Scamster site, privacy.li (update) - SSH

This is a discussion on Scamster site, privacy.li (update) - SSH ; I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100% confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these groups, but I'm trying my ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 143

Thread: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

  1. Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    anyone.

    There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    their true colors.

    First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    using Google Groups.

    The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.

    They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    stupid) they are.

    The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    I've posted as accurate.

    This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    ) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    ). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    2007). Read the forums for the details.

    I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    ) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    traffic to my site to help spread the word).

    Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.

    Beware


  2. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    Addendum: My website http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/ has been
    removed for whatever reason. I won't bother to rebuild it, but I will
    still provide updates as new developments occur.

    Thanks for reading.

    yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    > I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    > experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    > confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    > groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    > related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    > relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    > anyone.
    >
    > There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    > drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    > their true colors.
    >
    > First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    > they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    > server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    > actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    > is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    > using Google Groups.
    >
    > The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    > that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    > customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    > essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    > visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    > exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.
    >
    > They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    > private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    > it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    > livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    > lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    > stupid) they are.
    >
    > The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    > shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    > making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    > I've posted as accurate.
    >
    > This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    > do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    > the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    > ) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    > ). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    > don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    > guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    > sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    > sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    > conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    > my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    > correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    > 2007). Read the forums for the details.
    >
    > I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    > ) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    > in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    > problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    > anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    > savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    > reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    > forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    > traffic to my site to help spread the word).
    >
    > Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    > posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    > word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.
    >
    > Beware



  3. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    lol, i don't care what is between you and privacy.li, but you're a sick
    pervert. Leave the newsgroups clean from your pathetic story.

    Why don't you contact a lawyer and make it a case ? if you can find
    anyone who will defend someone who gets off on dead corpses and women
    getting raped. Or did you forgot to tell that part also on the forums ?


    yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    > Addendum: My website http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/ has been
    > removed for whatever reason. I won't bother to rebuild it, but I will
    > still provide updates as new developments occur.
    >
    > Thanks for reading.
    >
    > yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    >
    >>I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    >>experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    >>confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    >>groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    >>related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    >>relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    >>anyone.
    >>
    >>There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    >>drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    >>their true colors.
    >>
    >>First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    >>they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    >>server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    >>actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    >>is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    >>using Google Groups.
    >>
    >>The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    >>that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    >>customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    >>essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    >>visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    >>exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.
    >>
    >>They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    >>private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    >>it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    >>livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    >>lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    >>stupid) they are.
    >>
    >>The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    >>shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    >>making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    >>I've posted as accurate.
    >>
    >>This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    >>do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    >>the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    >>) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    >>). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    >>don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    >>guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    >>sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    >>sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    >>conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    >>my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    >>correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    >>2007). Read the forums for the details.
    >>
    >>I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    >>) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    >>in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    >>problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    >>anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    >>savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    >>reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    >>forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    >>traffic to my site to help spread the word).
    >>
    >>Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    >>posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    >>word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.
    >>
    >>Beware

    >
    >


  4. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    nospam wrote:

    > lol, i don't care what is between you and privacy.li, but you're a sick
    > pervert. Leave the newsgroups clean from your pathetic story.


    Talk about desperation.

    Here's a free clue asswipe: WE care about ripoff scam artists like you,
    and WE enjoy watching you **** yourself with the things you do like
    posting personal information, tracking down users, and the illiterate
    trolls you post here.

    What we DON'T care about is what you're trying to deflect attention to,
    the sites the guy was trying to subscribe to.

    > Why don't you contact a lawyer and make it a case ? if you can find
    > anyone who will defend someone who gets off on dead corpses and women
    > getting raped. Or did you forgot to tell that part also on the forums ?


    Yup, desperate. Sure sign they guy has you dead to rights. You're
    buggered and you know it, and this is your last ditch effort to try and
    make it all just go away.

    Sorry about your luck asswipe. Not going to happen.


  5. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote:
    > nospam wrote:
    >
    >
    >>lol, i don't care what is between you and privacy.li, but you're a sick
    >>pervert. Leave the newsgroups clean from your pathetic story.

