I regret the possibility that the viral intrusion at gnubg.org may have been
due to the viral attacks on me, to reiterate, entirely separate from any
aspect of anyone at gnubg.org.
The viral mechanisms are fair to middlin' adept technically, and the hacking
code I deal with is above and beyond the symptoms as listed by the mailing
list organizers.
Provided you are satisfied with the resolution you find,
you do not have any pressing need to follow through
on any information herein: you may have that if it repeats,
or if YOU ascertain such a need.
if you have a recurrence of such now or in the future, you may want to
consider the following
backdoor path (among about a hundred other possibilities) that shows how a
separate
viral intrusion on an independent individual or site can result in exposure
of
your site
to a viral intrusional attack:
I) Note that the specific keyword in the thread I elected to participate in
is the word given in the title "cheat", reflecting back to previous
discussion
some time ago, confirmed as still present in the GNUBG archives.
II) my email (and most other web activities) has/have been intruded upon for
an extended period of time (years): I will not delineate the
possible/actual mechanisms
here. For argument sake, submit to the idea that it can be done more
easily than
you may suspect by mechanisms out of reach of rectification by the party
under
attack (me).
III) This leads to open access (by the intruding party/parties) of my email
contents
IV) Including reading of my email reading patterns
V) Among which has been ongoing perusal of GNUBG mailing list(s).
VI) A "mocking program" sequence has been run as a "challenge" by the
spoofers
intruding, among other sequences, popping a spam "FBI" message in
whenever
I have touched any FBI site.
VII) The "mock'/"challenge" in this sequence is:
A) Pre-intrude on another site: that would be the origin of the malware
detected at google.
B) Pop a sequence that results in a trigger phrase insertion
specifically the word "cheat" in a topical header.
I will not specify the mechanism(s) possible here. It can be done even
with
a good faith origin of the first or subsequent messages.
VIII) Suppress any warning message on the net side of the person under
attack (me,indirectly)
IX) Wait to see if the trigger phrase has the desire effect of startling an
interaction
(as desired,negative or positive, whatever) between the individuals or
groups desired
X) Feed in inflammatories in the resulting thread conversation in order to
disenfranchise one of the participants.
There are ways to do this:
the labelled technique is called a dialectic maneuver within a
parliamentarian gambit:
and is also called a false parley in terms of scenarios involving thing
similar to
round tables, formally organized administrative groups, or Parliaments:
A talks to B & C; B&C pass a modification on to D & E; they in turn get
angry with F & G
who in turn pound on H.
And this is almost untraceable.
It CAN be done by those whoa re adept at it.
And it is a new form of disinformational and disreputational practices
present within the web
because of the new abilities that the web networking, social networking
within it,
and automated scripting abilities
CAN achieve.
I will not give you the exact methods involved.
XI) repeat as desired elsewhere.
This CAN be done with the apparent originators being ENTIRELY innocuous in
the advent.
And, given the relatively low experience, high self opinion, and somewhat
obnoxious arrogance
of the people producing (if not virally modified!!!) responses in the
consequent interactions
I have had to endure:
NO, I frankly do NOT think that ANY one (including Mr Petch)
would have the simple technical expertise or experientially developed
_ability_
to do this type of attack.
(To be snot nosed and obsequious, and generally an obdurate jerk:: yes)
(To rely on an established network of friends and participating buddies who
will back up the established correspondent, and IGNORE the netiquette
violations while running a whisper chain in the background: YES.)
But _not_ to engage in the more virulent triggering mechanisms I just
described.
They literally do not have what it takes.
Sadly. They _are_ intelligent enough to be _able_ to learn such methods.
And to circumvent.
But: to date they do NOT appear to be
morally adult enough
to actually take those steps.
Whether you believe me or not:
you had damned well better watch for the new coming wave of these types of
attacks.
And get them reduced or stopped.
At this point, I _have_ made enough assertions and committed enough _minor_
infractions
that it _would_ be provident for a formal report to formal authority
IF _YOU_ think so:
I will NOT be upset by That type of thing.
