reason
> alone, they prevail more often than not.

    I agree, because I have the same experienece(s) with my son. Give'em
the (good) basics and they'll do well. That's really something to be
proud of, if you've succeeded.  :)

> Here, we see boys and girls posing as men and women in order to be
pricks and bitches.  There is
> *no* reason to tolerate it and *every* reason to smash it flat.

    True, but they're also part of our society, which is also GRC. I
think you just can't dismiss them just like that. Maybe they've never
had a father like you and me. Is it their fault?

>    What I find discouraging in this recent discussion series is the
> confusion of priorities and values, as well as the dearth of
> understanding of the respective roles of host and guest.

    FWIW Steve has said many times that he appreciates the meanings of
our NGs. He never mentioned the confusion of priorities and values or
the dearth of understanding the respective roles of host and guests.

>  Steve's here for one reason and one reason only:  to help US.

    Sure, but he's also said that he was quite happy with such an army
testing his thingy's.

>  He doesn't need us at all, look at all he does *without* us.

    He's said he was happy with us, remember?

> The least we can do is help each other, if we don't see a way to help
Steve.

    But.. but... uh.. I really thought we were doing very well by giving
him our opinions. Isn't that what he referred to?
>
>

>    What, specifically, is "not in the spirit" and what "spirit" is it
> that you're talking about?

    Well.. exactly like I've said it in my former msg. Steve has said
that he would (mostly) comply with the NGs's wishes. To me it means that
he wants to know what's going on in our minds, which seems fair. The
result is what we've all seen. So the decisions is his.

>    What I want is for Steve to *already have* the *complete* capacity
to
> *at any time* and *for any reason* close the door to his house on
> *anyone.*  And no, I don't think that's rigid at all, I think that
each
> and every person should have such a capacity.  In today's world, many
> don't.  But just as anyone here has the complete capacity to "shut the
> door" on Steve, I think it should be reciprocal and that we should
> facilitate that reciprocity any way he asks.  It's just good manners.

    I think you're right about that, I also think that Steve has the
capacabillities to do that, in various means. He's just waiting for the
end of the thread to make up his mind. Don't worry.  :)
>
>
>    "A solution" is implicitly reasonable.  I'd like it to be complete
> and the least possible burden to Steve.

    I know, abujamal, I should have said: *reasonable solution*. With
*reasonable* I only meant to say: suitable for all of us, seen from
Steve's viewpoint.

> > Just leave it to the master.  The way I understand it is that
> > once he has accumulated enough opinions, he'll make his mind
> > up and eventally will find a solution that'll suit us all.
> > Just let's all be a little bit patient.
>
>    I left that in there for a good laugh.  Several laughs, actually.

    Tell me, please, did I say something funny? Sometimes your languages
is hard to understand.  :)

Wimpie.

"NoNameGiven" <pugnacious_1@somewhere.INVALID> schreef in bericht
news:9iooqu$30qh$1@news.grc.com...
>
>

< The fact that others do not feel the same as you does not make
> their opinions any less worthy or their motives any more suspect.
It's
> Steve's decision, not yours, that will be final in this matter and
> thankfully he is proceeding with caution and deep consideration of the
> possible implications.

        I agree totally, Becky.


>
> : > I do feel with you, but don't you think it's
> : > a bit rigid to do it the way you want?
> :
> >:    What I want is for Steve to *already have* the *complete*
capacity to
> : *at any time* and *for any reason* close the door to his house on
> : *anyone.*  And no, I don't think that's rigid at all, I think that
each
> : and every person should have such a capacity.  In today's world,
many
> : don't.  But just as anyone here has the complete capacity to "shut
the
> : door" on Steve, I think it should be reciprocal and that we should
> : facilitate that reciprocity any way he asks.  It's just good
manners.
>
> I totally agree with you about good manners and respect!  Be careful
though
> that criteria for exclusion are not applied with the purpose of
eliminating
> any and all who disagree with Steve as that just might make these
newsgroups
> less valuable to *him*.  Rosenburger (and his ego) might need the
deciples;
> Steve's ego seems to be mature enough to handle, and even welcome,
> thoughtful debate and dissenting viewpoints.  Please don't deprive him
of
> those opinions.

    I agree  totally with you, Becky.

>
>

Wimpie.

