Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00) - Security

This is a discussion on Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00) - Security ; seconserv wrote: > Announcing the release of spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ... -- Lew...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

  1. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    seconserv wrote:
    > Announcing the release of


    spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

    --
    Lew

  2. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    Lew writes:

    > seconserv wrote:
    >> Announcing the release of

    >
    > spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...


    Of course it's spam. The guy is using Google Groups...

    ---
    http://improve-usenet.org/
    blog spam, block Google Groups.

  3. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    "Zen Clark" schreef in bericht
    news:87abcrcqn7.fsf@news.albasani.net...
    > Lew writes:
    >
    >> seconserv wrote:
    >>> Announcing the release of

    >>
    >> spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

    >
    > Of course it's spam. The guy is using Google Groups...
    >
    > ---
    > http://improve-usenet.org/
    > blog spam, block Google Groups.


    If you take a sandwich with the meat product named "spam (tm)" it's very
    tastefull with a baked egg :-)))

    Greetz
    Wim



  4. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    Zen Clark wrote:
    > Lew writes:
    >
    >> seconserv wrote:
    >>> Announcing the release of

    >> spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

    >
    > Of course it's spam. The guy is using Google Groups...


    That does not follow. Much spam comes through channels other than GG, and
    some who post via GG are not posting spam.

    Illogical and incorrect.

    --
    Lew

  5. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    Lew wrote:
    > Zen Clark wrote:
    >> Lew writes:
    >>
    >>> seconserv wrote:
    >>>> Announcing the release of
    >>> spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

    >>
    >> Of course it's spam. The guy is using Google Groups...

    >
    > That does not follow. Much spam comes through channels other than GG,
    > and some who post via GG are not posting spam.
    >
    > Illogical and incorrect.
    >


    Yes, you are. If the majority of google groups users here are sending spam,
    then using google groups is a strong indicator that the person is sending spam.

    The prevalence of spam from other channels is entirely irrelevant to that
    assertion.

  6. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    On Oct 26, 12:48 pm, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
    > [...]
    > If the majority of google groups users here are sending spam,
    > then using google groups is a strong indicator that the person is sending spam.


    Non sequitur.

    In my situation the system that was running knews went belly up at
    about the same time my ISP ceased providing a news feed.

    Since I use a browser for other forums, online banking, etc. it's
    convenient to use Google Groups for perusing Usenet.

    I am not going to pay for something (a news feed) that used to be free
    especially now that keeping a home system up 24/7 is costly both in
    terms of electrical operating costs and reduced hardware lifetime.

    I've been using Usenet since the early 1980s and you can see the
    config
    of one of my systems in the O'Reilly "Managing uucp and Usenet" book,
    ISBN 0-937175-93-5.




  7. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    Thad.Floryan wrote:
    > On Oct 26, 12:48 pm, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
    >> [...]
    >> If the majority of google groups users here are sending spam,
    >> then using google groups is a strong indicator that the person is sending spam.

    >
    > Non sequitur.


    No, it's basic logic.

    > In my situation the system that was running knews went belly up at
    > about the same time my ISP ceased providing a news feed.
    >
    > Since I use a browser for other forums, online banking, etc. it's
    > convenient to use Google Groups for perusing Usenet.


    I'm not objecting to this. I use it myself on occasion, when I don't have my
    desktop for Usenet access. I'm merely pointing out that you haven't refuted
    the logic. If most posts from Google groups come from spam, *EVEN if 99.9% OF
    ALL SPAM IS FROM ELSEWHERE*, then being from Google groups remains a strong
    indicator that the message is spam. And Google groups has had a real problem
    with spam lately, due to their CAPTCHA system being broken.
    (http://securitylabs.websense.com/con...logs/2919.aspx)

    We saw the same problem years ago when AOL users first became active in NNTP.
    Most of the material was spam or trolling idiots, so seeing aol.com in a
    'From' was a strong indicator to simply flush the post. It is, in fact, a
    basic security problem: even though there are legitimate users, such as
    yourself and sometimes myself, when most of the use of a service from a
    particular domain or address range is abusive, it's completely reasonable to
    assume that any traffic from that domain is abusive. It is, in fact, unavoidable.

    We see similar problems in spam filtering. One of the strongest indicators
    that a message is spam is HTML tags. Simply flushing all email in HTML is one
    of the fastest and most effective spam filters ever discovered.

    > I am not going to pay for something (a news feed) that used to be free
    > especially now that keeping a home system up 24/7 is costly both in
    > terms of electrical operating costs and reduced hardware lifetime.
    >
    > I've been using Usenet since the early 1980s and you can see the
    > config
    > of one of my systems in the O'Reilly "Managing uucp and Usenet" book,
    > ISBN 0-937175-93-5.


    That's fine. Then you've been at this perhaps as long as me? I date all the
    way back to its early UUCP days as well. (Maybe 1982? Hard to be sure that
    long ago.) And I got wildly active in spam hunting and Usenet abuse tracking
    in 90's.

