Re: remailers to give up keys?
George Orwell
THIS UNWANTED GARBAGE ORIGINATED FROM AND BROUGHT TO YOU COURTESY OF:
PATRICK PARIS -- SCUM OF THE EARTH
PATRICK PARIS -- HATEFUL SCUMBAG
PATRICK PARIS -- MORALLY BANKRUPT
PATRICK PARIS -- PEDOPHILE
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, nonalt <non...@hod.aarg.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer
><nob...@cypherpunks.to> wrote:
>>In article <UD9P7ZXE38646.2953356481@remailer@twistycreek.com>
>>Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header (My =?iso-8859-1?Q?2=A2?=) wrote:
>>>
>>> > Which media outlets are generating hatred for Bush?
>>>
>>> CNN
>>
>>
>>Such uninformed BS could only come from a Foxnews watcher.
>
>Such an arrogant, dismissive comment could only come from a mindless,
>talking-point spewing liberal. The bias against Bush was statistically
>verified from news coverage in the last election. More than 85% of
>journalists are *self described* as "Democrats". More than 85%.
They say what they're paid to say by the people who OWN the
media you dumb shit.
Are you so stupid you think the talking heads write the drivel they
read off the teleprompter?
>Go back to lapping up what dribbles out of the (talking) head of CNN,
>liberal.
Go back to sucking down whatever spurts out of the cock of Satan,
you Nazi shit.
<<==========>>
Subject: THE REASONS TO AVOID EELBASH
*****************************************
The message below came through a remailer.
Take that into account as you read the message.
*****************************************
Why Bash The Evil E.e.l?
Eelbasher
<<==========>>
Subject: Thank You Thrasher - Repost
Hash: SHA1
On 16 Oct 2005 16:23:00 -0000, Thrasher Remailer <thra...@reece.net.au>
wrote:
>In article <OCI0NH5J3864...@anonymous.sender>
>Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header (Twisty_admin) wrote:
>
>> >> I have been consistantly pinged by BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG from
>> >> ANONYMOUS and mail.brianbinder.com. A tad annoying when mine is a
>> >> static commercial account.
>> >>
>> >> Odd that they could ping me from 10.1.10.1 which is the same address
>> >> as my new modem/router. They also tried to connect to port 137.
>> >>
>> >> I had to use the internal firewall to block all the connections they
>> >> use. Now I can't access my modem/router from this PC. A never ending
>> >> battle. :)
>> >
>> >I thought you had a static IP now, not some 10.x.x.x crap? Or is
>> >the static IP on the WAN side of the router? If so, no 10.x.x.x
>> >traffic should be coming in to your network (the router should
>> >be able to stop it and the ISP shouldn't be routing it to you in
>> >the first place).
>> >
>> >Anyway, block ports 135-139 and 445 at the router. All virus
>> >stuff.
>>
>> I have everything blocked except port 25 which is forwarded.
>>
>> I have a static IP. The new modem is a combination modem/router. You are
>> correct, the static IP is on the WAN side. I have 4 other computers
>> connected to it. 1 laptop by wireless so I have a wireless router
>> plugged in to one of the ports. The 3 others are direct connected to the
>> router. The re-mailer has a fixed IP while I let the other 2 receive
>> their addesses by DHCP. The wireless laptop receives a 192.168.0.2
>> address from the
>> wireless router. The others all have 10.1.10.xxx IPs.
>>
>> To access the router, I have to type in 10.1.10.1 which brings up the
>> login page for the router. The re-mailer PC is at a fixed IP of
>> 10.1.10.xxx. (in case they read this, they'll have to guess what xxx
>> is) The router itself has a built in firewall which I enabled. Then each
>> computer has a McAffee virus/securitycenter/firewall combination on it.
>>
>> The only one that gets pinged is this one, the re-mailer. Things slowed
>> down since I blocked everything including the router. I am surprised it
>> still works at all.
>>
>> I just don't know how I can get pinged or whatever from the same address
>> as my router. I thought a real Domain IP should show up. Again, I am far
>> from the expert so would really like to know how this can be done. Seems
>> pretty tricky. I just don't like the name Blackhole. Gives me the
>> shudders. I sure know what a "blacklist" is and blackhole and blacklist
>> are somewhat
>> synonymous.
>>
>> I picked out 3 out of about 12.
>> Here they are.