    >
    >
    > Talk about desperation.
    >
    > Here's a free clue asswipe: WE care about ripoff scam artists like you,
    > and WE enjoy watching you **** yourself with the things you do like
    > posting personal information, tracking down users, and the illiterate
    > trolls you post here.
    >
    > What we DON'T care about is what you're trying to deflect attention to,
    > the sites the guy was trying to subscribe to.
    >
    >
    >>Why don't you contact a lawyer and make it a case ? if you can find
    >>anyone who will defend someone who gets off on dead corpses and women
    >>getting raped. Or did you forgot to tell that part also on the forums ?

    >
    >
    > Yup, desperate. Sure sign they guy has you dead to rights. You're
    > buggered and you know it, and this is your last ditch effort to try and
    > make it all just go away.
    >
    > Sorry about your luck asswipe. Not going to happen.
    >


    Well, same old puppet as always, trying to setup people against each
    other in this newsgroup. Anyway, as most people visiting this newsgroup
    i can say to you: be gone and get a job

  6. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    On 30 Apr 2007 05:05:19 -0700, yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:

    > I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    > experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    > confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    > groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    > related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    > relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    > anyone.
    >
    > There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    > drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    > their true colors.
    >
    > First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    > they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    > server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    > actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    > is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    > using Google Groups.
    >
    > The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    > that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    > customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    > essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    > visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    > exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.
    >
    > They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    > private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    > it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    > livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    > lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    > stupid) they are.
    >
    > The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    > shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    > making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    > I've posted as accurate.
    >
    > This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    > do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    > the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    > ) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    > ). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    > don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    > guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    > sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    > sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    > conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    > my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    > correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    > 2007). Read the forums for the details.
    >
    > I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    > ) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    > in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    > problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    > anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    > savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    > reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    > forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    > traffic to my site to help spread the word).
    >
    > Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    > posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    > word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.
    >
    > Beware


    Was this post about your private information signed by anyone? Probably
    not. It's more likely you posted it yourself and when you figured out you
    posted a Tor exit node tried to blame it on others as if they didn't know
    what it was, like you didn't.

    So what about the rest of the info?

    Flush/Spammer/Anono perv


  7. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    What?!

    Does any of what you're saying actually make sense to you? You're
    saying I posted that info myself.

    Are you just trying to say anything to mount some type of argument,
    regardless of how little sense it makes. Does everyone here work for
    privacy.li or is there just a complete lack of common sense?

    For those of you that can't talk about anything but the websites. Get
    a clue. What I do is irrelevant. This is a privacy newsgroup. We're
    here to discuss privacy.li, not me. Even if you don't like me, that
    does nothing to alter the fact that I've meticulously detailed
    unethical, unscrupulous, and possibly illegal behavior by privacy.li
    in the following ways:

    1. They can and will rip you off.
    2. They can and will post, sell, or otherwise give away your personal
    information if it suits their purposes. They will do this without
    hesitation and will even brag about it.
    3. They will use any means within their power to intimidate or harass
    someone who objects to their business practices.

    These are the relevant issues, not personal issues you have with me.

    Beware



    traveller 66 wrote:
    > On 30 Apr 2007 05:05:19 -0700, yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    >
    > > I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    > > experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    > > confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    > > groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    > > related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    > > relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    > > anyone.
    > >
    > > There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    > > drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    > > their true colors.
    > >
    > > First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    > > they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    > > server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    > > actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    > > is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    > > using Google Groups.
    > >
    > > The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    > > that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    > > customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    > > essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    > > visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    > > exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.
    > >
    > > They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    > > private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    > > it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    > > livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    > > lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    > > stupid) they are.
    > >
    > > The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    > > shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    > > making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    > > I've posted as accurate.
    > >
    > > This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    > > do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    > > the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    > > ) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    > > ). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    > > don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    > > guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    > > sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    > > sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    > > conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    > > my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    > > correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    > > 2007). Read the forums for the details.
    > >
    > > I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    > > ) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    > > in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    > > problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    > > anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    > > savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    > > reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    > > forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    > > traffic to my site to help spread the word).
    > >
    > > Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    > > posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    > > word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.
    > >
    > > Beware

