The plain truth about EVIDENCE ELIMINATOR: Defeats Forensic Analysis Software
EE Support
Recently messages have appeared on privacy security & PGP newsgroups
about our wonderful software. Some posts are genuine. Other posts are
perhaps not so genuine. Who is making these posts?
In tests, Evidence Eliminator defeats all known Forensic Analysis
Software as used by police, investigators and government agencies. Who
would want to discredit the World's #1 and most effective tool for
eliminating forensic evidence from computer hard drives?
--
The facts:
Evidence Eliminator is a new, "ultra-powerful" hard drive cleaning
program. In one click, Evidence Eliminator runs a fully-automated hard
drive cleansing process.
Here is what ZDNet editors said about Evidence Eliminator when they
reviewed it, included it on their download site, featured it as "Hot
Utility of the Day", and awarded it their highest award of "Five-Star
Editor's Pick" on Jan 21 2000:
http://www.hotfiles.com/?0012R3
Here is what RocketDownload.com editors said about Evidence Eliminator
when they reviewed it, included it on their download site and awarded it
their highest award of "Five Smileys". At 07 February 2000, Evidence
Eliminator is in the Top-Ten most popular downloads at
RocketDownload.com
http://www.rocketdownload.com/Details/Secu/evelim.htm
Here is what SlaughterHouse.com editors said about Evidence Eliminator
when they reviewed it, included it on their download site and awarded it
"Pick Of the Day" on 20th January 2000:
http://www.slaughterhouse.com/pick_012000.html
--
Please visit our web site, download your free fully-functional 30-day
trial version and make up your own mind about Evidence Eliminator.
Download links are available in many locations around the world:
http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/downloads.shtml
--
Regards,
EE Support
sup...@evidence-eliminator.com
http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/
Mountain Mike^^
"EE Support" <support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com> wrote in message
I've been using it and have one question. After I do a "safe shutdown", and
then run the program Spider, a bunch of URL's and stuff are left on the HD.
What's the deal here? MM^^
Mountain Mike^^
"Steve Marshall" <st...@smarshall93.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:87no77$2s1$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> mike, I did exactly the same test and found that Spider found nothing but
a
> couple of microsoft channels that I wasn't bothered about, no URLs were
left
Yeah, you may be right. And thanks! But why MS channels? I never go there
and anything about MS makes me suspicious as hell :) Can this thing manage
your cookies too? MM^^
Gary Woods
EE Support <support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com> wrote:
>
>Recently messages have appeared on privacy security & PGP newsgroups
>about our wonderful software. Some posts are genuine. Other posts
>are perhaps not so genuine. Who is making these posts?
Well, _I_ am, to point out that posting glowing testimonials about
your software, and hinting that there is some conspiracy to discredit
it, all with a "no spam" return address, does make me wonder.
You see, all any privacy software has to sell is the reputation of
the author, and what I see doesn't impress me very much.
Where might I find the source code for this? The Good Stuff doesn't
need to self promote in this way. 'scuse me; I gotta go light an
incense stick to St. Phil. He's not that saintly, but he's pretty
good.
- --
Gary Woods O- K2AHC Public keys at www.albany.net/~gwoods, or get
0x1D64A93D via keyserver
gwo...@albany.net gwo...@wrgb.com
fingerprint = E2 6F 50 93 7B C7 F3 CA 1F 8B 3C C0 B0 28 68 0B
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.1i for non-commercial use <http://www.pgpi.com/>
iQEVAwUBOJ97sDAssNodZKk9AQFjkAf7BPVgYHyFnNWhafx6e77ZhJYfZtkQdgX1
QYd9bW4e1zVviUJnotDwVTeL7KaNDarnmrtWEcn7ZQE7/LBZekZhMmV4+9ttIdQP
dPEi0Ism3ixKW9Zz5jJcL545U4qO1+xeTsuPMKWjRn9tfg9uv9Cko1haSSGRp2Q8
Cb/nSO2hwh+oPSfh/qvMt3wqW6/4dn3QhZ61UFKNMdLS1Qh/paoEcs37LSQwSyGN
fJetwcXw6+gAMrxzMlg8J0zV9M8CpF8xviXt2Tl2B6SFssGyRArd7H2P0oRx48Tf
dJxkxSyTktptC17oL7cfcC9+YB69NLz5xAfGlWn5nTLelkG9IVHkDA==
=0pgZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steve Marshall
couple of microsoft channels that I wasn't bothered about, no URLs were left
looks for had indeed been removed, contrary to my initial reaction. I'm
assuming you have all the appropriate check boxes ticked.
Mountain Mike^^ <gam...@NOTSPAMmindspring.com> wrote in message
news:87nlkt$pne$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net...
Steve Marshall
I still use Cookie Pal for cookies, I take a morbid interest in seeing the
list of cookies I've rejected, although I sometimes whether that list itself
is stored somewhere! I guess there's nothing wrong with accumulating cookies
and just letting EE eliminate them on safe shutdown each day. Some privacy
thing about Microsoft that really bugs me is the way WORD documents store
the name of the person or organisation the PC is registered to, this can be
very traceable if you write something at work and your work happens to be
very well-known. I didn't notice it in word 97/win 95 at work, but when I
hovered my mouse over document icons in Win Explorer at home in Windows 98
up comes the "tool tips" telling me exactly where I wrote the file,
information I was unwittingly giving away to anyone I emailed a Word
document to. From now on its Notepad for contentious material. Anyone know
how to disable this in Word?