In article <MPG.15bb298181f1157e9896ed@news.grc.com> Ares{a} wrote:
> 
> FWI: Clock was correct, timezone was incorrect, I hope that fixed it.
> 
> Regards
> 
Yes, it did.  Thank you, Ares(a).

And thank *you* for the Gravity tutorial, Milly.
-- 
Alan
(at work on 21st century Energy Theory)

--
maggie@tcsn.net
"John Fitzsimons" <johnf@net2000.com.au> wrote in message
news:measktsovf5f9j71ku05gkb8fedml2h5qo@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:16:59 -0400, mc <no.spam@mctech.org> wrote:
>
> If someone is a troll. Fine.
> If someone isn't a troll. Fine.
> Do we need these never ending debates day after day after...?

You're right, it just adds to the problem

> IMO a huge number of useless posts could be avoided if debates about
> whether people were/were not trolls were made "OT" for this newsgroup.

Again, I agree with you.  Apparently it's an attractive temptation to answer
the troll that some find hard to resist.
>
> Regards, John.


Take care

Maggie

Salaam!

Wimpie wrote:

>>> Just leave it to the master.  The way I understand it is that
>>> once he has accumulated enough opinions, he'll make his mind
>>> up and eventally will find a solution that'll suit us all.
>>> Just let's all be a little bit patient.
>>    I left that in there for a good laugh.  Several laughs, actually.

> Tell me, please, did I say something funny?
> Sometimes your language is hard to understand.  :)

   It's a laugh because mostly, that's what I've been saying all along;
and also because "a solution that'll suit us all" is not likely to
happen before 65536-bit RSA keys are cracked.  Some are here for the
purpose of disagreeing.

> Wimpie.

was-salaam,
abujamal
-- 
news://news.pchelpers.org

In article <MPG.15b9b2d060fb8cd59896db@news.grc.com>, dated Sat, 14 Jul
2001 02:37:54 +0100, "Ares{a}" <sk_tigerkMY@lairhotmail.com> wrote:

>> In the end it's no different to asking everyone to post with a pgp
>> signature and have grc.com check them before accepting them. Not
>> everyone wants all that they write to have the potential of being
>> subject to the full authority of law. people like to have an escape
>> route. Sure it's not accepting responsibility but then why should we
>> always and for everything.
> 
> Well actually, that is sad! You should always be prepared and willing to
> accept the responsibility for your actions - if not, then you had no
> justification performing them.
> 

Hey look keep it in perspective. We are not talking crime hear! We are
talking about "usenet". Most of which is just so much garbage anyway.

> 
>> It's only a goddam news posting after all.
> 
> Your point being that its insignificant? I fail to see the difference
> between not accepting responsibility for inciting a riot in a city mall,
> causing thousands of dollars of damage and trauma, and not accepting
> responsibility for an deliberately inflamatory newsgroup posting - which
> incidentally causes its own damage and trauma.

Me thinks you have too high an opinion of your writings if you think it's
THAT powerfull.

> 
>> You'll be bringing on the thought police next! ;-)
> 
> You can think what you like :) However, If you were invited to attend
> discussions at your bosses house and made disparaging remarks about his
> daughters looks and facility in various carnal acts, insulted the other
> guests etc - well, expect to take responsibility for your actions.

Why is it the crap that's printed in here every day is compared with what
happens in the real world? Sure, there are things you cannot write down
in "usenet" without attracting atention but most are passed over.

rgds
roy

Salaam!

roy wrote:

> Hey look keep it in perspective.  We are not talking crime
> here!  We are talking about "usenet."  Most of which is
> just so much garbage anyway.

   Apparently you need a little perspective.  This is NOT Usenet.

> rgds
> roy

was-salaam,
abujamal

In article <3B50998E.C26512B9@cox-internet.com>, Hermital said...
> In article <MPG.15bb298181f1157e9896ed@news.grc.com> Ares{a} wrote:
> > 
> > FWI: Clock was correct, timezone was incorrect, I hope that fixed it.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> Yes, it did.  Thank you, Ares(a).
> 
> And thank *you* for the Gravity tutorial, Milly.

My pleasure, though it was apparently of no value to Ares. 

-- 
Milly

On Sun, 15 Jul 2001 13:17:09 -0700, abujamal enlightened us all with:

>Salaam!
>
>roy wrote:
>
>> Hey look keep it in perspective.  We are not talking crime
>> here!  We are talking about "usenet."  Most of which is
>> just so much garbage anyway.
>
>   Apparently you need a little perspective.  This is NOT Usenet.