    >
    > Was this post about your private information signed by anyone? Probably
    > not. It's more likely you posted it yourself and when you figured out you
    > posted a Tor exit node tried to blame it on others as if they didn't know
    > what it was, like you didn't.
    >
    > So what about the rest of the info?
    >
    > Flush/Spammer/Anono perv



  8. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    > What?!
    >
    > Does any of what you're saying actually make sense to you? You're
    > saying I posted that info myself.
    >
    > Are you just trying to say anything to mount some type of argument,
    > regardless of how little sense it makes. Does everyone here work for
    > privacy.li or is there just a complete lack of common sense?
    >
    > For those of you that can't talk about anything but the websites. Get
    > a clue. What I do is irrelevant. This is a privacy newsgroup. We're
    > here to discuss privacy.li, not me. Even if you don't like me, that
    > does nothing to alter the fact that I've meticulously detailed
    > unethical, unscrupulous, and possibly illegal behavior by privacy.li
    > in the following ways:
    >
    > 1. They can and will rip you off.
    > 2. They can and will post, sell, or otherwise give away your personal
    > information if it suits their purposes. They will do this without
    > hesitation and will even brag about it.
    > 3. They will use any means within their power to intimidate or harass
    > someone who objects to their business practices.
    >
    > These are the relevant issues, not personal issues you have with me.
    >
    > Beware
    >
    >
    >
    > traveller 66 wrote:
    >
    >>On 30 Apr 2007 05:05:19 -0700, yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    >>>experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    >>>confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    >>>groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    >>>related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    >>>relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    >>>anyone.
    >>>
    >>>There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    >>>drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    >>>their true colors.
    >>>
    >>>First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    >>>they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    >>>server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    >>>actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    >>>is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    >>>using Google Groups.
    >>>
    >>>The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    >>>that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    >>>customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    >>>essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    >>>visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    >>>exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.
    >>>
    >>>They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    >>>private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    >>>it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    >>>livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    >>>lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    >>>stupid) they are.
    >>>
    >>>The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    >>>shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    >>>making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    >>>I've posted as accurate.
    >>>
    >>>This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    >>>do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    >>>the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    >>>) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    >>>). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    >>>don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    >>>guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    >>>sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    >>>sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    >>>conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    >>>my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    >>>correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    >>>2007). Read the forums for the details.
    >>>
    >>>I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    >>>) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    >>>in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    >>>problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    >>>anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    >>>savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    >>>reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    >>>forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    >>>traffic to my site to help spread the word).
    >>>
    >>>Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    >>>posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    >>>word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.
    >>>
    >>>Beware

    >>
    >>Was this post about your private information signed by anyone? Probably
    >>not. It's more likely you posted it yourself and when you figured out you
    >>posted a Tor exit node tried to blame it on others as if they didn't know
    >>what it was, like you didn't.
    >>
    >>So what about the rest of the info?
    >>
    >>Flush/Spammer/Anono perv

    >
    >




    Please go get off on dead bodies and women getting raped pervert. I
    wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. I really hope you have no kids
    or any kids around you.

  9. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    I don't get off on either of those things or otherwise find them
    arousing.

    Just for the record. That's the truth, whether you choose to believe
    it or not.

    I don't see any need to go into further detail.

    Would you like to get back to the topic at hand?


