Re: What are the choices for anon posting besides QS?
anonymous
Why don't you want to use QS? It works perfectly well.
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
anonymous
See http://www.danner-net.de/om/QSMNOM_Help_1_2_4.rar for setup.
Omnimix: http://www.danner-net.de
Dave U. Random
<fr...@spamexpire-200908.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>> I really need some answers.
>
>Then go and look for them.
omnimix
.
Invalid
"anonymous" <an...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:h6ceeq$578$1...@news.mixmin.net...
>> I really need some answers.
>
> Why don't you want to use QS? It works perfectly well.
>
>
Only if you can find an email service that works with it. If you ask, no one
will admit which ones do.
Invalid
"Richard Forbes-Lesbian"
<fr...@spamexpire-200908.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote in message
news:cb298b1e6a9f104a...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
>> I really need some answers.
>
>
He or she is. If you have nothing useful to add, don't bother to reply.
Invalid
"Dave U. Random" <anon...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> wrote in message
news:a7f7d7bc95679483...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net...
Everyone here is now using Omnimix?
Greegor
Nomen Nescio
"Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid> wrote:
>
>
>"anonymous" <an...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>news:h6ceeq$578$1...@news.mixmin.net...
>>> I really need some answers.
>>
>> Why don't you want to use QS? It works perfectly well.
>>
>>
>
>Only if you can find an email service that works with it.
hotpop.com for one. you can post directly to any remailer as well.
QS works with any non-tls service. with stunnel that limitation is
gone.
>If you ask, no one will admit which ones do.
ridiculous.
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
>Everyone here is now using Omnimix?
That's hard to figure out. :-)
.
Anonymous Remailer
Greegor wrote:
> This ""anonymous remailer community"" sure is friendly. (sarcasm)
That's pathetically ironic coming from a shillpuppet whose entire
on line existence entails nothing more than making enemies.
Non scrivetemi
Huh?
Any email service works with QS. That's what QS is... an email
client. It's just at home at your ISP's email server, as it is
talking to a local postfix server, as it is at shitholes like Gmail.
Fritz Wuehler
Not sure what you mean by that. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding.
I use a private VPN with it's own encrypted SMTP. I use QS and it works
just fine.
George Orwell
Hotpop used to be a a decent choice but is declining in reliability. As
of this morning their website isn't reachable.
Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it
& sons.outfit
It doesn't work if your provider blocks emails to remailers.
Anonymous
Well..... DUH!
Funny thing is, QS STILL works just fine. It's the provider that
breaks things. :-P
Prism
It works with any and all email services except those requiring
SSL, then you use it in conjunction with stunnel.
It is no more difficult to set up and get going than any other
email client.
It does require that you be able to read, and that you have a
basic understanding of mail and news configuration. Even if
you're mentally handicapped, the docs are more than adequate to
get you through it.
noauth
Wow. Learn something everyday.
Some ISP's actually block remailer addresses? All 26 of them?
Any examples?
Prism
Which provider would that be? I don't know of any who block
outbound email to remailers.
sons.outfit
I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
to me.
Kulin Remailer
harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>
> I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
> remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
> to me.
Sounds more like the remailer isn't allowing you to relay, not
your ISP. Not all remailers allow relaying, even if they are the
first hop in the chain.
sons.outfit
wrote:
I did have QS working for some years until it simply stopped working.
It doesn't matter which chain I choose, it simply bombs out. I know
it has to be my email provider's machine doing it to me. I'll just
have to find another email provider. The problem is that I cannot
know beforehand if that provider's system isn't set to do the same
thing.
There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
Anyone know an email service that allows posting to remailers?
Stray Cat
Snip.....
>There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
>able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
>secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
There still are.
https://www.cotse.net/cgi-bin/mixmail.cgi
https://www.cotse.net/cgi-bin/mixnews.cgi
https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-email.htm
https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-news.htm
Prism
>
> I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
> remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
> to me.
Common enough error. You are relaying when you use QS. Some
ISP's will no longer allow you to relay unless you authenticate
first. QS has SMTP Authentication, see tools. There are
multiple methods to allow unauth/auth mail sending via an ISP.
Some block all outbound port 25 now and you must use their
servers to send mail. They generally do not require that you
auth first before sending/relaying if you are in their network
address space. Others allow unauth sending, but to relay, you
must auth first. Others filter by IP address or the domain name
of the sender (i.e. "fa...@realdomainname.com"). The latter is
less common, but it is encountered. Some even use DNS
redirection to redirect outbound mail connections regardless of
destination server to a specific internal SMTP host for scanning
prior to sending. Auth will not work in this case. There is
always the possibility of port 587 availability.
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
> I did have QS working for some years until it simply stopped working.
> It doesn't matter which chain I choose, it simply bombs out. I know
> it has to be my email provider's machine doing it to me. I'll just
> have to find another email provider. The problem is that I cannot
> know beforehand if that provider's system isn't set to do the same
> thing.
OK, so first it's "a bunch of local ISP's", and now it's "your
email provider".
Sounds to me like you munged something up in your QS configuration.
If your "email provider" is rejecting messages it will give you an
error. It won't just "bomb out".
> There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
> able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
> secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
Is your Google broken too?
>
> Anyone know an email service that allows posting to remailers?
As you've been told several times now... all of them.
Dave U. Random
> I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
> remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
> to me.
Rubbish.
Name *one* of them.
Your "local ISP" story sounds like so much baloney.
& sons.outfit
>https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-email.htm
>https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-news.htm
Neither of the above is for posting to Usenet, though.
Email I can encrypt with any of hundred different programs. Besides,
I don't email anyone from whom I have to hide my identity.
It's posting to Usenet anon that I would like to have. The abundance
of vindictive morons rampant on Usenet these days kind of make anon
posting mandatory most times.
& sons.outfit
(austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>
>harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>
>> I did have QS working for some years until it simply stopped working.