But your posts in uk.religion.islam (which IS in Usenet) indicate that
you agree with roy :-)

-- 
Mitch

In article <9iq4ii$1ejb$1@news.grc.com>, stam@indi.nl says...
> 
>         I agree totally, Becky.
> ...
> ...
>
>     I agree  totally with you, Becky.

I can't help but wonder, was NNG's name known to you before d.max
trolled her and revealed her name as provided him previously in
confidence?

Just wondering whether NNG's appriciates the propagation. ??

Hi, YKW.

"YKW" <ykw@antinox.com> schreef in bericht
news:MPG.15bcb9649252d59e98978b@207.71.92.194...
> In article <9iq4ii$1ejb$1@news.grc.com>, stam@indi.nl says...
> >
> >         I agree totally, Becky.
> > ...
> > ...
> >
> >     I agree  totally with you, Becky.
>
> I can't help but wonder, was NNG's name known to you before d.max
> trolled her and revealed her name as provided him previously in
> confidence?

    Indeed, I do remember - some time ago - adressing NNG once with
Fiona (beautifull name BTW). She (NNG) answered my post and also
*revealed* her true name (Becky) to me and everybody who read her post,
stating that she had no objection whatever to ppl using her real name.
So I think I was the first person ever to know her real name, and I'm
proud of it.

    As for d.max trolling her, I just don't take sides. That's a thing
between her and d.max.

    The way I feel it, concerning Becky, is that she seems to be a
knowledgable person who many times helped me out with my language
problem. She's never been unfriendly to me, but allways been very
helpfull, which I happen to appreciate.

>
> Just wondering whether NNG's appriciates the propagation. ??

    Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean. Could you refrase that please?

Wimpie.

Howdy Wimpie

Wimpie wrote:

>> Just wondering whether NNG's appriciates the propagation. ??
>  Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean. Could you refrase that please?

Spreading it around Wimpie

George

-- 
..  ֿ� The Elevator is Broken, Please use the steps. ֿ�

Salaam!

Mitch B wrote:

> abujamal enlightened us all with:
>> roy wrote:
>>> Hey look keep it in perspective.  We are not talking crime
>>> here!  We are talking about "usenet."  Most of which is
>>> just so much garbage anyway.
>> Apparently you need a little perspective.  This is NOT Usenet.

> But your posts in uk.religion.islam (which IS in Usenet)
> indicate that you agree with roy :-)

   My posts *here* indicate my agreement with roy -- I don't get excited
about the things that seem to drive the thin-skinned into a frenzy. 
However, this *is* something of an island apart from Usenet, and there
*are* customs and some considerations of manners and civility that the
inhabitants of these newsgroups have come to expect, not without
reasonable basis.  It is a private news server, it is as cohesive a
community as can be found in virtual space, and control over such of the
electronic "territory" as we occupy *is* one of the orientations of most
who frequent the newsgroups.

   So protests against what would be expected of Usenet are not entirely
out of line, or (we hope) out of the bounds of reality.  It's possible
that Steve, either unilaterally or with cooperation from us, can further
distinguish these newsgroups from Usenet by ... what, exactly?  It
remains to be seen.  Reliable blocking of known attackers seems to me to
be a reasonable objective, we'll see whether it's actually doable.

> Mitch

was-salaam,
abujamal

Hi YKW,
I just saw your post... Thank you for your thoughtfulness!  As Wimpie said,
I'd already "introduced myself" to him in that previous post, so I see his
use of my name as genuine and friendly, quite separate and distinct from
that "other situation".  I really do appreciate your sensitivity about how
my real name is used... Thanks again! :)
--  NNG
***  I Hate SPAM (from the can or via e-mail)  ***
Resistance is futi.... ohhhh cookies!!  --MS of Borg

"YKW" <ykw@antinox.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15bcb9649252d59e98978b@207.71.92.194...
: In article <9iq4ii$1ejb$1@news.grc.com>, stam@indi.nl says...
: >
: >         I agree totally, Becky.
: > ...
: > ...
: >
: >     I agree  totally with you, Becky.
:
: I can't help but wonder, was NNG's name known to you before d.max
: trolled her and revealed her name as provided him previously in
: confidence?
:
: Just wondering whether NNG's appriciates the propagation. ??