I actually would welcome it. I have been _trying_ to get official support
for about a decade now.
I _will_ remain upset if mischaracterization is involved.
But: you are well insulated from any consequences.
I do not have the resources: I told you the literal truth about what I am
facing.
And I will not likely overcome it by my own efforts, and
i have to watch for attacks on other people.
I gave you one (possible) name already impacted;
I will mention once only in passing that multiple members of my own
family OTHER than me HAVE been impacted.
Whatever you do: provided you do it in good faith with
proper, professional and properly measured responses to the correct
mechanisms present
to correctly handle this type of thing (however you characterize my
interaction the same OR differently from my characterizations)
I will not be upset and will guarantee to hold you safe /harmless in the
consequent sequel.
But I am damned likely to take the time out
from trying to survive
to write the 3-4 page technical rebuttal
to the snot-nosed obsequious wipe-ass comments
already fomented and vomited forth on GNUBG
and post it to a couple of net correspondent who WILL vette it and MAY elect
to referee it
back in Mr. Petch's face. Professionally.
I regret that his trigger points got tripped:
I tried to avoid them.
But:
I cannot do that when external third party sequences intrude and inflame
the situation beyond the avalanche trigger point of a in-looking
participative group of high intelligence people who have at times low
professionalism in their conduct..
It HAPPENS. And that is ONE of the reasons that businesses for profit
forced the creation of open source and such organizations as GNU.
Please do not lose that openness aspect that is the life blood of the open
source movement:
you do not ant to replace explicitly PUBLIC for-profit groups
by iconoclastic self appointed un-named-as-such priests enforcing a
different hype of
for-profit
social networking organization that uses open source for their own ends and
chase people out by indirect usage of
an arrogant fool who will not grow up.
((Whether you conclude _I_ am that individual or Mr Petch is is up to you;
or whatever other alternative you elect to come up with).
Another document I am contemplating on writing would be
an analysis of
the types of information
that would need to be held covert
by professional level profiteering gammoners
in order to use the non-bene-adriot (mal adroit or neutral)
capabilities for manipulation
within a neural network engine
(can you say "subliminal", folks?
to win games and train people to play for loss of money
as do professional world class backgammon players when
they play in a professional tournament or
a rigged call-in game based on
the "tells" THEY can see that the fool, rube, or mark can NOT see.
You really do not want to find out that this is being done with your open
source software.
it would be a devastating loss of the public's trust for such a thing to
become known
where GNU and FSF did NOT trap on it and instead ignored
someone being disenfranchised for mentioning it.
the tools are tremendously powerful:
my compliments to the historical (maybe not the current in all its
membership) team
that has produced GNUBG
Including those who invented neural network's.
including the 5 centuries of math that lead up to them on computers.
And the rest of the 5,000 years plus of human efforts that gave rise
to the web and the resources
that GNU and FSF depend on, implicitly to exist.
Make sure you act in the basic best interests OF that ecology/civilization
in your actions around such circumstances as these.
You may only get one shot before the next tidal wave hits:
it's coming, folks. head's up and get ready for it.
Best wishes.
Cheers^1
royc
P^1S: if I had wanted to inflame the situation, I would add a third
document:
An analysis of the thread involved on the specific rhetorical gambits
used by Mr. Petch
and how they have been known for some 2-3 centuries as techniques of
manipulation
delineating the specific false hoods, spins, and double inversions pulled.
But: I have not; because I know exactly how difficult it is to SEE some of
these things
when someone ELSE is manipulating Mr. Petch as a stupid fool fall guy
for THEIR intentions.
but i may decide to let the chips fall where they may.
When resources fall below a certain level for a long enough period of time,
the urge to
shovel it back where it came from directly, if the original source is not
in sight
becomes pretty much well nigh irresistible.
But for the efforts of many people within my own life, and over the last 5+
millenia of human history:
I would have already done so. hard core. It is fairly easy to do: find
the buttons and push them.
But: I have tried instead to use the methods within the scope of a positive
constructive response;
so that Mr. Petch may eventually come to see that some of what he did was
repulsive in the extreme
and that it can be near lethally damaging when applied in a social
networking circumstance.
