Hello
Ok, follow up on the auriate story
(this time then from a security expert (g)):
Quote:
I have been contacted by several legal firms who have requested that I post
a message in their behalf.
They are seeking anyone who is interested in becoming a representative in
your home state for a cla
How-do-you-do...Marck,
Y'said:
MDP> Watchfully. ;-)
:-D
I'm glad it wasn't wasted ;-)
Slan,
Simon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usin' TB! v1.41 B3
--
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a messag
Thursday, March 02, 2000, 2:02:55 AM, tracer wrote:
> Not true, I referred to Anglefire as it had a nice visible website but
> I got the info direct from the very first guy who posted it.
Then you should have included those cites as well. A cheap, lame HTML,
backwards site quoting someone el
Hi Simon,
On 02 March 2000 at 14:06:23 GMT + (which was 14:06 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
S> How-do-you-do,
Watchfully. ;-)
416E64 4D6172636B 73616964: 2249 63616E 72656164 7468
How-do-you-do,
But there again...
Slan,
Simon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416E64 5374657665 4C616D62 73616964: 224c6574 7468657265 6265 6C696768742122
~~
Hello Steve Lamb,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 18:43:13 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 9:43:13 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 09:21:13AM +0700, tracer wrote:
>> I donot mind that but you should be TOLD.
>> So you have a choice not t
Hello István Szendrõ,
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 07:14:05 +0100 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 1:14:05 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
István Szendrõ wrote:
> Hello Steve,
> Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 7:15:17 PM, you wrote:
SL>> The point I was trying to make isn't that the
How-do-you-do,
tracer @ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
t> Anyway, lets stop the discussion,
Agreed, fruitless to persist down a dark alley.
Slan,
Simon mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
##
5354457645: 796F75 4152524F464E54 54574154
##
Hello Steve Lamb,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:35:47 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 6:35:47 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Joe-blow on Angelfire was reposting what someone else had said, cited a
> source I had never even heard of before and clearly
SL> On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 09:21:13AM +0700, tracer wrote:
>> I donot mind that but you should be TOLD.
>> So you have a choice not to install or even download it.
SL> Male-cow-dung! It is /ADWARE/. Geez, it is common knowledge that adware
SL> in the past, oh, 2-3 years does tracking!
Hello Steve,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 7:15:17 PM, you wrote:
SL> The point I was trying to make isn't that the program was doing something,
SL> the point was that what the program /was/ doing wasn't confirmed by a
SL> reputable source as anything contrary to what the user was told. To be
On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 09:21:13AM +0700, tracer wrote:
> I donot mind that but you should be TOLD.
> So you have a choice not to install or even download it.
Male-cow-dung! It is /ADWARE/. Geez, it is common knowledge that adware
in the past, oh, 2-3 years does tracking! It is like all
Hello Leif Gregory,
On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 06:57:11 +0900 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 4:57:11 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Leif Gregory wrote:
> This weekend, I'll examine more packets from longer sessions using
> multiple advertiser supported software. I'm not saying th
Hello Steve Lamb,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:15:17 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 1:15:17 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Steve Lamb wrote:
> The time to worry is when a /REPUTABLE/ source, not a joe-blow dorkwad on
> angelfire (AKA, can't even afford web space of h
Hello Tom Plunket,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 10:11:21 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 1:11:21 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Tom Plunket wrote:
> tracer wrote:
t>> Wednesday, March 01, 2000
t>> Hello Bat-users,
t>> http://www.angelfire.com/rock/fangthane/index.html
t>
Hello Steve Lamb,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:54:54 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 12:54:54 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 9:46:43 AM, tracer wrote:
>> If you had read whats being uploaded from ones system then its clearly
>>
Hello Leif,
Hello Leif,
Just the point that I was trying to make to before, but got out of my
way. Well, for all who missed the actual threads, here are some of
them;
Read this first ;
http://grc.com/aureate.htm
for more;
http://kumite.com/myths/
http://pub3.ezboard.com/fzorsboardgenerald
A Chara Steve,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 11:35:47 PM, you wrote:
SL> I dunno about you, but I'd side with BugTraq. I'll grant that sometimes
SL> L0pht, BugTraq, CERT, SERT(sp?) and a few other organizations will not be the
SL> first to report it. This is not the case here. When they do r
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 3:17:44 PM, Simon wrote:
> what happens next? Does it get ignored? Does everyone shout "ahh, its
> a stupid lamer creating more bogus alerts"? Some will, but eventually
However, before I made that determination about this case I /DID/ check
bugtraq and found discuss
A Chara Leif,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 9:57:11 PM, you wrote:
LG> I'll side with Steve on this issue.
