Printable View
Somebody emailed me, saying they are in London. I have several
reasons to believe this person is not who they say they are. So I
traced the email back to a TV/cable company in Belgium, using the
header info in the email. For reasons I will not get into, I believe
this to be accurate.
Is there a possibility that a yahoo email from the UK near London
would use a proxy server in Belgium? If so, why would it not show up
in the trace?
Thank you.
X-No-Archive: Yes
"Osyrys" <indexai@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:875d9821-35db-4a99-959f-422aa6bfd20c@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Somebody emailed me, saying they are in London. I have several
> reasons to believe this person is not who they say they are. So I
> traced the email back to a TV/cable company in Belgium, using the
> header info in the email. For reasons I will not get into, I believe
> this to be accurate.
>
> Is there a possibility that a yahoo email from the UK near London
> would use a proxy server in Belgium? If so, why would it not show up
> in the trace?
>
> Thank you.[/color]
I just happen to be an expert on the use of proxies, since I have often
talked of people using proxies either from work, or from more
authoritarian countries to avoid filtering.
If someone was in London and emailed you through a proxy in
Belgium. It could be they were at work and probably wanted to
hide what they were doing from the boss. That is probably what
was going on..
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 20:50:37 -0700 (PDT), Osyrys wrote:
[color=blue]
> Is there a possibility that a yahoo email from the UK near London
> would use a proxy server in Belgium?[/color]
I'm guessing you're talking about Telenet? In the beginning, the only
way to surf with Telenet was through a proxy server
(proxy.pandora.be/proxy.telenet.be or [url]http://pac.pandora.be:8080[/url] /
[url]http://pac.telenet.be:8080[/url] ). So I'm guessing this user owns a laptop
and hasn't changed his/her browser proxy settings, so he/she is still
surfing through the Telenet proxy, even when not in Belgium.
--
s|b
On Oct 19, 11:01*am, "s|b" <priv...@usenet4all.org> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 20:50:37 -0700 (PDT), Osyrys wrote:[color=green]
> > Is there a possibility that a yahoo email from the UK near London
> > would use a proxy server in Belgium?[/color]
>
> I'm guessing you're talking about Telenet? In the beginning, the only
> way to surf with Telenet was through a proxy server
> (proxy.pandora.be/proxy.telenet.be orhttp://pac.pandora.be:8080/http://pac.telenet.be:8080). So I'm guessing this user owns a laptop
> and hasn't changed his/her browser proxy settings, so he/she is still
> surfing through the Telenet proxy, even when not in Belgium.
>
> --
> s|b[/color]
Well, this person claims to never have been in Belgium. I know she's
not at work. I just don't understand why it is necessary for an email
from the UK to be routed through a Belgium TV company.
On Oct 19, 11:01*am, "s|b" <priv...@usenet4all.org> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 20:50:37 -0700 (PDT), Osyrys wrote:[color=green]
> > Is there a possibility that a yahoo email from the UK near London
> > would use a proxy server in Belgium?[/color]
>
> I'm guessing you're talking about Telenet? In the beginning, the only
> way to surf with Telenet was through a proxy server
> (proxy.pandora.be/proxy.telenet.be orhttp://pac.pandora.be:8080/http://pac.telenet.be:8080). So I'm guessing this user owns a laptop
> and hasn't changed his/her browser proxy settings, so he/she is still
> surfing through the Telenet proxy, even when not in Belgium.
>
> --
> s|b[/color]
The other thing is, when I compare the origin of her email with an
email from the person I think this is, they go back to the exact same
spot in Belgium.
In article <gdf8nl$hld$1@aioe.org>, Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I just happen to be an expert on the use of proxies,[/color]
If you are, you certainly haven't displayed that expertise
publically (and yes, I have seen a number of your postings about
proxies.)
On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 11:30:05 -0700 (PDT), Osyrys wrote:
[color=blue]
> routed through a Belgium TV company.[/color]
Perhaps it would be helpful to mention *which* Belgian TV company?