It _IS_ lethal at the street level. Count on it: I have had to deal with it
for 2+ years directly.
Good luck and best wishes to GNU/FSF & GNUBG;
AND to Mr. Petch: of the three, he may be most in need of it.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:53, Roy A. Crabtree <[email protected]>wrote:
> Specifically improper handling of a viral intrusion attack,
> derision and exclusion of a possible source of that intrusion,
> and what appears to be improper reference, possibly illegal
> to the institution of an allied country (US to UK) or
> violation of the laws of that country by a citizen of it (UK only).
>
> You may want to review the correspondence on the GNUBG mailing list.
>
> i was going to do a private side mail to MI5, but it appears their web form
> only allows
> 1800 characters.
>
> So I will post it to GNUBG, as well as leaving the correspondence in my
> gmail Sent box
> for inspection by them.
>
> Perhaps your response can be posted there as well.
>
> (Plus the historical archives as well for previous history on the technical
> topic,
> if not a common type of response to it).
>
> My understanding is that referring to a UK institution incorrectly while a
> citizen of the
> the UK, and at times even of the US,
>
> in regards to a viral intrusion attack and MI5, for example
>
> might have severe consequences if that attack goes unchecked
> because an improper response failed to check it correctly.
>
> New technical ideas occur all the time; and the
>
> philosophical purpose of GNU
>
> as stated, indirectly if not also directly, includes the concept of
>
> beneficent free will interchange of ideas.
>
> When a member of your voluntary crew transgresses that principle,
>
> it is bad enough.
>
> when ad hominems are used in place of actual technical discussion,
> from a momentary fit of pique, that can be passed off and rectified easily
> enough.
>
> When it continues in the face of repeated requests and pleadings to
> rectify the behavior
>
> and is compounded by e-nagging on it continuously on it on list
> afterwards
>
> then netiquette standards older than GNU are in breach
>
> and the reputation of GNU may come into question.
>
> When an actual viral attack on a GNU web site is in progress
>
> and a participating member raises a possible explanation of the source o
> fit
>
> and ridicule is heaped upon the individual for doing so
>
> it gets into an area that could be construed as intentional
> maliciousness
> and possibly slander and libel.
>
> If, in turn that breach of ethics further breaches the specific legal
> ramifications
>
> require at law, both domestically and internationally
>
> as regards handling of the specifics of a viral intrusion attack,
>
> most of the time it will pass harmlessly off
>
> ...until someone is damaged or injured extensively
> by such an attack NOT being handled properly.
>
> And when, further, a member of GNU, actually entails a comment that could
> be
> actually in breach of the laws of the sovereign nation/state he is in, or
> even
> simply derogatory as regards the institution of an allied state
>
> if an actual viral intrusion results in warrantable damage, and
>
> the actual person responsible at GNU for handling such an affair is the
> one
> engaging in such a recourse
>
> it can result in a rather severe set of circumstances if
>
> the damage reaches a level warranting the official participation of
> those
> agencies involved to resolve it.
>
> Alternatively , you might possibly conclude I am the source of the problem,
> or pulling a grandstanding stunt: I am not.
>
> If in turn it came to be known that the specific capabilities of a NN
> engine
> were being used for some purpose OTHER than the public one that was
> being stated in the GNU description of it
>
> by those maintaining it, or otherwise,
>
> and you had a chance to forestall that by reacting professionally and
> properly
>
> it might be more than merely an embarrassment:
>
> it could damage the public perception of the free software
> concept
> and the resulting boon to society in general.
>
> Such as the NNP network of a game playing engine engaging in unfair
> "cheating"
> AND THEN BEING APPLIED to any other purpose than fairly playing gammon.