>> It doesn't matter which chain I choose, it simply bombs out. I know
>> it has to be my email provider's machine doing it to me. I'll just
>> have to find another email provider. The problem is that I cannot
>> know beforehand if that provider's system isn't set to do the same
>> thing.
>
>OK, so first it's "a bunch of local ISP's", and now it's "your
>email provider".
Local ISPs ARE what I used for email. (See, people, it's contentious
jerks like this one that kind of make it necessary to post anon.)
>Sounds to me like you munged something up in your QS configuration.
>If your "email provider" is rejecting messages it will give you an
>error. It won't just "bomb out".
Nope.
>> There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
>> able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
>> secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
>
>Is your Google broken too?
Gee, if this guy gets this hot over such trivial things as my posts,
can you imagine what it is like for those who have to live with him?
>>
>> Anyone know an email service that allows posting to remailers?
>
>As you've been told several times now... all of them.
See, this jerk is the reason why many people just killfile all
remailers - as I also have done in many groups.
I think I'll just leave now. It's getting nasty.
Bye-bye.
Stray Cat
>On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:43:51 -0400, Stray Cat
><Stra...@alt.anonymous.messages> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:36:13 -0500, harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>>
>>Snip.....
>>
>>>There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
>>>able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
>>>secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
>>
>>There still are.
>>
>>https://www.cotse.net/cgi-bin/mixmail.cgi
>>https://www.cotse.net/cgi-bin/mixnews.cgi
>
>>https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-email.htm
>>https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-news.htm
>
>Neither of the above is for posting to Usenet, though.
Look again.
The second and last are for posting to Usenet.
& sons.outfit
<Stra...@alt.anonymous.messages> wrote:
>On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 21:20:41 -0500, harry@harry & sons.outfit wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:43:51 -0400, Stray Cat
>><Stra...@alt.anonymous.messages> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:36:13 -0500, harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>>>
>>>Snip.....
>>>
>>>>There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
>>>>able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
>>>>secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
>>>
>>>There still are.
>>>
>>>https://www.cotse.net/cgi-bin/mixmail.cgi
>>>https://www.cotse.net/cgi-bin/mixnews.cgi
>>
>>>https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-email.htm
>>>https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-anon-news.htm
>>
>>Neither of the above is for posting to Usenet, though.
>
>Look again.
>
>The second and last are for posting to Usenet.
>
Whoops! Sorry 'bout that. :0)
Thanks!
George Orwell
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:30:53 +0200 (CEST), "Anonymous Remailer
> (austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>
> >
> >harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
> >
> >> I did have QS working for some years until it simply stopped working.
> >> It doesn't matter which chain I choose, it simply bombs out. I know
> >> it has to be my email provider's machine doing it to me. I'll just
> >> have to find another email provider. The problem is that I cannot
> >> know beforehand if that provider's system isn't set to do the same
> >> thing.
> >
> >OK, so first it's "a bunch of local ISP's", and now it's "your
> >email provider".
>
> Local ISPs ARE what I used for email. (See, people, it's contentious
> jerks like this one that kind of make it necessary to post anon.)
It's not contentious to point out the inconsistencies in your
bullshit story. And your pathetic appeal to the masses isn't a
substitute for clarifying it.
>
> >Sounds to me like you munged something up in your QS configuration.
> >If your "email provider" is rejecting messages it will give you an
> >error. It won't just "bomb out".
>
> Nope.
Judging by the way your ADD affected your ability to grasp Cat's
links, I'd say you've most certainly munged something up. Email
servers don't just "bomb out" they accept messages and then process
them. If there's something wonky during processing they almost
always fire off a mail explaining why.
You really don't seem like you're the most computer savvy knife in
the drawer. Maybe if you let go of the juvenile attitude and gave
some STRAIGHT answers to some questions someone could help you sort
out your configuration problem. Chances are it's something very
simple. Maybe even something your ISP has changed recently that you
need to adjust for. You could start by relaying the EXACT error
message you said you were getting before your bullshit story
changed to just "bombed out".
>
> >> There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
> >> able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
> >> secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
> >
> >Is your Google broken too?
>
> Gee, if this guy gets this hot over such trivial things as my posts,
> can you imagine what it is like for those who have to live with him?
It might make you feel all adult to believe I'd be "hot" over your
shortcomings, but the truth is, telling someone to do a little foot
work on their own is often more helpful than handing them an
answer. It's a "give them a fish or teach them to fish" thing.
>
> >>
> >> Anyone know an email service that allows posting to remailers?
> >
> >As you've been told several times now... all of them.
>
> See, this jerk is the reason why many people just killfile all
> remailers - as I also have done in many groups.
>
> I think I'll just leave now. It's getting nasty.
>
> Bye-bye.
The online version of a two year old getting mad, grabbing its toy,
and running to its room.
How sad.... *sigh*
Kulin Remailer
Invalid
"George Orwell" <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
news:1c6402cab2ee90b2...@mixmaster.it...
I forgot the errors I got with hotpop but remember it stopped working after
a few months. Tried a few others and no dice.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Invalid
"Non scrivetemi" <nonscr...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote in message
news:19c7200c439b99f4...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info...
Sorry but you're wrong. They brought errors. Only hotpop worked and that
was for a few months only.
>
Invalid
"Prism" <pr...@none.com> wrote in message
news:1b01c6c6e1d6082c...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
OK then, which ISPs allow it? I've had 3 ISPs in the past 10 yrs and all 3
blocked them.
Invalid
"harry@harry& sons.outfit" wrote in message
news:hkmta5p0qk9o8ck5m...@4ax.com...
YES! YES!!! That's the error I got from my ISPs and free email accounts
also. Only hotpop worked, then gave the same error.