Mountain Mike^^ <gam...@NOTSPAMmindspring.com> wrote in message
news:87npb1$k4i$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net...
>
> "Steve Marshall" <st...@smarshall93.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:87no77$2s1$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > mike, I did exactly the same test and found that Spider found nothing
but
> a
> > couple of microsoft channels that I wasn't bothered about, no URLs were
> left
>
Arturo
<st...@smarshall93.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>I still use Cookie Pal for cookies, I take a morbid interest in seeing the
>list of cookies I've rejected, although I sometimes whether that list itself
>is stored somewhere! I guess there's nothing wrong with accumulating cookies
>and just letting EE eliminate them on safe shutdown each day. Some privacy
>thing about Microsoft that really bugs me is the way WORD documents store
>the name of the person or organisation the PC is registered to, this can be
>very traceable if you write something at work and your work happens to be
>very well-known. I didn't notice it in word 97/win 95 at work, but when I
>hovered my mouse over document icons in Win Explorer at home in Windows 98
>up comes the "tool tips" telling me exactly where I wrote the file,
>information I was unwittingly giving away to anyone I emailed a Word
>document to. From now on its Notepad for contentious material. Anyone know
>how to disable this in Word?
>
Thereæ„€ a program called Privacy Assistant, which deletes
Word/Excelæ„€ IDs. Unfortulately, I donæ„’ remember the url (donæ„’ even
have the original zipped file), but you can ask the creator, Drew G.
Gray, at dgg...@yahoo.com, or make a search.
jarno...@my-deja.com
seem to be:
- Automation of all the tasks
- Proper handling of files which are locked by the OS
- Even cares about some often overlooked security holes like the
registry backup files etc.
On the other side, the web presentation and advertisment is not so brilliant.
These testimonies "rated 5 stars by xyz" are really stupid. Okay, you can
have them if you find more customers this way. But more technical details
about the features and the way of operation, please.
And: Who's the developper of the program? I found absolutely no information
about it. Rather unusual among shareware authors. What do you have to hide?
And why this .shtml download page?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
li...@my-deja.com
when you can get it free.
I posted an article a short time ago "Securing windows a bit" to the
alt.security.scramdisk forum about free solutions which do exactly the
same thing, possibly even more. A little set up time and work (God
forbid someone should actually have to learn a little bit!) is
required, but the solutions are very simple to implement and don't cost
a dime.
Solutions included:
wipe temp files you are not even aware Windows creates
wipe cookies
wipe IE/Netscape temp files
wipe swap file
wipe recycle bin on empty
wipe free space/cluster tips/directory names - all with user defined
passes
encrypt sensitive data/e-mail
All available through 5 freeware programs which can usually be
completely automated:
Autowipe
Scorch
Scramdisk
PGP
Eraser
See previously mentioned post for URLs.
LFE
In article <87p7gh$gjl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Steve Marshall
I've not heard of before, but nonetheless Evidence Eliminator is *one*
program that does all these things, does them well, and is customisable to
do more as more traces and tracks are discovered. Last night I emailed EE
support about eliminating evidence accumulated by Opera 3.6 and they made me
a plugin and sent it this morning. As for the argument about "doing a bit of
work" I have learnt plenty by experimenting with Evidence Eliminator, its
not some passive press-a-button-and-it-does-it-for-you kind of thing -- yes,
ultimately you do just press the button (that's useful isn't it?), but it
hasn't stopped me wanting to check its results, in the process of which I
have learnt a great deal. If the argument is against automating these
tiresome tasks, then we'd still all be using the abacus. Why run five
programs when you can run one? If the argument is against paying for good
software, you can use it free to decide for yourself, and if you're
determined never to pay anyone for a piece of software ever, then there's
always a crack. The Evidence Eliminator people seem to be genuine to me, and
to have a good product, and that is always worth our support.
<li...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:87plb5$rrd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
EE Support
Steve Marshall wrote:
>
> it's interesting to hear about five other privacy programs, four of which
> I've not heard of before, but nonetheless Evidence Eliminator is *one*
> program that does all these things, does them well, and is customisable to
> do more as more traces and tracks are discovered. Last night I emailed EE
> support about eliminating evidence accumulated by Opera 3.6 and they made me
> a plugin and sent it this morning. As for the argument about "doing a bit of
> work" I have learnt plenty by experimenting with Evidence Eliminator, its
> not some passive press-a-button-and-it-does-it-for-you kind of thing -- yes,
> ultimately you do just press the button (that's useful isn't it?), but it
> hasn't stopped me wanting to check its results, in the process of which I
> have learnt a great deal. If the argument is against automating these
> tiresome tasks, then we'd still all be using the abacus. Why run five
> programs when you can run one? If the argument is against paying for good
> software, you can use it free to decide for yourself, and if you're
> determined never to pay anyone for a piece of software ever, then there's
> always a crack. The Evidence Eliminator people seem to be genuine to me, and
> to have a good product, and that is always worth our support.
Hi Steve,
Thankyou for sticking up for us.
It's nice to know that people appreciate the effort we put in to our
software, and appreciate the software itself. That's why our program is
so successful.
Glad we got the opera browser plugged in correctly for you.
Will have some more unique new developments available soon.