    nospam wrote:
    > yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    > > What?!
    > >
    > > Does any of what you're saying actually make sense to you? You're
    > > saying I posted that info myself.
    > >
    > > Are you just trying to say anything to mount some type of argument,
    > > regardless of how little sense it makes. Does everyone here work for
    > > privacy.li or is there just a complete lack of common sense?
    > >
    > > For those of you that can't talk about anything but the websites. Get
    > > a clue. What I do is irrelevant. This is a privacy newsgroup. We're
    > > here to discuss privacy.li, not me. Even if you don't like me, that
    > > does nothing to alter the fact that I've meticulously detailed
    > > unethical, unscrupulous, and possibly illegal behavior by privacy.li
    > > in the following ways:
    > >
    > > 1. They can and will rip you off.
    > > 2. They can and will post, sell, or otherwise give away your personal
    > > information if it suits their purposes. They will do this without
    > > hesitation and will even brag about it.
    > > 3. They will use any means within their power to intimidate or harass
    > > someone who objects to their business practices.
    > >
    > > These are the relevant issues, not personal issues you have with me.
    > >
    > > Beware
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > traveller 66 wrote:
    > >
    > >>On 30 Apr 2007 05:05:19 -0700, yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing my
    > >>>experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not 100%
    > >>>confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of these
    > >>>groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as privacy
    > >>>related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam anyone. I post
    > >>>relatively infrequently, so I don't think this should be a burden to
    > >>>anyone.
    > >>>
    > >>>There have been some developments since my last post. I was ready to
    > >>>drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li started showing
    > >>>their true colors.
    > >>>
    > >>>First of all, they posted my personal information (or at least what
    > >>>they thought was my information) on alt.privacy and alt.privacy.anon-
    > >>>server. They posted what they thought was my IP address (turned out to
    > >>>actually be a Tor exit node) and other information. The link to this
    > >>>is http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...73504778872530
    > >>>using Google Groups.
    > >>>
    > >>>The point of all this is that this is an anonymity/privacy service
    > >>>that has no reservations about releasing personal info about their
    > >>>customers. To those who don't understand how a proxy service works, in
    > >>>essence, the proxy service becomes your surrogate ISP. The sites you
    > >>>visit don't know who you are but a proxy service like privacy.li knows
    > >>>exactly who you are and what websites you visit, etc.
    > >>>
    > >>>They've proven they have no hesitation whatsoever in releasing this
    > >>>private data. The point is, I was cautious in dealing with them, and
    > >>>it paid off. If you sign up with them, you may just be putting your
    > >>>livelihood (or even your life) in their hands. Don't take this
    > >>>lightly. They've proven how untrustworthy and dishonest (and even
    > >>>stupid) they are.
    > >>>
    > >>>The post from the privacy.li admin serves a dual purpose. It not only
    > >>>shows the character of these people but it shows that I'm not just
    > >>>making this stuff up. They've, in essence, verified all the details
    > >>>I've posted as accurate.
    > >>>
    > >>>This is just the first part of the story. The second part also has to
    > >>>do with the character of the people at privacy.li. I've posted all of
    > >>>the details on the TrueCrypt forums ( http://forums.truecrypt.org/viewtopic.php?t=5893
    > >>>) and on the Wilders Security forums ( http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=994124
    > >>>). The details are in my 2 posts dated today (April 30, 2007). I just
    > >>>don't want to repost all the details here. It has to do with how the
    > >>>guys at privacy.li submitted my e-mail address to numerous scam/spam
    > >>>sites and about the e-mails I've received due to their actions. I'm
    > >>>sure they had no way of knowing this, but I can show fairly
    > >>>conclusively that it was them and only them who could have submitted
    > >>>my e-mail address to those sites. And the dates of those scam e-mails
    > >>>correspond very well with the date I first posted on usenet (April 10,
    > >>>2007). Read the forums for the details.
    > >>>
    > >>>I will also update my website ( http://screwprivacy.li.freewebspace.com/
    > >>>) to reflect this new information right after I finish this post. Keep
    > >>>in mind that this is free web hosting, so I cannot control any
    > >>>problems that may occur after visiting the site. I don't think there's
    > >>>anything wrong with the site or any malware. I'm fairly technically
    > >>>savvy, and I haven't experienced any problems. If you have any
    > >>>reservations about it, just read the TrueCrypt and Wilders Security
    > >>>forums. It's the same information (although I would like to boost
    > >>>traffic to my site to help spread the word).
    > >>>
    > >>>Thanks for reading. I hope it's clear that I'm being honest in my
    > >>>posts, and I have nothing to gain by this except for spreading the
    > >>>word, and helping people avoid the problems I've experienced.
    > >>>
    > >>>Beware
    > >>
    > >>Was this post about your private information signed by anyone? Probably
    > >>not. It's more likely you posted it yourself and when you figured out you
    > >>posted a Tor exit node tried to blame it on others as if they didn't know
    > >>what it was, like you didn't.
    > >>
    > >>So what about the rest of the info?
    > >>
    > >>Flush/Spammer/Anono perv

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    >
    > Please go get off on dead bodies and women getting raped pervert. I
    > wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. I really hope you have no kids
    > or any kids around you.