--
s|b
On Oct 19, 1:07*pm, "s|b" <priv...@usenet4all.org> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 11:30:05 -0700 (PDT), Osyrys wrote:[color=green]
> > routed through a Belgium TV company.[/color]
>
> Perhaps it would be helpful to mention *which* Belgian TV company?
>
> --
> s|b[/color]
here is the info:
% This is the RIPE Whois query server #3.
% The objects are in RPSL format.
%
% Rights restricted by copyright.
% See [url]http://www.ripe.net/db/copyright.html[/url]
% Note: This output has been filtered.
% To receive output for a database update, use the "-B" flag.
% Information related to '85.201.0.0 - 85.201.63.255'
inetnum: 85.201.0.0 - 85.201.63.255
netname: TVCABLENET
descr: ELECTRABEL
descr: Belgian Cable Modem ISP
descr: # Please report abuse to [email]abuse@tvcablenet.be[/email]#
country: BE
admin-c: BH1260-RIPE
tech-c: AM6971-RIPE
status: ASSIGNED PA
mnt-by: tvcablenet-be-ripe-mntner
mnt-routes: TELENET-OPS-MNT
mnt-domains: tvcablenet-be-ripe-mntner
source: RIPE # Filtered
person: Bernard Haine
address: Avenue Jean Monnet 2 B-1348 Louvain-La-Neuve BELGIUM
phone: + 3210486902
fax-no: + 3210486975
e-mail: [email]bernard.haine@netmanagement.be[/email]
nic-hdl: BH1260-RIPE
source: RIPE # Filtered
person: Andre Medaets
address: Avenue Jean Monnet 2 B-1348 Louvain-La-Neuve BELGIUM
phone: + 3210486610
fax-no: + 3210486975
e-mail: [email]andre.medaets@netmanagement.be[/email]
nic-hdl: AM6971-RIPE
source: RIPE # Filtered
% Information related to '85.201.0.0/18AS6848'
route: 85.201.0.0/18
descr: TVCABLENET
origin: AS6848
mnt-by: tvcablenet-be-ripe-mntner
mnt-by: TELENET-OPS-MNT
source: RIPE # Filtered
X-No-Archive: Yes
"Walter Roberson" <roberson@hushmail.com> wrote in message
news:sdLKk.32589$SH5.7466@newsfe08.iad...[color=blue]
> In article <gdf8nl$hld$1@aioe.org>, Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>I just happen to be an expert on the use of proxies,[/color]
>
> If you are, you certainly haven't displayed that expertise
> publically (and yes, I have seen a number of your postings about
> proxies.)[/color]
Well, I do get interesting people using my proxies. I have one
woman out in California who works in radio at night, but
has to have another job during the day. She uses my proxy,
at her day job, to log into web sites she needs to get ready
for her nighttime radio gig, which is her second job, and the
boss at her day job has no CLUE as to what she is up to,
because she is making an encrypted connection to my proxy.
She is a talk show co-host on one of a sports station there,
and she needs to access certain web sites, before she goes
on the air in the evening, and by using my proxy, she
circumvents the blocking of sports-related web sites, at
her day job. The connection is a secure encrypted
connection, and cannot be monitored or sniffed. I am
always willing to help out someone working in radio
who may be just starting out and may have to take a
second job elsehwhere. She signs on to my VPN
server, and accesses the web sites she needs to get
ready for her nighttime radio gig.
Idiot. You never did look up "traffic analysis" like I suggested,
did you? Just because a message cannot be read does not mean
information cannot be gathered form it. And again, if an employee
is willfully circumventing company policy, they are rightfully
risking their job.