Take care,
--
Regards,
EE Support
sup...@evidence-eliminator.com
http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/
>
Dave Mould
you, "Evidence Eliminator" - subtlety and stealth are obviously not going to
be its strongpoints. Not to mention log file (AKA audit trail). It's there
at startup, on the desktop, in the "Start" menu .... It screams out to the
thickest magistrate, judge or jury panel, "Look! I've got something to
hide!" I wouldn't be surprised if it sent back all your custom settings
together with machine name, credit card details and registered address to
some central database. Seems to be the norm with modern "user friendly"
programs these days. So when the 3 letter forensic folk boot up your
confiscated PC, they will get a "user friendly" message informing them that
the latest upgrade is available for $XXX and a bunch of promo email
exhorting the virtues of the latest ability to "eliminate" traces of your
area of special interest - which will confirm their suspicions and focus
their attention. Even if you had nothing illegal on your PC before
installing the program - it's a sure bet that its presence can now be used
to convince a jury that you must have had *something* you needed to hide.
I can see myself in front of a jury arguing that I use a program called
"cleanup" or "spacemaker" in order to delete unwanted Windoze info that is
eating up my hard disk, and that the deletion of forensic evidence was just
an unfortunate side-effect, but what jury would believe that I installed
"Evidence Eliminator" for any purpose other than to- well - destroy evidence
of whatever heinous crimes the prosecution want to dream up.
Seems a good program to use if you are sure that your computer will never be
investigated though.
Hey - EE support guy - I have some excellent handkerchiefs for sale. They
are embroidered with the words "fingerprint eliminator". If used correctly
they are guaranteed to remove traces of your presence ....
Dave
li...@my-deja.com
privacy programs I mentioned. IMHO, everyone should probably be doing
a bit more research into what privacy programs are already out there
before simply accepting the newest one to come along as the "fix all"
solution. You may be pleasantly suprised to find just the tool you
need for free.
The "doing a bit of work" part was not intended as a personal attack,
so I hope your response does not mean that you took it that way. It
was an editorial comment, as it seems to me that laziness is a common
problem with many people in our society today. When presented with a
"press the button and fix the problem" solution, many people jump all
over it without the slightest bit of research.
I must say that I find the name "Evidence Eliminator" a bit
foolhearty. The name itself implies that you had something illegal to
hide if you were using it. You will need a benevolent deity to help
you out of jail if your computer gets confiscated for evidence.
Obviously the name is a marketing ploy to snag people who take part in
activities which are "not quite legal".
Crack the software? HA. That's a good one. "Well, your Honor, not
only did the defendant have a program on his computer specifically
designed to destroy evidence, but it was also illegaly cracked, thereby
violating copyright laws and showing proof of a criminal mind at work."
The simple point of my original post was to demonstrate that the
functions of the "New and Wonderful" program could already be
accomplished by using programs which were already available to the
computing community at no cost. No illegal cracks necessary. That is
all.
Oh, BTW, I've been in classes with people who have used the abacus much
more effectively and faster than people with multi-function
calculators. The effectiveness of any tool is based upon user
understanding and proficiency, not "technologically advanced"
conveniences.
And, in the same vein, all of the wiping tasks I mentioned in my
previous post can be completely automated. No "push of a button"
necessary at all. This is why I use it - "hands off" background
operation. By adding items to the list of things wiped by Scorch at
shutdown, my solution "is customisable to do more as more traces and
tracks are discovered" as well. Again EE is nothing new.
LFE
In article <87psjd$8ok$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>,
Marcin Tustin
Hash: SHA1
In article <hrsu9scbu6r0jkhop...@4ax.com>,
nos...@nospam.com says...
> If anyone has any extra features you'd like, let me know here
> and I'lladd them to the wishlist.
I'd appreciate that. I'd ask for a feature to be able to do
stuff at shutdown, but I ought to exercise my programming
skills. I might try to ad that feature myself. With a big
disclaimer.
- --
Humanity will not be happy until the day when the
last bureaucrat has been hanged with the guts of
the last capitalist.
Marcin Tustin
PGP Key at
http://www.anarchist99.freeserve.co.uk/marcintustin.txt
Mar...@mindless.REMOVEGOATS&OATS.com
Marcint@^^refreshmagazine.com.nomail <-- Do not use at this
time
KeyID 0x86D72550
Fingerprint DDD9 FB07 4C2F 9A79 C860 C391 D672 364C 86D7 2550
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 Int. for non-commercial use
<http://www.pgpinternational.com>
iQA/AwUBOKG7O9ZyNkyG1yVQEQKHlACffq5NldcPr/dMN0FcP/0z0x9Ij84AnjkV
r2/fMrI/WI4lLh1V4UGdijri
=USSP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
EE Support
>what this hot discussion has to do with scramdisk support forum ?
>drop alt.security.scramdisk from this discussion, please
Why?
>
>> It's nice to know that people appreciate the effort we put in to our
>> software, and appreciate the software itself. That's why our program is
>> so successful.
>>
>> Glad we got the opera browser plugged in correctly for you.
>> Will have some more unique new developments available soon.
>>
>> Take care,
>> --
>> Regards,
>> EE Support
Evidence Eliminator and disk cleaning has been discussed on this forum
before.
People who use disk encryption often use our Evidence Eliminator with
it. This forums contents include related topics other than ScramDisk.
--
Regards,
EE Support
support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com (remove NO_SP_AM for e-mail)
http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/
EE Support
<da...@airstrip.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I can't take seriously folk that give a program a name like that! I ask
>you, "Evidence Eliminator" - subtlety and stealth are obviously not going to
>be its strongpoints. Not to mention log file (AKA audit trail). It's there
>at startup, on the desktop, in the "Start" menu .... It screams out to the
>thickest magistrate, judge or jury panel, "Look! I've got something to
>hide!" I wouldn't be surprised if it sent back all your custom settings
>together with machine name, credit card details and registered address to
>some central database.
What a load of rubbish!
Our program eliminates forsensic evidence.
Changing the name won't change what it does.
Seems to be the norm with modern "user friendly"
>programs these days. So when the 3 letter forensic folk boot up your
>confiscated PC, they will get a "user friendly" message informing them that
>the latest upgrade is available for $XXX and a bunch of promo email
>exhorting the virtues of the latest ability to "eliminate" traces of your
>area of special interest - which will confirm their suspicions and focus
>their attention. Even if you had nothing illegal on your PC before
>installing the program - it's a sure bet that its presence can now be used
>to convince a jury that you must have had *something* you needed to hide.
You could say the same about PGP or any other privacy program.
We all have the right to a clean hard drive.
>
>I can see myself in front of a jury arguing that I use a program called
>"cleanup" or "spacemaker" in order to delete unwanted Windoze info that is
>eating up my hard disk, and that the deletion of forensic evidence was just
>an unfortunate side-effect, but what jury would believe that I installed
>"Evidence Eliminator" for any purpose other than to- well - destroy evidence
>of whatever heinous crimes the prosecution want to dream up.
>
>Seems a good program to use if you are sure that your computer will never be
>investigated though.
One can only wonder at the true motive of anybody posting such
ridiculous nonsense to a public forum!
EE Support
>I would not be suprised if a lot of people have not heard of the other
>privacy programs I mentioned. IMHO, everyone should probably be doing
>a bit more research into what privacy programs are already out there
>before simply accepting the newest one to come along as the "fix all"
>solution. You may be pleasantly suprised to find just the tool you
>need for free.
>
There is no program freeware or not which even begins to compete with
Evidence Eliminator.
>The "doing a bit of work" part was not intended as a personal attack,
>so I hope your response does not mean that you took it that way. It
>was an editorial comment, as it seems to me that laziness is a common
>problem with many people in our society today. When presented with a
>"press the button and fix the problem" solution, many people jump all
>over it without the slightest bit of research.
>
Research at your leisure. Evidence Eliminator remains the most
comprehensive and secure drive cleaning system available.
>I must say that I find the name "Evidence Eliminator" a bit
>foolhearty. The name itself implies that you had something illegal to
>hide if you were using it. You will need a benevolent deity to help
>you out of jail if your computer gets confiscated for evidence.
>Obviously the name is a marketing ploy to snag people who take part in
>activities which are "not quite legal".
>
How ridiculous. Our software is to protect legitimate users and keep
their drives clean.
>Crack the software? HA. That's a good one. "Well, your Honor, not
>only did the defendant have a program on his computer specifically
>designed to destroy evidence, but it was also illegaly cracked, thereby
>violating copyright laws and showing proof of a criminal mind at work."
>
>The simple point of my original post was to demonstrate that the
>functions of the "New and Wonderful" program could already be
>accomplished by using programs which were already available to the
>computing community at no cost. No illegal cracks necessary. That is
>all.
>
Not true. No combination of existing programs you listed can compete
with Evidence Eliminator.
>Oh, BTW, I've been in classes with people who have used the abacus much
>more effectively and faster than people with multi-function
>calculators. The effectiveness of any tool is based upon user
>understanding and proficiency, not "technologically advanced"
>conveniences.
>
So what?
>And, in the same vein, all of the wiping tasks I mentioned in my
>previous post can be completely automated. No "push of a button"
>necessary at all. This is why I use it - "hands off" background
>operation. By adding items to the list of things wiped by Scorch at
>shutdown, my solution "is customisable to do more as more traces and
>tracks are discovered" as well. Again EE is nothing new.
>
>LFE
What a load of rubbish!
One can only wonder at the true motive of anybody posting such
Joe Schmoe
"<snip
>
> What a load of rubbish!
>
> One can only wonder at the true motive of anybody posting such
> ridiculous nonsense to a public forum!
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> EE Support
> support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com (remove NO_SP_AM for e-mail)
> http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/
You know, I consider myself pretty open minded to either side of an issue.
I've learned in the school of hard knocks it doesn't pay not to. And
sometimes, it hurts real bad.
When I see your continual resistence to constructive criticism I have no
choice but to side with the detractors. You're not acknowledging that there
is a problem. This is a bigger problem than any of the other suggestions
combined. Why are you so defensive? Accept the problems and go forward,
deny it and go down. Never underestimate the power of "word of mouth." It
will cost you a lot more than what you might try to save by not giving due
considerations to improve something like this and acknowledge what you may
"erroneously believe" to be even the smallest detractor. Do it personally,
publically, and with respect and you will in turn earn the respect you
desire.
Joe
Steve Marshall
the paths it eliminates before and after. This stuff about the source code
is a red herring. Open source code is important for cryptography software,
naturally, but in this case do you seriously suspect that this company is
the CIA or something and that they have programmed the product to hide away
all the evidence it is kidding you it is eliminating in some massive hidden
file on your PC, or sending it over the web to Spook HQ? If so, use a
firewall and prove it, hunt down that hidden file and prove it. Put up or
shut up!