Invalid
"Greegor" <gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4c6e2c2a-3846-48da...@h13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> This ""anonymous remailer community"" sure is friendly. (sarcasm)
I think most of them, computer experts with much experience, don't realize
others lack their expertise for whatever reason. They quickly lose patience
with those who fail to grasp how remailers work and don't know and
understand the terminology. I got some really good help here with QS some
years back. Unfortunately, around the time hotpop no longer worked with QS,
I started getting the "bombed" error, time after time after time. What we
all really need is something easy, more automatic, for beginners to use. A
program that updates the keys itself. Something that somehow works with all
or most email services. Something with an intuitive interface and no need to
read reams of technical text to learn to use. But software writers are busy
people and there may not be money in such a project although I would gladly
pay for such software. I'm sure others would also.
Invalid
> In article <h8hpg7$kqt$1...@aioe.org>
> "Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "anonymous" <an...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:h6ceeq$578$1...@news.mixmin.net...
>> >> I really need some answers.
>> >
>> > Why don't you want to use QS? It works perfectly well.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Only if you can find an email service that works with it. If you ask, no
>> one
>> will admit which ones do.
>
> It works with any and all email services except those requiring
> SSL, then you use it in conjunction with stunnel.
None of my services required SSL and none would forward the mail. None
worked with QS. Stunnel? Are we all supposed to know what THAT is?
>
> It is no more difficult to set up and get going than any other
> email client.
>
> It does require that you be able to read, and that you have a
> basic understanding of mail and news configuration. Even if
> you're mentally handicapped, the docs are more than adequate to
> get you through it.
>
Who are you to judge who is or isn't mentally handicapped?
Invalid
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> wrote in
message news:371ed667e93db3b1...@remailer.privacy.at...
>
>>Everyone here is now using Omnimix?
>
> That's hard to figure out. :-)
> .
>
I know that all too well. I've tried it myself. Never once got it to send
anything anonymously. My IP always showed. I've seen others post here over
the years that they couldn't get it to work for them either. They couldn't
figure it out.
Invalid
"harry@harry& sons.outfit" wrote in message
news:hkmta5p0qk9o8ck5m...@4ax.com...
*No relaying* was the one I got from my past ISPs.
Invalid
"harry@harry& sons.outfit" wrote in message
> On 15 Sep 2009 02:01:38 -0000, Kulin Remailer <rema...@reece.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <hkmta5p0qk9o8ck5m...@4ax.com>
>>harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>>>
>>> I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
>>> remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
>>> to me.
>>
>>Sounds more like the remailer isn't allowing you to relay, not
>>your ISP. Not all remailers allow relaying, even if they are the
>>first hop in the chain.
>>
>>
>
> I did have QS working for some years until it simply stopped working.
> It doesn't matter which chain I choose, it simply bombs out. I know
> it has to be my email provider's machine doing it to me.
I think you're wrong. It's not your ISP. The bombing out happened to me
also. I uninstalled and reinstalled QS several times just to have it
continue to bomb out. I have Windows Vista now but with no email service
that will forward email, I haven't tried QS again. Someone mentioned
Stunnel but have no idea how that can be used to get email services to
forward the messages.
Invalid
"Dave U. Random" <anon...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> wrote in message
news:2f5d84a475a0927b...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net...
Bellsouth for example, was one of these that did not work with QS.
Invalid
"Hidden" <hid...@nym.mixmin.net> wrote in message
news:200909180423...@fleegle.mixmin.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> "Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid> wrote in message
> news:h8ubg5$4sj$1...@aioe.org...
>
They don't service my area. I'm way back in the country, miles from any
large town.
& sons.outfit
wrote:
snip
>>
>> It does require that you be able to read, and that you have a
>> basic understanding of mail and news configuration. Even if
>> you're mentally handicapped, the docs are more than adequate to
>> get you through it.
>>
>
>Who are you to judge who is or isn't mentally handicapped?
Who are they? Frustrated, lost little twits in their own lives whose
only glimmer of power is to sit on Usenet and pretend to be somebody.
They're also the reason so many, many people routinely killfile anon
posters.
Nomen Nescio
"Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid> wrote:
>
>
> "Non scrivetemi" <nonscr...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote in message
> news:19c7200c439b99f4...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info...
> > Invalid wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "anonymous" <an...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
> >> news:h6ceeq$578$1...@news.mixmin.net...
> >> >> I really need some answers.
> >> >
> >> > Why don't you want to use QS? It works perfectly well.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Only if you can find an email service that works with it. If you ask, no
> >> one
> >> will admit which ones do.
> >>
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > Any email service works with QS. That's what QS is... an email
> > client. It's just at home at your ISP's email server, as it is
> > talking to a local postfix server, as it is at shitholes like Gmail.
>
confidence in your ability to determine what your problems are. You
appear to be less than fully competent. Hell, you can't even quote,
for sure, your error messages. That's why you can't get your
software to work. You've been told QS works damn near anywhere.
But, of course, you can't get it working anywhere. Doesn't that
tell you anything? Are you so smart you can't take any advice at
all?
> Sorry but you're wrong. They brought errors. Only hotpop worked and that
> was for a few months only.
I'd say, when people setup their smtp host incorrectly--they get
errors! Usually, though, they try to determine the cause of the
error so they can make the necessary fix(es) to get it going. Not
you.
Nomen Nescio
You're right. There's no money in it. Forget thinking you could pay
for such a program. You can't finance the program development on
your own.
QS has it's problems but you won't find an easier program to use.
Just face it. We've done what we can to provide you with software.
You'll have to educate yourself in it's use. period. So, stop with
the 'oh, poor us, we need something more to our liking...'.
You just don't realize you have an obligation to make whatever
effort is require.
Non scrivetemi
Um, hate to break the news to you but I'm
using BellSouth right now and they absolutely
DO allow mail to remailers.
I don't know what your problem is, but I
suspect you've made some major error in your
setup and done it consistently. A lot of ISPs
are blocking open relays (filtering port 25
traffic), especially DSL providers for some
reason, but none of them are blocking mail
going through THEIR servers as far as I'm
aware.
Kulin Remailer
Non scrivetemi
> > Which provider would that be? I don't know of any who block
> > outbound email to remailers.
> >
>
> OK then, which ISPs allow it? I've had 3 ISPs in the past 10 yrs and all 3
> blocked them.
>
No they didn't. You just don't have the IQ to properly set up a
mail client or the maturity to accept good advice. Hell, you can't
even be bothered to provide any detailed information. It's your
fault and your fault alone that QS is not working for you. Period.
George Orwell
He's not wrong at all. You are.
You screwed something up in your QS configuration. In fact if
you're reading this it PROVES that QS works with Hotpop.
So far you've failed to provide any specifics regarding these
alleged errors and your story has changed a couple times. You're
either a troll or one of the most lazy people on earth.
Anonymous Remailer
Invalid wrote:
Then, as you've been told, you have QS set up improperly. You're
not actually trying to use your ISP email at all.
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
Can you access any type of a proxy?
Can you access Tor?
Nomen Nescio
Ok pal, let's get real. Who is your ISP now and do they work with
QS? Apparently not, so it's time you setup QS correctly with that
ISP. Let's set the fucking thing up for you. You could start with
the host. What is it.
Anonymous Remailer
harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
> On 15 Sep 2009 02:01:38 -0000, Kulin Remailer <rema...@reece.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <hkmta5p0qk9o8ck5m...@4ax.com>
>> harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>>> remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
>>> to me.
>> your ISP. Not all remailers allow relaying, even if they are the
>> first hop in the chain.
>>
>>
>
> I did have QS working for some years until it simply stopped working.
> It doesn't matter which chain I choose, it simply bombs out. I know
> have to find another email provider. The problem is that I cannot
> know beforehand if that provider's system isn't set to do the same
> thing.
>
> There used to be Web page remailer interfaces, but I don't seem to be
> able to find them any longer. Yes, I know, they might not be very
> secure, but I would only post mundane usenet material through them.
>
> Anyone know an email service that allows posting to remailers?
You started your childish rant with the conclusion, "My ISP" is blocking
remailers." I highly doubt it. Your QS configuration is somehow mangled.
Your ability to properly provide useful error messages and relevant
information, makes analyzing your broken little toy, impossible, a waste
of time.
That, and your stubborn block-headedness brings the whole fiasco to a
grinding halt.
You are so myopic and narrow-minded that to you, the declining dollar
and the rising price of gold ALWAYS =The Great Depression. In other
words, you refuse to fucking listen.
So drop it.
Here are some juicy tidbits for you.
https://www.bananasplit.info/cgi-bin/anon.cgi
https://www.awxcnx.de/mm-news.htm
https://www.mangrin.org/cgi/remail
https://www.gabrix.ath.cx/cgi-bin/anon.cgi
Be wise enough to access them through Tor or something like JanusVM.
And take off, eh?
Fritz Wuehler
Per chance are you on satellite?
Invalid
"Anonymous" <cri...@ecn.org> wrote in message
news:2009091820462...@www.ecn.org...
Hey asshole, why do you think people have Satellite dishes for PC service
out in the country? You're a real fucking dummy. Shut up before you expose
yourself as the biggest asshole on this group.
>
Invalid
"Nomen Nescio" <nob...@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:9383880823952059...@dizum.com...
Had I not made the effort to learn the program I would not have been able to
use it as long as I did before it bombed for the last time.
>
>
>
Invalid
"Kulin Remailer" <rema...@reece.net.au> wrote in message
news:F9CME6GN4007...@reece.net.au...
Really? It looks like a NSP to me.
>
>
>
Invalid
> Invalid wrote:
>
>>
>> "Dave U. Random" <anon...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> wrote in message
>> news:2f5d84a475a0927b...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net...
>> > harry@harry& sons.outfit wrote:
>> >
>> >> I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
>> >> remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
>> >> to me.
>> >
>> > Rubbish.
>> >
>> > Name *one* of them.
>> >
>> > Your "local ISP" story sounds like so much baloney.
>> >
>>
>> Bellsouth for example, was one of these that did not work with QS.
>
> Um, hate to break the news to you but I'm
> using BellSouth right now and they absolutely
> DO allow mail to remailers.
All I ever got was the no relaying message or error. DirecPC allowed it
until Hughes.net took them over. Then it was no relaying again. The other
two were small private ISPs I'd rather not mention on a public forum.
Invalid
>> > Try Comcast.net and astound.net
>> >
Too many quoted lines.
>>
>> They don't service my area. I'm way back in the country, miles from any
>> large town.
>
> Ok pal, let's get real. Who is your ISP now and do they work with
> QS? Apparently not, so it's time you setup QS correctly with that
> ISP. Let's set the fucking thing up for you. You could start with
> the host. What is it.
Why would you need the host info? The last time someone got hold of that
they hounded my ISP for months. That's why I only use free NSPs that hide
that information. All my email accounts are now through gmail.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Invalid
"Anonymous Remailer" <m...@awxcnx.de> wrote in message
news:0246c8ae72cbf951...@awxcnx.de...
>
> Invalid wrote:
>
Too many quoted lines:
>> >
>> > I had a number of local isps that whenever I tried emailing through a
>> > remailer gave me a "no relaying" error. Quite a few locals did that
>> > to me.
>>
>> YES! YES!!! That's the error I got from my ISPs and free email accounts
>> also. Only hotpop worked, then gave the same error.
>>
>
> Then, as you've been told, you have QS set up improperly. You're
> not actually trying to use your ISP email at all.
>
Then how is it set up properly to allow relaying? If it was set up
improperly, why did hotpop work for all that time?
Invalid
"Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@spamexpire-200909.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
in message
news:5a95b665ecc87ffc...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
I have both dial-up and Satellite.
>
Invalid
> Invalid wrote:
>
>> OK then, which ISPs allow it? I've had 3 ISPs in the past 10 yrs and all
>> 3
>> blocked them.
>>
>
> No they didn't. You just don't have the IQ to properly set up a
> mail client or the maturity to accept good advice. Hell, you can't
> even be bothered to provide any detailed information. It's your
> fault and your fault alone that QS is not working for you. Period.
>
The error was "no relaying" for all but the hotpop server. What detailed
information would you like?
Invalid
"George Orwell" <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
news:782adf63ee1bffb3...@mixmaster.it...
> Invalid wrote:
>> >>
>> >
>> > Huh?
>> >
>> > Any email service works with QS. That's what QS is... an email
>> > client. It's just at home at your ISP's email server, as it is
>> > talking to a local postfix server, as it is at shitholes like Gmail.
>>
>> Sorry but you're wrong. They brought errors. Only hotpop worked and that
>> was for a few months only.
>
> He's not wrong at all. You are.
>
> You screwed something up in your QS configuration. In fact if
> you're reading this it PROVES that QS works with Hotpop.
After perhaps a year, hotpop started to give me the same "no relaying" error
I got from my ISPs server. At about that time QS kept freezing or bombing
out. Over and over and over it would bomb. I asked about that here several
years ago and was advised to uninstall and reinstall it. I was advised to
get a clean new copy from the website and I did. It still bombed out. That
was on an XP/SP2 machine.
>
> So far you've failed to provide any specifics regarding these
> alleged errors and your story has changed a couple times. You're
> either a troll or one of the most lazy people on earth.
What specifics do you want to know? I uninstalled it over 2 years ago. I
have better things to do with my time than troll. To post my personal
information here would be plain crazy.
Invalid
"Harry@harry & sons.outfit" wrote in message
news:0e96b5lleu0etc4es...@4ax.com...
You got that right. Though some of the posters here are really great and
very helpful, the elitist attitude of some of the others is sickening. They
expect anyone coming here to have the same level of expertise they have or
they look down on and insult them. Probably most of that type are kids with
ego issues.
I must say when QS started to bomb out a few years ago there were those who
made excellent suggestions, but nothing worked. I even changed my anti-virus
software and uninstalled my firewall.... QS still bombed. Together with
Hotpop giving me the dreaded *no relaying* I finally uninstalled QS and used
an online anonymous Usenet service when posting to some of the, let's say,
more sensitive groups.
I would love to try QS again but can't see how I can get around the no
relaying of my email server gmail. Perhaps I can try hotpop again. Let's see
if one of them has a suggestion as to how to add a email server to prevent
the *no relay* issue. I'm sure it would help others who lurk here. I'm not
the only one who ran into that problem. I lurk here on and off for years and
it comes up now and again.
Kulin Remailer
wrote:
he originally wanted to post to usenet.
Nomen Nescio
I'm afraid I have been very pissed off at you in earlier messages.
I'm sorry, but you do generate that response.
First of all, I see, in another post you haven't even looked at the
program for 2 years. I have little time for someone arguing from a
2 year old memory. You post--how many messages--arguing like you
this happened yesterday. Now I see why you have so little info to
offer. That's why you give so little to go on. In fact, your
arguments have been so unlikely that I have no confidence in your
knowing/remembering for sure what errors you encountered. I don't
blame anyone for being pissed off. I feel like I'm wasting my time
now...but...
Second, I don't think anyone has made this very clear so I'll try
one time and have nothing further to say.
What is relaying?
Relaying is using a server that you don't have permission to use.
Here's an example. Let's say I connect through myisp.net. You
connect through yourisp.net. I know my smtp server smtp.myisp.net
will accept a message I send to you at y...@yourisp.net. In QS I can
put Host: smtp.myisp.net and it will accept mail to anyone I choose-
-anyone--anywhere. I also know that your ISP's server is
smtp.yourisp.net. The fact is, in this one case--sending an email
to you--I can even put Host: smtp.yourisp.net in QS and your server
will accept the message. In the first case, my ISP's server accepts
my message because it knows me. In the second case, your ISP's
server accepts my message because it knows you. Now, I also know
AOL's server is smtp.aol.com. If I put _that_ server in my Host
header, the aol server will refuse with 'no relaying' because it
doesn't know either of us. That's the rule. That's what relaying is
and the rule affects any email client--not just QS.
You say QS won't work. You say it gets a 'no relaying' error. I
would say you have somehow used the wrong server name(s)--or
possibly the server requires authentication and you didn't provide
that info. If it requires auth and you don't provide
userid/password then it doesn't know you.
People will swear up and down, stamp their feet and shout that they
have the correct server, only to discover later they were wrong.
This is very common. It's surprising how convinced people can be,
that they have the right server yet they don't. Here's a
theoretical example. The server is smtp.myisp.net. Without
thinking, I create this header, Host: myisp.net. That's the wrong
server but I'm positive I have it correct. I just don't see the
flaw. Just an example of how something simple can, and has, gone
wrong.
You apparently have an email program you use for everyday
messaging. Assuming your server doesn't require SSL (encrypted
connection) you can use exactly the same info in QS as the email
program--including authentication if required.
Now you know what relaying is. It's not just because you're sending
mail to a remailer. If you get that error you have some knowledge
to apply to the problem.
Ok, that's it for me. Bye.
Anonymous Remailer
>>>Everyone here is now using Omnimix?
>>
>> That's hard to figure out. :-)
>
>I know that all too well. I've tried it myself. Never once got it to send
>anything anonymously. My IP always showed. I've seen others post here over
>the years that they couldn't get it to work for them either. They couldn't
>figure it out.
Wasn't the point in question whether everyone here is now using
Omnimix, which indeed is hard to figure out, as messages sent by
Omnimix don't stand out in any way? ;-)
BTW, if you don't like it forwarding MIME headers, which may set your
postings apart from those created by Quicksilver, then remove them
from the Filter Permits lists and restrict yourself to standard ASCII
letters.
.
George Orwell
The *exact* error message, how you received it, exactly which
address(es)/remailer(s) your encrypted mail was sent to as a first
hop, the precise server name and port number in your QS config,
a "sanitized" version of all your configs including any
authentication information used by QS as well as any other email
clients you might use... everything.
To be brutally honest I even doubt the fact that you were getting a
"no relaying" error. I suspect you haven't a real clue because
your bullshit story changed several times before someone *else*
suggested it. At that point you jumped on that particular error
in some lame attempt to save face.
It's not working kiddo. If that was in *fact* the error you were
getting then it's a 100% sure bet you've boogered up your QS
config. But here you are, stomping your little feet and screeching
on and on about how BellSouth won't deliver your Mixmaster
messages. Which we all know is total crap, because other people use
the remailer system via BellSouth with no problems what so ever.
What it boils down to is you having two choices...
1. Come clean, get your problems fixed up, apologize, and thank
everyone for their help.
2. Keep acting like a 4 year old brat, don't get your problems
resolved, and resign yourself to being just another APAS football
for people to kick around.
Ball's on your side of the court kid. Whatcha gonna do?
Non scrivetemi
>
> "Harry@harry & sons.outfit" wrote in message
> news:0e96b5lleu0etc4es...@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:00:16 -0500, "Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>Who are you to judge who is or isn't mentally handicapped?
> >
>
> > Who are they? Frustrated, lost little twits in their own lives whose
> > only glimmer of power is to sit on Usenet and pretend to be somebody.
> > They're also the reason so many, many people routinely killfile anon
> > posters.
>
> You got that right. Though some of the posters here are really great and
> very helpful, the elitist attitude of some of the others is sickening. They
There's nothing "elitist" about the responses you're getting.
You're the one that's causing the problem. We all started out
trying to help... trying to explain to you that your layperson's
preconceived notions were wrong. At which point you told everyone
they were full of it and started calling them names.
*shrug*
The simple truth of the matter is that both Bellsouth and Hotpop
work just fine with Quicksilver. Neither of them are blocking mail
to remailers. Period. Welcome to reality.
Now, do you want to fix your problems and mayber learn something in
the process, or do you want to continue to act like a child and
call the people who are treating you in kind more names?
> expect anyone coming here to have the same level of expertise they have or
> they look down on and insult them. Probably most of that type are kids with
> ego issues.
The only one with an ego problem here is you kid. Your misplaced
sense of self importance won't even let you admit the POSSIBILITY
that the problem is yours and not your ISP's.
>
> I must say when QS started to bomb out a few years ago there were those who
> made excellent suggestions, but nothing worked. I even changed my anti-virus
> software and uninstalled my firewall.... QS still bombed. Together with
> Hotpop giving me the dreaded *no relaying* I finally uninstalled QS and used
> an online anonymous Usenet service when posting to some of the, let's say,
> more sensitive groups.
>
> I would love to try QS again but can't see how I can get around the no
> relaying of my email server gmail. Perhaps I can try hotpop again. Let's see
Now waitaminute... first it's BellSouth, now it's Gmail?
Gmail works just fine with the remailer system too by the way. I use
it all the time when I'm "on the road" because like so many other
ISP's, BellSouth disallows SMTP/POP access from outside their own
IP block.
That's what... like strike 8 or 9 now?
> if one of them has a suggestion as to how to add a email server to prevent
> the *no relay* issue. I'm sure it would help others who lurk here. I'm not
> the only one who ran into that problem. I lurk here on and off for years and
> it comes up now and again.
Cite?
Fact is I can only remember hearing the problem one other time and
the problem was resolved easily. It was, as everyone is trying to
tell you now, a simple configuration mistake.
So why is it that person could resolve this issue, but you don't
seem to be able to do anything but dig yourself a big old hole?
Nomen Nescio
Agreed. It's simply ridiculous.
And a satellite connection and dialup up in the Great North Woods and
God knows what else?
This guy simply fails in providing any sort useful information. It just
sort of dribbles out.
At this rate any sort of diagnosis should take about 6 months.
Invalid
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> wrote in
message news:64d12357bb2154ec...@remailer.privacy.at...
The onlines ones work. Onion works.
>
> Can you access Tor?
When surfing? Yes, but I seldom feel the need to surf anonymously.
>
Invalid
> Invalid wrote:
>
>>
>> "Non scrivetemi" <nonscr...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote in
>> message
>> news:696b39b54fd80117...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info...
>> > Invalid wrote:
>> >
>>
>> >> OK then, which ISPs allow it? I've had 3 ISPs in the past 10 yrs and
>> >> all
>> >> 3
>> >> blocked them.
>> >>
>> >
>> > No they didn't. You just don't have the IQ to properly set up a
>> > mail client or the maturity to accept good advice. Hell, you can't
>> > even be bothered to provide any detailed information. It's your
>> > fault and your fault alone that QS is not working for you. Period.
>> >
>>
>> The error was "no relaying" for all but the hotpop server. What detailed
>> information would you like?
+
> The *exact* error message, how you received it,
There was the Bombed messages with no other explination.
exactly which
> address(es)/remailer(s) your encrypted mail was sent to as a first
> hop, the precise server name and port number in your QS config,
> a "sanitized" version of all your configs including any
> authentication information used by QS as well as any other email
> clients you might use... everything.
Since I uninstalled the software quite awhile back, well over a year, maybe
more, I wouldn't have that information for you. I do remember 1st hops as
whatever was above 90. Hastio, Frell. I can't recall them all. For months
QS worked fine with Hotpop. As for the No Relaying messages... that was all
the error would say as I remember.
>
> To be brutally honest I even doubt the fact that you were getting a
> "no relaying" error. I suspect you haven't a real clue because
> your bullshit story changed several times before someone *else*
> suggested it. At that point you jumped on that particular error
> in some lame attempt to save face.
Save face for what? That's fucking absurd. I couldn't remember the error
until I saw that phrase. If you don't want to help, don't reply. I mentioned
more than once I uninstalled QS a long time back, yet you expect me to
remember information like it was yesterday.
> It's not working kiddo. If that was in *fact* the error you were
> getting then it's a 100% sure bet you've boogered up your QS
> config. But here you are, stomping your little feet and screeching
> on and on about how BellSouth won't deliver your Mixmaster
> messages. Which we all know is total crap, because other people use
> the remailer system via BellSouth with no problems what so ever.
Well then when I asked back then, who didn't one of you Bellsouth users
explain how to get by the Bellsouth *no relay* error? Not one of you
Bellsouth users replied.
>
> What it boils down to is you having two choices...
>
> 1. Come clean, get your problems fixed up, apologize, and thank
> everyone for their help.
>
> 2. Keep acting like a 4 year old brat, don't get your problems
> resolved, and resign yourself to being just another APAS football
> for people to kick around.
Come clean about what? I did everything suggested here at the time and not
one of you came forward to suggest how to get around the no relaying. Why is
that? Where were you hiding at the time.
>
> Ball's on your side of the court kid. Whatcha gonna do?
So you're saying you have some way to aviod the 'no relaying' but refuse to
post it knowing others have also ran into the same problem. How do I know
this, because I've seen it mentioned here before by others.
Now the ball's in your court kiddo. How do people get around the no relaying
issue with their ISPs email server?
Invalid
> In article <h8ubbd$4p2$1...@aioe.org>
> "Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Non scrivetemi" <nonscr...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote in
>> message
>> > Invalid wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "anonymous" <an...@domain.invalid> wrote in message
>> >> news:h6ceeq$578$1...@news.mixmin.net...
>> >> >> I really need some answers.
>> >> >
>> >> > Why don't you want to use QS? It works perfectly well.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Only if you can find an email service that works with it. If you ask,
>> >> no
>> >> one
>> >> will admit which ones do.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Huh?
>> >
>> > Any email service works with QS. That's what QS is... an email
>> > client. It's just at home at your ISP's email server, as it is
>> > talking to a local postfix server, as it is at shitholes like Gmail.
>>
> confidence in your ability to determine what your problems are. You
> appear to be less than fully competent. Hell, you can't even quote,
> for sure, your error messages.
How the hell can I quote them when I uninstalled the program well over a
year ago? It's probably closer to 2 years ago. Do you expect me to have
some kind of photographic memory? I remember the constant Bombing and
freezing problem with QS. How do I quote that? You all told me to uninstall
and reinstall QS which I did. I downloaded a new copy, it still "bombed."
I did everything suggested and it still bombed/froze. And the NO RELAYING
error from my ISPs. I can't quote it word for word because it was too long
ago. Not one of you offered or suggested how to get around that issue.
That's why you can't get your
> software to work. You've been told QS works damn near anywhere.
> But, of course, you can't get it working anywhere. Doesn't that
> tell you anything? Are you so smart you can't take any advice at
> all?
Telling someone it works everywhere is no help. Try telling them *how* to
get it to work for them instead.
>
>> Sorry but you're wrong. They brought errors. Only hotpop worked and that
>> was for a few months only.
>
> I'd say, when people setup their smtp host incorrectly--they get
> errors! Usually, though, they try to determine the cause of the
> error so they can make the necessary fix(es) to get it going. Not
> you.
Where were you about 2 years ago when I asked for help here with the no
relaying issue?
Oh, excuse me..... my wife just said it was further back than that. Her
memory is better than mine. She said it was more like 3 years ago.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Invalid
Thank you for this information. It was very helpful. I'll download QS again
and see if I can get it to work correctly.
So it would be 'Host: smtp.myisp.net' and not 'Host: myisp.net'.
Understood. All my ISPs required authentication including Bellsouth which I
no longer use.
>
Invalid
> Invalid wrote:
>
>>
>> "Harry@harry & sons.outfit" wrote in message
>> news:0e96b5lleu0etc4es...@4ax.com...
>> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:00:16 -0500, "Invalid" <inv...@invalid.invaid>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Who are you to judge who is or isn't mentally handicapped?
>> >
>>
>> > Who are they? Frustrated, lost little twits in their own lives whose
>> > only glimmer of power is to sit on Usenet and pretend to be somebody.
>> > They're also the reason so many, many people routinely killfile anon
>> > posters.
>>
>> You got that right. Though some of the posters here are really great and
>> very helpful, the elitist attitude of some of the others is sickening.
>> They
>
> There's nothing "elitist" about the responses you're getting.
> You're the one that's causing the problem. We all started out
> trying to help... trying to explain to you that your layperson's
> preconceived notions were wrong. At which point you told everyone
> they were full of it and started calling them names.
>
> *shrug*
OK... sorry for some of the comments I made. It was very frustraiting for me
several years ago when trying to get QS to stop bombing/freezing, and before
that, to work with other than hotpop.
I don't use Bellsouth any longer. I have a cheap ISP now just for backup
when the dish is down. I can get an email account from them.
>
> Gmail works just fine with the remailer system too by the way. I use
> it all the time when I'm "on the road" because like so many other
> ISP's, BellSouth disallows SMTP/POP access from outside their own
> IP block.
>
> That's what... like strike 8 or 9 now?
I got the no relay error trying to use gmail.
>
>
>> if one of them has a suggestion as to how to add a email server to
>> prevent
>> the *no relay* issue. I'm sure it would help others who lurk here. I'm
>> not
>> the only one who ran into that problem. I lurk here on and off for years
>> and
>> it comes up now and again.
>
> Cite?
Cite what? Someone else recently mentioned "no relaying" and that's what
jogged my memory as to what it was called. I couldn't remember the error
until he posted that.
>
> Fact is I can only remember hearing the problem one other time and
> the problem was resolved easily. It was, as everyone is trying to
> tell you now, a simple configuration mistake.
>
> So why is it that person could resolve this issue, but you don't
> seem to be able to do anything but dig yourself a big old hole?
OK, let me download QS again and we'll see if it'll work with either Gmail
or another email address I can get from my dial-up ISP. I'll download a
fresh copy of QS. :^)
>
Invalid
BIG BREVITY SNIP.
>
> And a satellite connection and dialup up in the Great North Woods and
> God knows what else?
Those on Satellite have a dial-up as backup. Example: Today it's raining and
there's no Satillite signal so I use dial-up which is very very slow. No
good for surfing but fine for email and Usenet. Isn't that better than no
internet at all? Why be negative and think the worst of people?
Invalid
>
>
>>>>Everyone here is now using Omnimix?
>>>
>>> That's hard to figure out. :-)
>>
>>I know that all too well. I've tried it myself. Never once got it to send
>>anything anonymously. My IP always showed. I've seen others post here over
>>the years that they couldn't get it to work for them either. They couldn't
>>figure it out.
>
> Wasn't the point in question whether everyone here is now using
> Omnimix, which indeed is hard to figure out, as messages sent by
> Omnimix don't stand out in any way? ;-)
I was pulling his or her chain. ;^)
> BTW, if you don't like it forwarding MIME headers, which may set your
> postings apart from those created by Quicksilver, then remove them
> from the Filter Permits lists and restrict yourself to standard ASCII
> letters.
> .
Thanks. I gotta ask. Do you believe Omnimix is for the average computer
user? I remember trying to read how to set it up and didn't know 90% of the
terminology used. Most of the tabs had meaningless information on them
unless the person had quite a lot of knowledge about the subject. What group
of users is it aimed it? QS was child's ply to set up by comparison.
Nomen Nescio
Regarding the host. smtp.myisp.net is an example. It could be
mail.myisp.net, or even something else. The point is, use the
_exact_ server that the email service tells you to use. And don't
make the mistake I showed above. To use your ISP's server use what
is in your regular email program.
Regarding a 'no relaying' being due to the service supposedly not
allowing you to send mail to a remailer (extremely unlikely). In
the case of that error, try sending a non-mix message (leave out
the chain header) to anywhere else (not a remailer). If it still
says 'no relays', it has nothing to do with remailers (of course)
and everything to do with the wrong server or possibly not
providing auth info.
You'll need new URLs in the URL Manager:
mlist.txt http://pinger.bananasplit.info/mlist.txt
type2.list http://pinger.bananasplit.info/type2.list
pubring.mix http://pinger.bananasplit.info/pubring.mix
rlist.txt http://pinger.bananasplit.info/rlist.txt
pubring.asc http://pinger.bananasplit.info/pgp-all.asc
Kulin Remailer
<anon...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> wrote:
>"Invalid" <inv...@invalid.net> wrote in
>news:4ab6...@news.x-privat.org:
>Omnimix is, well... Overkill. A lot of the terminology it uses is arcane
>and obscure, and you're left wondering if you really have it set up
>right.
>
>I certainly didn't find setting it up particularly easy, but I do now
>have it working nicely with my news client and reading via Tor, then
>responding via remailers.
>
>I've had zero luck with nyms, I've looked at the interface for that,
>scratched my balding noggin, and wondered how something I've done
>manually could be made so goddamned complex.
>
>Of course, it does not help that the nym servers I have been told are
>current don't respond. I've sent list and key requests in a variety of
>ways, including in-the-clear from an ISP mail account - they don't
>respond.
>.
The only nym server that I have been able to use is nym.mixmin.net
Anon
program
and then deleting the QS registry entry fixed the problem, after
another
QS reinstall.
> "harry@harry& sons.outfit" wrote in message
George Orwell
> How the hell can I quote them when I uninstalled the program well over a
> year ago?
<FLUSH>
A better question is why in the FUCK are you here pissing
and moaning about shit you know nothing about, after years,
without at the very LEAST having installed the software
again?
That's just fucking MORONIC!
Zax
Hash: SHA512
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:37:02 -0500, Invalid wrote in
Message-Id: <h8hpg7$kqt$1...@aioe.org>:
> Only if you can find an email service that works with it. If you ask, no one
> will admit which ones do.
How about trying snorky.mixmin.net? It has a couple of local Mixmaster
Remailers, (banana and slow). It will also relay to any of the known
Mixmaster Remailers. As an added bonus, by enabling logging for a brief
period I might be able to tell you why your messages are rejected.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEAREKAAYFAkq41rEACgkQlKZ6CY7Vd0PjYgCgo631QqLZKRUZ6xNtt3UAf8XT
BhQAoOrH6hjzwTjt4Tkwo9E/xR7JzYLt
=UR8S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>
Cloaked
Hash: SHA1
I live in the US and my internet service provider is Comcast. Here is my
setup:
SMTP Authentication via the Tools | SMTP Authentication menu is:
myuse...@smtp.comcast.net:587. Please note comcast this year started
requiring port 587 for authentication. If your service provider uses port 25,
then just leave the :587 off.
My Nym Template looks like this:
Fcc: outbox
Host: smtp.comcast.net
From: yourrealemai...@here.com
Chain: *,*,*
Nym: yourr...@nym.mixmin.net
To: mail...@reece.net.au
References:
Newsgroups:
Subject:
Cloaked
Hash: SHA1
My previous POST was truncated. Here's the complete message.
Please note that I did not have to enter :587 in the template above as I have
already done that in my SMTP setup.
You also need to make sure that you have good links for the STATS downloads.
I'm using:
http://pinger.bananasplit.info/mlist.txt
http://pinger.bananasplit.info/pubring.mix
http://pinger.bananasplit.info/rlist.txt
http://pinger.bananasplit.info/pgp-all.asc
Under the Chain option above, you may want to reduce this to two chains until
you get things working. The less variables the better. Just make sure you
update your stats daily.
Also note above my SMTP provider is different than my email service provider.
The key thing is to get the SMTP portion and PORT correctly configured. You
can get all this information from the existing EMAIL program that you're
using right now. I don't want to start an argument here about the best
version of PGP, but I'm using PGP 6.5.8ckt. Do a google search and give this
version a try. I'm using DH/DSS key pairs.
I hope this helps. I've been using QS for quite sometime and know that I
would not be able to figure this stuff out without it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/
iQA/AwUBSwngMFTaFkIA7Oi+EQLwIACgstDGO0LFX23WLY5SidQCSeIgkgYAnj3I
PdhVAYABAwVzF+vLLWn97aNM
=10nI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----