>>
>> 2005/10/15 10:06:26 10.1.10.1:0 (mail.brianbinder.com) 10.1.10.200:0
>> ICMP Ping
>> 2005/10/15 10:12:35 10.1.10.1:0 (mail.brianbinder.com) 10.1.10.200:0
>> ICMP Ping
>> 2005/10/15 16:26:11 10.1.10.95:68 (ANONYMOUS) 255.255.255.255:67
>> Bootstrap Protocol Server
>
>ICMP type 0 is ping reply (pong) isn't it? Sure you're not
>pinging or tracerouting mail.brainbinder.com at the time?
>
>> All traceroutes come back to this:
>> Maybe this is all OK and they just happened to pick bad names for their
>> servers. Blackhole? Yuuch!!!
>>
>> Sender ANONYMOUS? Why not a real name?
>
>Because 10.1.10.95 doesn't have a valid reverse DNS record.
>Which it won't, because it's not on the internet. Unless you set
>one up locally.
>
>> Reminds me of Carnivore. Some stealth project :) A bad pick for a name
>> at any case.
>>
>> OrgName: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
>> OrgID: IANA
>> Address: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
>> City: Marina del Rey
>> StateProv: CA
>> PostalCode: 90292-6695
>> Country: US
>>
>> NetRange: 10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
>> CIDR: 10.0.0.0/8
>> NetName: RESERVED-10
>> NetHandle: NET-10-0-0-0-1
>> Parent:
>> NetType: IANA Special Use
>> NameServer: BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG
>> NameServer: BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG
>> Comment: This block is reserved for special purposes.
>> Comment: Please see RFC 1918 for additional information.
>> Comment:
>> RegDate:
>> Updated: 2002-09-12
>>
>> OrgAbuseHandle: IANA-IP-ARIN
>> OrgAbuseName: Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number
>> OrgAbusePhone: +1-310-301-5820
>> OrgAbuseEmail: ab...@iana.org
>>
>> OrgTechHandle: IANA-IP-ARIN
>> OrgTechName: Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number
>> OrgTechPhone: +1-310-301-5820
>> OrgTechEmail: ab...@iana.org
>>
>>
>> The part that disturbs me is from their own website. It says:
>>
>> Special-Use Addresses
>>
>> Several address ranges are reserved for "Special Use". These addresses
>> all have restrictions of some sort placed on their use, and in general
>> should not appear in normal use on the public Internet. The following
>> briefly documents these addresses – in general they are used in
>> specialized
>> technical contexts. They are described in more detail in RFC 3330.
>> "Private Use" IP addresses:
>> 10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
>> 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255
>> 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255
>>
>> The above address blocks are reserved for use on private networks, and
>> should never appear in the public Internet. There are hundreds of
>> thousands
>
>That's right.
>
>You're not being pinged or attacked from outside your network.
>
>Don't worry about the name blackhole - that's been assigned by
>IANA!
>
>> So, in the end, am I getting spoofed by a hacker, or by my own
>> cablemodem/router?
>
>If it's a spoof (and I very much doubt it), the reply isn't
>going anywhere. Besides which, your router shouldn't be routing
>those addresses inbound so it's almost certainly coming from
>within your network.
>
>
Just checked the firewall again. You are right. I shut down all the other
computers except my main and the re-mailer. I just checked the firewall and
was pinged just a little while ago from 10.1.10.95.
The mail.brianbinder.com might be built into the modem router. I just
checked and the 10.1.10.95 is the IP of my main computer.
As I mentioned before, I gave this PC a different workgroup name to keep it
separated from the rest of the network. Maybe the main computer can see
another computer on the network and is trying to connect.
Looks like I am chasing my tail. Whew!!!!!!! Thank you so very much.
That is a great relief. Paranoia, the stuff re-mailers were made for :)
My Warmest Regards and Thanks, you can't imagine what a relief it is. I
hope you can understand why I worry so much about this PC since it is a
re-mailer.
I feel much better being being safe than sorry. Obviously if I knew more, I
wouldn't have gotten so nervous.
I freely admit I am a noobie, so anything that seems out of place gets my
attention.
Operating a re-mailer is a great learning experience. It makes you question
everything related to the security of the system. I know others are
trusting me to operate a secure system and I don't take that trust lightly.
Again, thank you for taking the time to clarify this for me.
My Most Sincere and Warmest Regards to You,
Twisty Admin
<<==========>>
Subject: Re: Please Block The Flood
In article <N6JZ24ZS386...@anonymous.poster>
Vosges Berge <BergeVo...@hushmail.fedreau.de> wrote:
>
>>> You're aware that it is Eelbash that you are replying to right?
>>
>> Yeah, I was. Who else would post this. Or it is
>
>
>> a new h2o based abomination in training
>
> Well said. Very amusing.
I'm sure he'll be ecstatic that Eelbash found his post amusing.
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