Joe Schmoe <no...@nobody.org> wrote in message
news:PGHp4.10697$OJ1.1...@tw12.nn.bcandid.com...
Dave Mould
> What a load of rubbish!
> Our program eliminates forsensic evidence.
> Changing the name won't change what it does.
Changing the name will not alter what it does, but it *will* alter the
*perception* of why you use it, and will not of itself invite people to
become suspicious.
> One can only wonder at the true motive of anybody posting such
> ridiculous nonsense to a public forum!
No, I can only wonder about a company that is paranoid and closed to
criticism.
I installed an "Evidence Eliminator" trial on my home PC. Several family
and friends use my PC. The banner comes up at bootup, and there's an icon
in the tray. So far (in a week), I've been asked twice, "What's that for?"
followed by "Why do you need it?"
I'd prefer a program that doesn't invite suspicion just by it's name. Is
that so ridiculous?
Would you place a label on your toilet that says, "evidence eliminator," and
put up neon signs outside your front door that says, "This person has
installed an Evidence Eliminator in his house."?
I stated that I wondered whether EE might advertise itself over the
Internet - not an unreasonable thought given that the programmers seem to
want to splash its presence about and there are quite a few other programs
that "phone home" regularly. EE support replied:
> You could say the same about PGP or any other privacy program.
NO! You can *NOT* say that about PGP, or most other good privacy programs.
Why? Because all *good* privacy programs publish their source code and have
it peer-reviewed. They do this for *exactly* that reason!
> We all have the right to a clean hard drive.
Oh! is *that* what your program is for? Here was I thinking that its
purpose was to eliminate evidence, and now you tell us it's just to clean my
hard drive!
You have just made my point! If you ever had to explain why you used your
program to a jury, would you say, "I used it to clean my HDD," or would you
say, "I used it to eliminate evidence from my HDD"? (Hint - the second
answer might get you free bed & board).
Now - under which circumstances do you think that a computer illiterate jury
would believe the first answer - if the program you used was called "disk
cleaner", or if the program were called "evidence eliminator"????
=======
As for:
Volume Control <n2w...@caliope12.com> wrote
> >
> I think the guys who marketed EE should have called the application:
>
> "This program is nameless so that you won't have a fucking clue't
> what it does unless you're name is Dave Mould"
>
> How's that for software title of the year?
I think your post reveals your character far better than any reply I could
make.
Dave
Joe Schmoe
"Volume Control" <n2w...@caliope12.com> wrote in message
news:27225464.19fc230@nowhere_never.com...
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:07:11 GMT, "Joe Schmoe" <no...@nobody.org>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"<snip
> >>
> >> What a load of rubbish!
> >>
> >> ridiculous nonsense to a public forum!
> >>
> >>
> threads again cowboy. I started this thread so stick that up your ass.
> I asked a simple question about whether anyone had any experience of
> using Evidence Eliminator. Well fuck my braces! This thread has gone
> way over the top with cunts like you mouthing of and not one of the
> nearly 80 or more replies from you fuckers is based on actual use of
> this program. Some of you cunts haven't even run it not alone tried
> it. I'm pissed in cased you haven't guessed. This used to be a group
> of well informed open minded, scientific/technical respondants. Now
> it's turned into narrow minded, pitiful, arrogant dumb shits. You know
> something, I was hoping I might actuall get some informed opinion. No
> chance, just a lot of bilge from uninformed narrow minded pricks. When
> are one of you cunts going to run the program, evaluate it thoroughly
> for some weeks, and then tell me it's a load of crap, I might actually
> start to believe you. I'm actually starting to believe that the EE
> tech support guy is right in his criticism that there is some ulterior
> motive going on in this group. Now let me ask you ONE MORE TIME.
> HAVE YOU THOROUGHLY TRIED THIS PROGRAM. IF SO SAY SO AND TELL US WHAT
> THE PROS AND CONS ARE. IF NOT THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU GODAMN PIECE
> OF DOG SHIT. NOW HAVE YOU GOT THE FUCKING MESSAGE YET. HAVE YOU?
> I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT A SIMPLE QUESTION ASKED BY ME RESULTED IN NEARLY
> 80 REPLIES FROM FROM SUCH LAMERS.
You must have been a difficult one for your poor mother.
Joe
EE Support
<tha...@redneck.gacracker.org> wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Feb 2000, EE Support <support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com>
>wrote:
>>On Wed, 9 Feb 2000 00:39:47 -0800, "Dave Mould"
>><da...@airstrip.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>I can't take seriously folk that give a program a name like that! I ask
>>>you, "Evidence Eliminator" - subtlety and stealth are obviously not going to
>>>be its strongpoints. Not to mention log file (AKA audit trail). It's there
>>>at startup, on the desktop, in the "Start" menu .... It screams out to the
>>>thickest magistrate, judge or jury panel, "Look! I've got something to
>>>hide!" I wouldn't be surprised if it sent back all your custom settings
>>>together with machine name, credit card details and registered address to
>>>some central database.
>>
>>
>>What a load of rubbish!
>>
>>Our program eliminates forsensic evidence.
>>
>>Changing the name won't change what it does.
>
>It completely changes how most people will react before they've even seen
>the specifics on what it actually does.
>
>How about marketing a handgun as 'Burglar Killer'?
>How about a butter product as 'Artery Blocker 2000'?
>
We market an "Evidence Eliminator" as an "Evidence Eliminator".
>Words are everything.....language carries a lot of connotations. Many of
>which should be avoided in situations where a person is trying to get out
>of trouble.
When we're marketing a program that "Eliminates Forensic Evidence and
Defeats Forensic Analysis Software" it's purpose is clear.
Certainly already covered in this thread there is nothing illegal
about having a clean hard drive and an Evidence Eliminator.
Hope this helps,
EE Support
<n2w...@caliope12.com> wrote:
>I concur with the comments below
>
>>Mmh, this software looks really sophisticated and brilliant. The benefits
>>seem to be:
>>
>>- Automation of all the tasks
>>- Proper handling of files which are locked by the OS
>>- Even cares about some often overlooked security holes like the
>> registry backup files etc.
>>
>>On the other side, the web presentation and advertisment is not so brilliant.
>>These testimonies "rated 5 stars by xyz" are really stupid.
ZDNet's ratings stupid?
And which world leading PC Magazine do you edit?
Okay, you can
>>have them if you find more customers this way. But more technical details
>>about the features and the way of operation, please.
Please press Help.
>>
>>And: Who's the developper of the program? I found absolutely no information
>>about it. Rather unusual among shareware authors. What do you have to hide?
You would't be trying to gather evidence on us now, would you :)
>>And why this .shtml download page?
>>
By jove you jolly chaps don't half ask a lot of questions?
Please try,
www.altavista.com search STHML + tutorial, for the solution in this
case.
Hope this helps,
Always happy to help protect and serve the public.
EE Support
<st...@smarshall93.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>can we have your source code mister, because I'm mightily uncertain about
>what you do and where you're coming from
>
>Chuck <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:s9vgask5nt8ic3rc8...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:12:07 -0000, "Steve Marshall"
>> <st...@smarshall93.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >there's one simple way to judge the worth of evidence eliminator. Examine
>> >the paths it eliminates before and after. This stuff about the source
>code
>> >is a red herring. Open source code is important for cryptography
>software,
>> >naturally, but in this case do you seriously suspect that this company is
>> >the CIA or something and that they have programmed the product to hide
>away
>> >all the evidence it is kidding you it is eliminating in some massive
>hidden
>> >file on your PC, or sending it over the web to Spook HQ? If so, use a
>> >firewall and prove it, hunt down that hidden file and prove it. Put up or
>> >shut up!
>>
Thanks Steve! These "people" won't let it go. They're trashing a good
privacy newsgroup to discredit a good disk cleaner! Two white doves
with one stone?
More nonsense follows:
>> There's no way to know for sure what it's doing if you don't have the
>> source. For example, is it really overwriting free space with random
>> patterns, or is it writing encrypted data about your system that only
>> someone with the right key can find and decode? Does it really wipe
>> your swap file, or does it manipulate the bits in some way that can be
>> undone with a "special" utility? Are there any programming errors that
>> might cause the software to fail only on certain machines?
>>
>> I'm not making any accusations here, just pointing out that nobody can
>> KNOW how well a program like this one works until the source code is
>> available for public inspection.
>>
>
Again, nonsense.
As you're obviously so concerned to help all our privacy, why don't
you write a hard drive interception driver or monitor the data bits
transmitted to the hard drive.
When your results prove Evidence Eliminator to be quite above any of
the accusations being made, we can use them to show people just how
good it really is, and why these accusations are nonsense.
We look forward to you presenting your results!
EE Support
<n2w...@caliope12.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:07:11 GMT, "Joe Schmoe" <no...@nobody.org>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"<snip
>>>
>>> What a load of rubbish!
>>>
>>> One can only wonder at the true motive of anybody posting such
>>> ridiculous nonsense to a public forum!
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> EE Support
>>> support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com (remove NO_SP_AM for e-mail)
>>> http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/
>>
Hi,
We understand your frustration with those recently occupying these
newsgroups with nonsense posts against our software.
Some like Evidence Eliminator, some don't. That's why we distribute
our software with the shareware principle.
We are looking at this situation as an overwhelming encouragement to
continue the evolution of Evidence Eliminator.
Geoff Dyer
<n2w...@caliope12.com> wrote:
<rant snipped>
So most of the messages posted in this thread (and related ones) have
been peripheral to the subject line? Hey, welcome to usenet.
The EE company statements posted here haven't helped.
Sure, making source available isn't quite as important if there's no
encryption involved in the product, but the credibility of *any*
security-related product is much harder to establish if the source is
*not* available. I think they've made the wrong choice, but it's their
right to make it.
The EE messages I've seen here, however, go way beyond this. They
indicate a paranoid, ideologically programmed mind, which thinks that
anyone who doesn't regard the product as wonderful and perfect must be
an enemy out to destroy it. That attitude is a good way to alienate
potential users (including, I suspect, some who might otherwise have
tried the program out and been able to give you their opinions). If
the company doesn't lose the attitude, it may have a shorter lifespan
than the owners expected.
--
Geoff
(to e-mail me, remove any instances of "-nospam" from my address)
EE Support
Recently messages have appeared on privacy security & PGP newsgroups
etc. about our wonderful software. Some posts are genuine. We thank
the genuine participants of these newsgroups for your support and
feedback. The suggested feature of "Under-Writing" of files to remove
magnetic remenance beneath existing files has been manufactured and
now available in Evidence Eliminator v4.5.
Other posts are perhaps not so genuine. Who is making these posts?
Examples of silly anti-Evidence-Eliminator messages "spammed" in these
newsgroups are accusations that our software doesn't work, or it
shouldn't be shareware, or that it cannot be evaluated without public
source, or it's illegal, will land you in jail, that we are spammers,
etc. All these ridiculous and very childish attacks are obviously
nonsense. We view these ridiculous attacks as an overwhelming
encouragement to continue the development of our formidable
world-leading hard drive cleaning program - Evidence Eliminator.
In tests, Evidence Eliminator defeats all known Forensic Analysis
Software as used by police, investigators and government agencies. Who
would want to discredit the World's #1 and most effective tool for
eliminating forensic evidence from computer hard drives?
--
The facts:
Evidence Eliminator is a new, "ultra-powerful" hard drive cleaning
program. In one click, Evidence Eliminator runs a fully-automated hard
drive cleansing process.
Here is what ZDNet editors said about Evidence Eliminator when they
reviewed it, included it on their download site, featured it as "Hot
Utility of the Day", and awarded it their highest award of "Five-Star
Editor's Pick" on Jan 21 2000:
http://www.hotfiles.com/?0012R3
Here is what RocketDownload.com editors said about Evidence Eliminator
when they reviewed it, included it on their download site and awarded
it
their highest award of "Five Smileys".
http://www.rocketdownload.com/Details/Secu/evelim.htm
Here is what SlaughterHouse.com editors said about Evidence Eliminator
when they reviewed it, included it on their download site and awarded
it
"Pick Of the Day" on 20th January 2000:
http://www.slaughterhouse.com/pick_012000.html
--
Please visit our web site, download your free fully-functional 30-day
trial version and make up your own mind about Evidence Eliminator.
Download links are available in many locations around the world:
http://www.evidence-eliminator.com/downloads.shtml
John Underwood
eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com> wrote in alt.security.pgp:
(Reference: <Ls6xOBOyhmwf3l2W3DC9u=0CW...@4ax.com>)
>Evidence Eliminator v4.5 - the World's #1 PC Security Utility
I know nothing about Evidence Eliminator apart from what I have read in
alt.security.pgp
I have ignored the criticism since I have no basis to compare the
accusations with the reality. What I am aware of is unashamed
advertising, using cross-postings to many groups. Neither of these
practices are things I welcome in Usenet.
On the basis of that evidence, regardless of the qualities of the
product, I would not trust its manufacturers to show me, as a potential
customer, any different degree of respect were I to become an actual
one. Your postings, therefore, have guaranteed that I will not acquire
you product.
I just thought you might like to know that.
--
John Underwood
Jim Crowther
<support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com> writes
[]
<plonk>
--
Jim Crowther
Mailto:j...@crowfam.demon.co.uk
Public PGP keys at ldap://certserver.pgp.com (and others)
Key ID 0xE0BCE5F1 (DH/DSS 2048/1024), 0x8A673777 (RSA 1024)
XruinerX
I would trust security information from.
XruinerX
https://128.253.163.111
A.Programmer
Good point, well presented.
And to the original poster....I never buy products from companies
who spam ANY of the newsgroups. I never visit their websites.
Neither do I ever mention their products in conversation.
If everybody did that perhaps they'd stop spamming. The fact
that spam obviously works is simply testament to how weak
someone people are both in being unable to stop themselves
from visiting spammers' web sites and also in their inability to find
suitable software products by other more conventional means on the
net.
For every software product advertised there is usually an alternative
of comparable or better quality somewhere else on the net.
Simplistic viewpoints possibly, but they give a warm feeling that at
least, in some small way, I'm doing my bit against spam and trying
to regain the newsgroups for what they were intended.
Hopefully, you will have well and truly shot yourself in the foot with
this latest spam. I'm certainly encouraged by the responses so far.
Wouldn't it be cool if you've just succeeded in eliminating yourself
?!
Must be the programmer in me !
CloudWalker
As to EE defeating all forensic analysis, it is not for me to say.
In the flurry of letters on EE, I got attracted enough to download
the product to see what it is all about. I do have a fairly clean
disk by using scorch and a few dos macros I set up to zap the cache files
, cookies, etc etc in my various netvigator profiles.
The first test of EE wiped out some files AND WIPED OUT WINDOWS DESKTOP.
I got a lot of goodies set up in different folders AND THEY WERE TOTALLY
ELIMINATED BY THAT #%^%%$##@ ELIMINATOR!
Needless to say, I scorched that #$%%^ eliminator from my disk.
That company will never get a penny from me for any future product that
they may launched!
CloudWalker
Test
The folks who've commented on spamming do have a point, though. The length
of the post is what bothers me I suppose. Just a quick note with a url
posted every couple of weeks would be more appropriate. And the
"SupportatEEdotcom" guy doesn't help matters much when he lets EE critics
get under his skin.
Just my two cents worth.
CloudWalker wrote in message
<24b9a2240aaf84c2...@anonymous.poster>...
John Underwood
wrote in alt.security.pgp:
(Reference: <k7o4bskjujnfgd0v8...@4ax.com>)
>Neither do I ever mention their products in conversation.
I do, at every possible opportunity. Just to make sure other people are
aware of what I know of them. I would hate their advertising campaigns
to go to waste, after all, those campaigns have cost me a lot.
--
John Underwood
John Underwood
wrote in alt.security.pgp:
(Reference: <27252768.19f9a50@nowhere_never.com>)
>On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 04:33:38 -0500, "XruinerX"
><ruiner_9in@nospam_remove.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Zdnet's hotfiles, slaughterhouse, and RocketDownload.com are not sites that
>>I would trust security information from.
>>
>>XruinerX
>>
>
>YEAH REALLY? Well what a surprise. God almighty give us strength. What
>a proverbial commment. And pray tell us you fucking dumb shit, just
>what sites we are able to trust on this proverbial open cast machine
>one calls the Intenet. Are you simple, naive, crazy, or fucking dumb.
>Thankyou for the most intelligent contribution to this claptrap thread
>so far!. A proverbial winner standing by the old shit poop filter no
>doubt. Don't even think about it. It 'll take too much brain power.
>FUCK YOU!
I start by rejecting any argument which thinks invective and insult
equivalent to reason. A long way ahead of that is a pure expression of
opinion.
If you can think of an argument to support your claim use it, if you
think your opinion is worth stating, even without support, state it. If
you think you achieve something merely by insulting somebody because you
disagree with them, I won't bother to read anything else you ever write.
Goodbye.
--
John Underwood
EE Support
>I've bought it and used it on my wintel95 machine with no problems at all.
>The folks who've commented on spamming do have a point, though. The length
>of the post is what bothers me I suppose. Just a quick note with a url
>posted every couple of weeks would be more appropriate. And the
>"SupportatEEdotcom" guy doesn't help matters much when he lets EE critics
>get under his skin.
>Just my two cents worth.
>
Hi,
Thanks for choosing Evidence Eliminator!
Just to let you know: we only posted the "plain truth about Evidence
Eliminator" message last week and this week because we were informed
about a small army of flamers bad-mouthing our product with nonsense
bug reports (like the one below to which you replied)
As you may know (even we don't recieve all the news posts here because
our ISP does not recieve them) a multi-poster flame attack was
launched last week on Evidence Eliminator by about 50 messages
reporting phony bugs, etc on these newsgroups.
We posted to these newsgroups to put the record straight. We believe
and stand by our software, and it stands on it's own merits. We also
believe strongly in our right to counter such attacks with the plain
truth.
We're pleased to hear we helped clean another Windows installation.
Thankyou for your support!
Regards,
EE Support
>CloudWalker wrote in message
><24b9a2240aaf84c2...@anonymous.poster>...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>As to EE defeating all forensic analysis, it is not for me to say.
>>
>>In the flurry of letters on EE, I got attracted enough to download
>>the product to see what it is all about. I do have a fairly clean
>>disk by using scorch and a few dos macros I set up to zap the cache files
>>, cookies, etc etc in my various netvigator profiles.
>>
>>The first test of EE wiped out some files AND WIPED OUT WINDOWS DESKTOP.
>>
>>I got a lot of goodies set up in different folders AND THEY WERE TOTALLY
>>ELIMINATED BY THAT #%^%%$##@ ELIMINATOR!
>>
>>Needless to say, I scorched that #$%%^ eliminator from my disk.
>>
>>That company will never get a penny from me for any future product that
>>they may launched!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>CloudWalker
>>
>
--
Jim Crowther
<jo...@jsunderwood.demon.co.uk> writes
[]
>I start by rejecting any argument which thinks invective and insult
>equivalent to reason. A long way ahead of that is a pure expression of
>opinion.
>
>If you can think of an argument to support your claim use it, if you
>think your opinion is worth stating, even without support, state it. If
>you think you achieve something merely by insulting somebody because you
>disagree with them, I won't bother to read anything else you ever write.
>Goodbye.
Quite. If I ever see sanity coming from him in quoted posts in the
future, he might be read here again. For now, <plonked>.
CloudWalker
EE Support <support@evidence-eliminatorNO_SP_AM.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:45:41 -0700, "Test" <n...@spam.org> wrote:
>
>>I've bought it and used it on my wintel95 machine with no problems at all.
>>The folks who've commented on spamming do have a point, though. The length
>>of the post is what bothers me I suppose. Just a quick note with a url
>>posted every couple of weeks would be more appropriate. And the
>>"SupportatEEdotcom" guy doesn't help matters much when he lets EE critics
>>get under his skin.
>>Just my two cents worth.
>>
>
>
>Hi,
>Thanks for choosing Evidence Eliminator!
>
>Just to let you know: we only posted the "plain truth about Evidence
>Eliminator" message last week and this week because we were informed
>about a small army of flamers bad-mouthing our product with nonsense
>bug reports (like the one below to which you replied)
Fuck you!
I thought you would be denying that your $#$%%^%# evidence eliminator
would do things like that. Anything which goes against your
claims would be smashed down stridently. Makes me wonder if you
knew that your EE really does what you claim it would do.
Your ^$%$##$% Evidence Eliminator screwed up my Windows desktop eliminating
all my folders. I was stunned when that happened. I have been using
RegClean without problems. Only when that was used as your #@$$@%
Evidence Eliminator requested, Windows, crummy as it is, became even worse.
I had to restart from scratch to build them up again.
All you guys out there, use Dejanews to check out my postings in the past as to
contents, tone and credibility.
In the meantime if that #$@@#$%%%^ evidence Eliminator eliminates more than
what you want to eliminate, be sure that Evidence Eliminator will deny
that such things can ever happen with their wonderful brilliant piece
of shit, like what they are happily do here now.
CloudWalker