  8. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 11:39:08 -0400, Zen Clark wrote:

    > Lew writes:
    >
    >> seconserv wrote:
    >>> Announcing the release of

    >>
    >> spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

    >
    > Of course it's spam. The guy is using Google Groups...
    >
    > ---
    > http://improve-usenet.org/
    > blog spam, block Google Groups.



    I can't believe what I'm reading at this site, & I'm appalled, amazed, &
    yet not surprised all at the same time. I won't miss the google groups
    posts- go 4 it. do whatever you got to. hahahahahahaha.


    --
    "Teach me, I learn & retain!"

  9. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.security, in article
    ,
    Thad.Floryan wrote:

    NOTE: Posting from groups.google.com (or some web-forums) dramatically
    reduces the chance of your post being seen. Find a real news server.

    >Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:


    >> If the majority of google groups users here are sending spam, then
    >> using google groups is a strong indicator that the person is sending
    >> spam.


    >Non sequitur.


    You may think not, but others do, and react to such indications by
    blocking/kill-filing posts from that source. That's the reason my
    newsreader automatically inserted the NOTE: at the top of my reply.
    Other people may (as I do) only block such posts in specific newsgroups
    where the spam/trolling is particularly bad (such as comp.os.linux.misc).

    >In my situation the system that was running knews went belly up at
    >about the same time my ISP ceased providing a news feed.


    And I'll bet no one is demanding a price reduction for the reduced
    service.

    >Since I use a browser for other forums, online banking, etc. it's
    >convenient to use Google Groups for perusing Usenet.


    No one is preventing you from doing so. You should still be aware that
    *posting* from groups.google.com will reduce the number of people who
    will see your post, which lessens responses.

    >I am not going to pay for something (a news feed) that used to be free
    >especially now that keeping a home system up 24/7 is costly both in
    >terms of electrical operating costs and reduced hardware lifetime.


    I've got six systems running 24/7 (though the monitors are only on a
    small part of that time when someone is using the systems locally), and
    the electrical operating costs (including the extra air conditioning
    needed to dissipate the added heat) is still less than the cost of
    having a broadband Internet connection. As for hardware lifetimes,
    I believe the difference between 'on only when needed' and '24/7' is
    insignificant. YMMV

    As for not wanting to pay for a news feed, you can try the Usenet
    groups news.software.readers and alt.free.newsservers. There is a
    number of free news servers as well as a number where the cost is
    minimal (under a dollar a month). There are a number of news servers
    that even have a web based interface if that's what you need. But
    choose with care, because a few of the free ones have abuse problems
    similar to groups.google.com, with the same results.

    >I've been using Usenet since the early 1980s and you can see the
    >config of one of my systems in the O'Reilly "Managing uucp and Usenet"
    >book ISBN 0-937175-93-5.


    That was then, this is now. You may want to hang onto that book, as
    it's the 10th Edition from January 1992, and hasn't been part of the
    O'Reilly catalog for over ten years.

    Old guy

  10. Re: Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

    Moe Trin wrote:

    > On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.security, in
    > article
    > ,
    > Thad.Floryan wrote:
    >
    > NOTE: Posting from groups.google.com (or some web-forums) dramatically
    > reduces the chance of your post being seen. Find a real news server.
    >
    >>Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

    >
    >>> If the majority of google groups users here are sending spam, then
    >>> using google groups is a strong indicator that the person is sending
    >>> spam.

    >
    >>Non sequitur.

    >
    > You may think not, but others do, and react to such indications by
    > blocking/kill-filing posts from that source. That's the reason my
    > newsreader automatically inserted the NOTE: at the top of my reply.
    > Other people may (as I do) only block such posts in specific newsgroups
    > where the spam/trolling is particularly bad (such as comp.os.linux.misc).
    >
    >>In my situation the system that was running knews went belly up at
    >>about the same time my ISP ceased providing a news feed.

    >
    > And I'll bet no one is demanding a price reduction for the reduced
    > service.
    >
    >>Since I use a browser for other forums, online banking, etc. it's
    >>convenient to use Google Groups for perusing Usenet.

    >
    > No one is preventing you from doing so. You should still be aware that
    > *posting* from groups.google.com will reduce the number of people who
    > will see your post, which lessens responses.
    >
    >>I am not going to pay for something (a news feed) that used to be free
    >>especially now that keeping a home system up 24/7 is costly both in
    >>terms of electrical operating costs and reduced hardware lifetime.

    >
    > I've got six systems running 24/7 (though the monitors are only on a
    > small part of that time when someone is using the systems locally), and
    > the electrical operating costs (including the extra air conditioning
    > needed to dissipate the added heat) is still less than the cost of
    > having a broadband Internet connection. As for hardware lifetimes,
    > I believe the difference between 'on only when needed' and '24/7' is
    > insignificant. YMMV
    >
    > As for not wanting to pay for a news feed, you can try the Usenet
    > groups news.software.readers and alt.free.newsservers. There is a
    > number of free news servers as well as a number where the cost is
    > minimal (under a dollar a month). There are a number of news servers
    > that even have a web based interface if that's what you need. But
    > choose with care, because a few of the free ones have abuse problems
    > similar to groups.google.com, with the same results.
    >


    Try: http://nntp.motzarella.org/



+ Reply to Thread