  10. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)



    > Please go get off on dead bodies and women getting raped pervert. I
    > wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. I really hope you have no kids
    > or any kids around you.


    Same here



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  11. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    yh7t78@yahoo.com wrote in
    news:1177934719.524138.229110@n59g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com:

    > I posted a message to 7 groups initially on April 10 detailing
    > my experiences with privacy.li and how they scammed me. I'm not
    > 100% confident that this message is strictly on-topic in all of
    > these groups, but I'm trying my best. They were all suggested as
    > privacy related groups by Google Groups. I'm not trying to spam
    > anyone. I post relatively infrequently, so I don't think this
    > should be a burden to anyone.
    >
    > There have been some developments since my last post. I was
    > ready to drop this whole thing until the guys at privacy.li
    > started showing their true colors.


    Started? They have outed users before, this is not new. They are
    also going to have difficulty because they only accept e-gold and
    e-gold has had their assets frozen.

    What I don't understand is that if you were already using Tor why
    signup at all with privacy.li? Tor gives you what no paid service
    can, relative anonymity. Paid services can only give privacy.

    If looking for additional features or speed selecting a privacy
    service is a good addition, but you are much better off with a more
    trusted service like anonymiser, cotse (imho the best in terms of
    features, price, and support), findnot, ultimate-anonymity,
    metropipe, or number of others. Privacy.li has a long sordid
    history in here (alt.privacy).

  12. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    Like I've stated, I never attempted to sign up to their proxy service.
    I would never be stupid enough to do that. They advertise ancillary
    services besides their proxy. It's really not relevant.

    Noone wrote:

    >
    > Started? They have outed users before, this is not new. They are
    > also going to have difficulty because they only accept e-gold and
    > e-gold has had their assets frozen.
    >
    > What I don't understand is that if you were already using Tor why
    > signup at all with privacy.li? Tor gives you what no paid service
    > can, relative anonymity. Paid services can only give privacy.
    >
    > If looking for additional features or speed selecting a privacy
    > service is a good addition, but you are much better off with a more
    > trusted service like anonymiser, cotse (imho the best in terms of
    > features, price, and support), findnot, ultimate-anonymity,
    > metropipe, or number of others. Privacy.li has a long sordid
    > history in here (alt.privacy).



  13. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    Hey asshole, this is a privacy newsgroup. Stay on topic.

    But as long as we're off topic. Why don't you just tell me where you
    live and I'll be happy to come over and pound you into dirt.

    amadeus wrote:
    >
    >
    > > Please go get off on dead bodies and women getting raped pervert. I
    > > wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. I really hope you have no kids
    > > or any kids around you.

    >
    > Same here
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



  14. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)


    If your statements are true, then privacy.li has no
    credibility whatsoever. But what was it that pissed
    them off so much, that they thought they could out
    you on Usenet?


  15. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" wrote:

    >
    > If your statements are true, then privacy.li has no
    > credibility whatsoever. But what was it that pissed
    > them off so much, that they thought they could out
    > you on Usenet?


    He exposed their theft. Dumb bunny actually sent them cash, they "lost"
    it (not the first report of this happening we've seen), and he went
    public about it.

    The crooks didn't even deny anything, they tried to brush it aside.
    When that didn't work they went on the attack only to embarrass
    themselves further by outing a Tor node.


  16. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" wrote:

    >
    > If your statements are true, then privacy.li has no
    > credibility whatsoever. But what was it that pissed
    > them off so much, that they thought they could out
    > you on Usenet?
    >


    They didn't out anyone, they TRIED to out someone.

    LOL!

  17. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:11:47 +0200, nospam
    wrote:

    Here is an interesting line in "nospam" headers:

    Organization: Privacy.li- Anonymous news through SSH2-Tunnels,
    www.privacy.li

    It appears not only the smear campaign continues, but the people at
    Privacy.li are real scumbags.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.1

    iQA/AwUBRjdwQWeRMROiAx2REQLzpgCg/wzsgEj52Y7H+rvfLnKiI3dmvoIAn0QV
    pr4qaaYwYHP/4Num5qKgjllz
    =2UXA
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  18. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Tue, 01 May 2007 01:34:44 +0200, nospam
    wrote:


    >Please go get off on dead bodies and women getting raped pervert. I
    >wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire. I really hope you have no
    >kids or any kids around you.