Brian
--
[url]http://www.skywise711.com[/url] - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: [url]http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html[/url]
Quake "predictions": [url]http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html[/url]
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
X-No-Archive: Yes
"Skywise" <into@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote in message
news:878Lk.34525$KL7.17191@newsfe08.ams2...[color=blue]
> Idiot. You never did look up "traffic analysis" like I suggested,
> did you? Just because a message cannot be read does not mean
> information cannot be gathered form it. And again, if an employee
> is willfully circumventing company policy, they are rightfully
> risking their job.[/color]
However, this woman holds down TWO jobs and MUST access
certain websites to get ready for her evening job as a sports radio
talk host. So helping someone else, who needs to access certain
web sites before they go on the air for their evening job, I have no
problem with it and I do NOT see that as unethical.
In message <gdj311$qkk$1@aioe.org> "Chilly8" <chilly8@hotmail.com> was
claimed to have wrote:
[color=blue]
>However, this woman holds down TWO jobs and MUST access
>certain websites to get ready for her evening job as a sports radio
>talk host.[/color]
And how is that the day job's problem?
If she "must" access certain websites, then her night time employers
should supply an appropriate connection and/or make having said access
prior to employment hours a job requirement, in which case she should
provide her own access.
[color=blue]
>So helping someone else, who needs to access certain
>web sites before they go on the air for their evening job, I have no
>problem with it and I do NOT see that as unethical.[/color]
This is actually more unethical then your normal, you've gone from
helping individuals waste their employer's resources for personal use to
helping one company unwittingly subsidize another company.
"Chilly8" <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:gdj311$qkk$1@aioe.org:
[color=blue]
> However, this woman holds down TWO jobs and MUST access
> certain websites to get ready for her evening job as a sports radio
> talk host. So helping someone else, who needs to access certain
> web sites before they go on the air for their evening job,[/color]
Then she needs to plan her life better, as it WILL catch up to
her.
[color=blue]
> I have no
> problem with it and I do NOT see that as unethical.[/color]
We are already aware of your ethics (or lack thereof).
Brian
--
[url]http://www.skywise711.com[/url] - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: [url]http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html[/url]
Quake "predictions": [url]http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html[/url]
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
X-No-Archive: Yes
"Chilly8" <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdf8nl$hld$1@aioe.org...[color=blue]
>
>
>
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
>
> "Osyrys" <indexai@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:875d9821-35db-4a99-959f-422aa6bfd20c@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...[color=green]
>> Somebody emailed me, saying they are in London. I have several
>> reasons to believe this person is not who they say they are. So I
>> traced the email back to a TV/cable company in Belgium, using the
>> header info in the email. For reasons I will not get into, I believe
>> this to be accurate.
>>
>> Is there a possibility that a yahoo email from the UK near London
>> would use a proxy server in Belgium? If so, why would it not show up
>> in the trace?
>>
>> Thank you.[/color]
>
>
> I just happen to be an expert on the use of proxies, since I have often
> talked of people using proxies either from work, or from more
> authoritarian countries to avoid filtering.[/color]
I found another trick to keep us out of the filtering lists of the
major filtering providers. I used Sam Spade to find the IP
ranges of the networks belonging to the like to WebSense,
SurfControl, Sentian, Bess and others, and entered rules
into my firewall, which blocks them from accessing my
web page. This way, their autmoated "bots" cannot scan
my site and categorise it. So I either stay out of filtering
lists, or get dropped when they go to scan my lists,
but it will appear as it my site is not there, so my site
either does not get categorised, or it gets dropped
from the filtering lists, which makes me accessible
in more schools and workplaces, many of which are
reliant on commercial filtering software to guard their
networks.
And blocking the filters from scanning my website
is LEGAL, and I CANNOT BE PROSECUTED
by either the filter vendors, or any of their customers
that depend on them to guard their networks. Its
MY server, and I am well within my rights to block
the filtering vendors' automated bots from accessing
my site and categorising it.
And I am seeing the differernce. I am seeing enough
listeners on our coverage of one skating event, that
the number of "standard" listeners (who can listen
without buying a Live 365 VIP membership) has
maxed out. And I am seeing connections from
office networks all over the place. I have 217
listners right now as I am writing this, nearly all
of them coming from office networks in Canada
and the USA, where it is still the working hours,
so more people can access my site without having
to resort to proxies.