Just so that everyone understands:
I wasn't in fact originally fully disagreeing with the statement that
Steve made, or attempting to take sides. I butted in simply because
Steve was seeming
Hello Tom,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 6:11:21 PM, you wrote:
TP> What's happening is that you're downloading shareware that's
TP> "supported by advertisements." The "fix" is to not download or use
TP> software that uses these DLLs in the first place, not to try to
TP> circumvent the mechanism t
Hello Steve,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 at 10:15:17 [GMT -0800], you wrote:
SL> The point I was trying to make isn't that the program was doing
SL> something, the point was that what the program /was/ doing wasn't
SL> confirmed by a reputable source as anything contrary to what the
SL> user was told. To
A Chara Steve,
Yeah, OK. I think everyone gets the point..Steven
SL> That is why you should rely upon reputable reports from people who know
SL> their business and not from some crack-pot newbie. The newbie, invariably,
SL> gets it wrong and causes more damage in his chicken-little act than
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 10:27:56 AM, Simon wrote:
> 'reputable source'. Some Joe-blah suffering from rectal-cranial
> inversion might just save your arse one day because you might have
> been looking up your own dark side for a bit to long!.
WARNING
I just discovered a new thr
A Chara Steve,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 6:15:17 PM, you wrote:
"...joe-blow dorkwad?" Ha ha. Nice description ;-)
Yeah, I really understood where you were coming from, and that you do
get those 'imbecilic, pimply-faced lame-brains' (getting the swing of
it) posting warnings about this and war
tracer wrote:
t> Wednesday, March 01, 2000
t> Hello Bat-users,
t> http://www.angelfire.com/rock/fangthane/index.html
t> if you like your privacy worth reading and following whats
t> happening...
What's happening is that you're downloading shareware that's
"supported by advertisements."
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 10:00:18 AM, Simon wrote:
> Privacy is privacy. Sneaky tactics are sneaky tactics. These companies
> need to get with the program and shouldn't get away with it. If they
> don't have our permission then they just shouldn't be allowed to do
> it. Yeah, blocking a port is
A Chara Steve,
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 5:54:54 PM, you wrote:
SL> Yeah, block outbound connections to port 1975, yay, that was hard. No, it
SL> shouldn't be accepted but paranoia is also not to be accepted. I'm big on
SL> privacy, but I'm also tired of all the bogus alerts going around
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 9:46:43 AM, tracer wrote:
> If you had read whats being uploaded from ones system then its clearly
> not exactly what they are telling...
I read it and I don't trust the person who posted it /UNLESS/ it is from a
recognized security source. I named two. Why?
Hello Steve Lamb,
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:10:55 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, March 02, 2000, 12:10:55 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 8:53:28 AM, tracer wrote:
>> http://www.angelfire.com/rock/fangthane/index.html
>> if you like yo
Wednesday, March 01, 2000, 8:53:28 AM, tracer wrote:
> http://www.angelfire.com/rock/fangthane/index.html
> if you like your privacy worth reading and following whats
> happening...
Hmmm, anything on Angelfire is worthy of suspicion. Any CERT/Bugtraq
advisories on the matter?
Yup
Wednesday, March 01, 2000
Hello Bat-users,
http://www.angelfire.com/rock/fangthane/index.html
if you like your privacy worth reading and following whats
happening...
--
Best regards,
tracer
Using theBAT 1.41 Beta/3
NO MICROSOFT VIRUS INFECTIONS
mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
using Fi
32 matches
Mail list logo