>
> (Example: I had an intrusion that I do not regard as being GNU
> based, where
> for about 5 months, a professional gammon playing site popped up
> whenever I tried
> to go to GNUBG. This is possible if a context sensitive HTML URL
> intercept
> is placed anywhere in the chain from server to browser; and half a
> dozen other
> different ways: it is only the most obvious one that it could have
> been an intrusion
> onto the GNUBG web site, and highly unlikely that any effective
> skulker
>
> would be stupid enough to do so)
>
> The public perception damage, if that were to be the case and become
> publicized
>
> for example, by scurrilious individuals similar in practice, practic,
> and practique to
>
> some would say Stephen Ballmer and Microsoft's practices
>
> it could be used as an advent to shut down open software as a viable
> alternative.
>
> Sort of like Oprah getting riled because one of her book authors lied to
> her,
> when her staff failed to vet the book and author in the first place.
>
> not that I think it would happen, but damaging it to gain control and
> advantage:
>
> oh yeah, in a heart beat.
>
> Which I do NOT want to see happen.
>
> This is just a head's up.
>
> Usually when software demonstrates a capability of high utility more broad
> than actually anticipated, the response is a positive one.
>
> Unfortunately, it COULD be taken after the fact to indicate, usually
> incorrectly,
>
> that the individual involved doing so
>
> was actively AWARE of this additional capability and
>
> for some undisclosed reason
>
> did NOT want to give away the fact of it.
>
> last, but not least:
>
> do you really want GNU or even just GNUBG to become known
>
> (correctly or INcorrectly is largely irrelevant)
>
> fro hiding something that an intelligence service wants hidden
>
> and then actually being responsible for disclosing it
>
> simply because the ordinary chain of events (viral intrusion, report of
> possible cause)
>
> was derided with ad hominems in a public forum
>
> instead of just being routinely reported to the correct
> intrusion/security authority?
>
> Think on it.
>
> Then maybe get a grip and readjust a couple of attitudes.
>
> The last thing you want
>
> from someone actually UNDER such an intrusional attack (separate from
> GNU, let's keep it clear)
>
> to be compelled under a circumstances of threat of death and
>
> an actual murder (cited already on the GNU list)
>
> and denoting a correlation between a viral intrusion onto your web site
>
> and his or her participation in it
>
> to actually take the case to Court and prove it in public as
>
> having been the case.
>
> As I already stated:
>
> I have few resources to do so:
>
> but if another person in the common group I _AM_ concerned with DOES die
>
> I may have to file a Bivens direct pleading on the matter.
>
> I would prefer to have it handled quietly and appropriately long before
> then.
>
> Whether or not the correlation is CAUSAL rather than
> temporal/statistical/inferential
>
> is not the point.
>
> The point is that reports of cause of intrusion on a viral attack sequence
>
> should not be trimmed in advance of collimation
>
> or any 4th grade skulker will get through your security,
>
> play pinochle on your snout to deride you in public
>
> and walk away having accomplished their purpose.
>
> It is also not about being caught with your pants down.
>
> And if you do not get THAT, point, then I would suggest spending a
> vacation day
>
> in Darfur: the correlation there IS causal and direct.
>
> I wish you the best.
>
> Cheers.
>
> To MI5: usually a waste of time. Sadly.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Roy A. Crabtree <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:00
> Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Site being reported as "Attack Site"
> To: Michael Petch <[email protected]>
>
>
> Good luck, Michael.
> You'll need it.
> Passed on to GNU Central.
>
> ... and MI5.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 17:56, Michael Petch <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24/08/09 3:52 PM, "Michael Petch" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I am fall more aware with the situation than you are. I am being watched
>> and by Mi5 agents for years.
>>
>>
>>
>> As you can tell I disguise myself by making it appear I am not an English
>> speaker . Normally I would have said “I am far more aware with the situation
>> than you are. I have been watched by Mi5 agents for years.”. I have to keep
>> a low profile. Shhh.. Don’t tell anyone, Mike (err, make that Barbara) out!
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Use Reply-To: & thread your email
> after the first: or it may take a while, as
> I get 2000+ emails per day.
> --
>
> Roy A. Crabtree
> UNC '76 gaa.lifer# 11086
>
> (mail, residence)
> Roy A. Crabtree
> 3322 Wheeler Road SE
> Oak Hill Apartments #T-4
> Washington, DC 20032-4166
> 202-562-1909 US no voicemail
> (try after 2100EST)
>
> (secondary mail)
> Roy A. Crabtree
> USPS POB 58097
> Washington, DC 20034-8097
> 703-318-2106
> (msgs only, use my name)
> (best effort next day M-F pickup)
>
> [When you hear/read/see/feel what a y*ehudi plays/writes/sculpts/holds]
> [(n)either violinist {Menuhin} (n)or writer {"The Y*ehudi Principle"} (n)or
> molder (n)or older]
> [you must strive/think/look/sense all of it, or you will miss the meanings
> of it all]
>
> [email protected] Forwards only to:
> [email protected]
> [email protected] CC: auto to ^
>
> http://musings-roy-crabtree.blogspot.com [& others]
> http://www.authorsden.com/royacrabtree
> http://skyscraper.fortunecity.com/activex/720/resume/full.doc
> --
> (c) RAC/IP, ARE,PRO,PAST
> (Copyright) Roy Andrew Crabtree/In Perpetuity
> All Rights/Reserved Explicitly
> Public Reuse Only
> Profits Always Safe Traded
>
>
>
> --
> Use Reply-To: & thread your email
> after the first: or it may take a while, as
> I get 2000+ emails per day.
> --
>
> Roy A. Crabtree
> UNC '76 gaa.lifer# 11086
>
> (mail, residence)
> Roy A. Crabtree
> 3322 Wheeler Road SE
> Oak Hill Apartments #T-4
> Washington, DC 20032-4166
> 202-562-1909 US no voicemail
> (try after 2100EST)
>
> (secondary mail)
> Roy A. Crabtree
> USPS POB 58097
> Washington, DC 20034-8097
> 703-318-2106
> (msgs only, use my name)
> (best effort next day M-F pickup)
>
> [When you hear/read/see/feel what a y*ehudi plays/writes/sculpts/holds]
> [(n)either violinist {Menuhin} (n)or writer {"The Y*ehudi Principle"} (n)or
> molder (n)or older]
> [you must strive/think/look/sense all of it, or you will miss the meanings
> of it all]
>
> [email protected] Forwards only to:
> [email protected]
> [email protected] CC: auto to ^
>
> http://musings-roy-crabtree.blogspot.com [& others]
> http://www.authorsden.com/royacrabtree
> http://skyscraper.fortunecity.com/activex/720/resume/full.doc
> --
> (c) RAC/IP, ARE,PRO,PAST
> (Copyright) Roy Andrew Crabtree/In Perpetuity
> All Rights/Reserved Explicitly
> Public Reuse Only
> Profits Always Safe Traded
>
--
Use Reply-To: & thread your email
after the first: or it may take a while, as
I get 2000+ emails per day.
--
Roy A. Crabtree
UNC '76 gaa.lifer# 11086
(mail, residence)
Roy A. Crabtree
3322 Wheeler Road SE
Oak Hill Apartments #T-4
Washington, DC 20032-4166
202-562-1909 US no voicemail
(try after 2100EST)
(secondary mail)
Roy A. Crabtree
USPS POB 58097
Washington, DC 20034-8097
703-318-2106
(msgs only, use my name)
(best effort next day M-F pickup)
[When you hear/read/see/feel what a y*ehudi plays/writes/sculpts/holds]
[(n)either violinist {Menuhin} (n)or writer {"The Y*ehudi Principle"} (n)or
molder (n)or older]
[you must strive/think/look/sense all of it, or you will miss the meanings
of it all]
[email protected] Forwards only to:
[email protected]
[email protected] CC: auto to ^
http://musings-roy-crabtree.blogspot.com [& others]
http://www.authorsden.com/royacrabtree
http://skyscraper.fortunecity.com/activex/720/resume/full.doc
--
(c) RAC/IP, ARE,PRO,PAST
(Copyright) Roy Andrew Crabtree/In Perpetuity
All Rights/Reserved Explicitly
Public Reuse Only
Profits Always Safe Traded
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