    Who would post this trolling off topic garbage?

    Let's take a look at the headers:

    Organization: Privacy.li- Anonymous news through SSH2-Tunnels,
    www.privacy.li
    X-Complaints-To: admin01@privacy.li

    How interesting.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.1

    iQA/AwUBRjdw9meRMROiAx2REQJp1wCcDQ7FEH90CRdeH3xcH3UJWG 2pBhMAn2f7
    ApGtZob3LRoVghxSRhKruz0V
    =g6vv
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  19. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    Sniper .308 wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:11:47 +0200, nospam
    > wrote:
    >
    > Here is an interesting line in "nospam" headers:
    >
    > Organization: Privacy.li- Anonymous news through SSH2-Tunnels,
    > www.privacy.li


    Old news. We already know through headers, spelling and grammar errors
    and attempts to correct them *snicker*, and flat out screwing up and
    replying to messages as the wrong sock puppet *laugh*, that all the
    bull**** posted to these groups is one lowlife bottom feeder juggling
    as many personas as possible, but not very well. *chuckle*.

    >
    > It appears not only the smear campaign continues, but the people at
    > Privacy.li are real scumbags.


    All you have to do is visit their web site to know that. They've poured
    all their hatred and paranoia into the very first page you see, and it
    goes down hill from there. They data mine you for third parties, use
    the same tricks spammers and phishers use to try and get you to reveal
    your personal information, send you web bugs and all sorts of other
    goodies to try and track your browsing habits, and plain old lie to you
    just to eek out some crumb of information about who you are.

    That's all BEFORE you even start the process of subscribing to or
    buying any of their snake oil services.

    The trolls keep telling us that Privacy.LIE has been around for a long
    time and has a good reputation. Fact is neither one of those things is
    true. Their reputation is dog ****. Everyone from moderately
    knowledgeable people in these groups to experts like Bruce Schneier has
    spanked them raw, and all they could ever do about it is whine
    and spit because all of it's true.

    Their alleged longevity is a total sham too. The business has either
    been sold, to forcibly or taken over by (depending on what day it is
    and which story sounds better), some alleged anonymous new owner slash
    former employee who doesn't have the guts to do business out in the
    open for some strange reason. IOW, Georg Adem proved to be such a slime
    ball this figurehead "Adminus" took over. Of course they have the exact
    same literary skills, run the exact same scams, and parrot the exact
    same delusional conspira-loon garbage.

    And lets not forget that within the last year or so they were forced to
    relocate their operation (they have nothing at ALL to do with
    Liechtenstein) because the dope smuggling scam site hosted on their
    very same machines was raided/busted. Of course they had nothing at all
    to do with any of that. Much like they have nothing at all
    to do with the well known scam banks they openly promote. again>

    Privacy.LIE is pure net filth. They provide no beneficial services what
    so ever, and scam people into handing over their money for the
    privilege of getting nothing in return. The only reason someone hasn't
    kicked their doors in and placed them in handcuffs permanently is
    because even among privacy services (a tiny subsection of the net)
    they're small potatoes. Nobody really cares about them aside from the
    few people who they do manage to steal money from, and most of those
    are too embarrassed to come forward either because they don't want to
    look like fools, or they were going to try and do something disgusting
    such as trade kiddie porn, just like their #1 user/moderator/advocate
    "traveler 66" AKA "Eggplant".

    Web search that skanky ****er's on line history and you get a real good
    picture of what sort of "satisfied customer" they cater to. It's
    revolting.


  20. Re: Scamster site, privacy.li (update)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    On 1 May 2007, Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
    wrote:

    >Web search that skanky ****er's on line history and you get a real good
    >picture of what sort of "satisfied customer" they cater to. It's
    >revolting.


    Oh, you're just being mean.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: N/A

    iQA/AwUBRjeZIQ6cfiGatg8+EQIHxwCeJKeJaXdxRl8fY98w5i7i/r/QwDcAn0+A
    SWJfBkVGPmsixsj5jRCfaWe6
    =1q/X
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast