Sun, 25 Sep 2016 16:47:12 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 11:14:00 -0500, Unquestionably Confused
wrote:

On 9/25/2016 10:34 AM, Taxed and Spent wrote:
It says you should change your password if you have not done so
since 2014. How can I tell when my password was last changed?
I don't keep a record of that.

How difficult is it change passwords? I routinely change mine
every six months or so. Just change it and move on.

The problem might be, if you do not know your password (it is
stored on the PC) you can't change it.

Is it stored in an encrypted password manager program or the web
browser for auto login purposes? If the latter, nirsoft utils are
your friend. If the former, you'd have to login to your password
manager to recover the current password so you can change it to
something else...

Oh, one more thing, stop having your web browser store
login/passwords for you, if that's something you do.

As you'll learn by using the utils I mentioned, it's obviously, NOT
secure. Anyone who has access to your computer with a brain (read:
knows how to pull up the passwords using Nirsoft or a variety of
other tools) can recover them, with ease.


--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

"Mayayana"
Sun, 25 Sep 2016 18:24:29 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:


You can *seem* to make more obscure passwords
by adding *, !, etc. And you could add those to the 4
words. The author of the articles linked also uses
spaces between words.

The author doesn't seem to understand/grasp the different ways one
can accomplish cracking passwords, OR, you misunderstood what they
wrote. I didn't check your url, so can't confirm.

You could also capitalize some characters. But as long as the
password cracker assumes those characters are possibilities it
will test for them, so they're no more unique than "a".
Menawhile, you have a 20-character password that you can remember.

No example you've provided so far is any threat to brute force. You
aren't even trying. lol. If the site will let me keep trying until I
get it right, I need nothing more than a quick and dirty character
generator that continues to increase the amount of characters until I
get it. Yes, it's that simple. Yes, I can write one to generate ALL
possible 20 character combinations you can possibly think of, in
say.. 10-15 minutes. Likely, less. Honestly. The time required to go
and test them will depend on how quickly I can issue the new password
to be tested to the host/program asking for it. And, that's about the
only real limit there is with your examples.

IE: your advice isn't sound and should be ignored because it's only
useful for SIMPLE dictionary based attacks that rely on common words.
A modified dictionary attack that can link various words and maintain
upper/lower case caps, etc, won't be fooled by your suggestions,
either.

The only possible defense your advise offers against either of the
aforementioned algorithms is a limit by the host/program that's
asking for the password. If it will let me try until I get it, you're
****ed two ways from sunday. Especially with the samples you've
provided so far.

Stick to what you actually seem to know about.. ok? leave the hacking
stuff for those of us who've been there and done it.

--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

"AL" wrote

| When I log into Yahoo from a strange (unknown to Yahoo) computer, Yahoo
| verifies it's me by texting me a code on my cell phone. When I enter
| that code on the strange machine it becomes a known machine and from
| that point on there is no more Two-step verification necessary to access
| my account on *that particular computer*.
|

That's a clever idea. I had no idea that webmail
companies were now tagging devices. I guess that
makes sense, since many people are now checking
their email mainly from a phone, rather than from
constantly changing desktops in hotels and
workplaces.

"Diesel" wrote

| The author doesn't seem to understand/grasp the different ways one
| can accomplish cracking passwords, OR, you misunderstood what they
| wrote. I didn't check your url, so can't confirm.
|

Maybe it would make sense to read it before
commenting on it? What is it about passwords
that suddenly turns people into world-class experts?

| No example you've provided so far is any threat to brute force. You
| aren't even trying. lol. If the site will let me keep trying until I
| get it right, I need nothing more than a quick and dirty character
| generator that continues to increase the amount of characters until I
| get it. Yes, it's that simple. Yes, I can write one to generate ALL
| possible 20 character combinations you can possibly think of, in
| say.. 10-15 minutes.

Then no password is of any value unless the
testing entity introduces a pause between
entries. Then again, there is at least a brief
pause across a network. Hmm.

| Likely, less. Honestly.

I have no doubt that you most heartily agree
with everything you say. By my calculations,
figuring about 80 possible characters (a-z,
A-Z, 0-9, !@#, etc) you'll need to test each
character in each position, against all other
possibilities. There would be 10 pentillion possible
combinations if it were only numbers. Given the
character options it would be more.... I guess
something like 80 pentillion times 80, 20 times?
It's a base-80 number with 20 places. Darned
big, I'd say, in any case. Even for a CPU doing
3 billion operations per second it seems it would
take a very long time to just walk those numbers.


The time required to go
and test them will depend on how quickly I can issue the new password
to be tested to the host/program asking for it. And, that's about the
only real limit there is with your examples.


Obviously. That's why it's a password. Each check
takes time, even if it's only a little time. Simply
making computer code walk through a series of
numbers has no relevance to actually testing
passwords.

That seems to be the main point of the article.
(The one I linked to, which you're too smart
to read.) A long password you can remember,
that avoids predictable patterns, is stronger and
also more practical than a shorter, seemingly
arcane series of punctuation marks.

On 9/26/2016 8:14 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"AL" wrote

| When I log into Yahoo from a strange (unknown to Yahoo) computer, Yahoo
| verifies it's me by texting me a code on my cell phone. When I enter
| that code on the strange machine it becomes a known machine and from
| that point on there is no more Two-step verification necessary to access
| my account on *that particular computer*.
|

That's a clever idea. I had no idea that webmail
companies were now tagging devices. I guess that
makes sense, since many people are now checking
their email mainly from a phone, rather than from
constantly changing desktops in hotels and
workplaces.

Actually, it's not the devices they are "tagging", it's the IP address
which you are using. If I log in from either home or office where I
have static IP addresses, I don't get the verification. If I log in
from any other location, a pass code is sent to my smart phone and I
have to enter it on the computer before my regular log in credentials
are accepted.

Some systems look for a specific IP address while other will allow for a
certain range (in the case of a dynamic IP address assignment by your
provider).

Unquestionably Confused writes:
On 9/26/2016 8:14 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"AL" wrote

| When I log into Yahoo from a strange (unknown to Yahoo) computer, Yahoo
| verifies it's me by texting me a code on my cell phone. When I enter
| that code on the strange machine it becomes a known machine and from
| that point on there is no more Two-step verification necessary to access
| my account on *that particular computer*.
|

That's a clever idea. I had no idea that webmail
companies were now tagging devices. I guess that
makes sense, since many people are now checking
their email mainly from a phone, rather than from
constantly changing desktops in hotels and
workplaces.

Actually, it's not the devices they are "tagging", it's the IP address
which you are using.

It's not solely the IP address. They also use the User-Agent
string provided by the browser, and other fingerprinting techniques
to identify the connection as uniquely as possible. There are fields
in the TCP packet whose usage can identify the operating system,
for example.

"Unquestionably Confused" wrote

| Actually, it's not the devices they are "tagging", it's the IP address
| which you are using. If I log in from either home or office where I
| have static IP addresses, I don't get the verification. If I log in
| from any other location, a pass code is sent to my smart phone and I
| have to enter it on the computer before my regular log in credentials
| are accepted.
|

This makes me feel old. I don't use webmail
to begin with. My cellphone, such as it is, is
a Tracphone that I turn on occasionally when
I need a phone booth. The system you're
describing seems like a great idea, but it also
assumes that you own and constantly use
a computer phone. But of course, these days
most people fit that profile.

On 9/26/2016 9:21 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Unquestionably Confused" wrote

| Actually, it's not the devices they are "tagging", it's the IP
address | which you are using. If I log in from either home or
office where I | have static IP addresses, I don't get the
verification. If I log in | from any other location, a pass code is
sent to my smart phone and I | have to enter it on the computer
before my regular log in credentials | are accepted. |

This makes me feel old. I don't use webmail to begin with. My
cellphone, such as it is, is a Tracphone that I turn on occasionally
when I need a phone booth. The system you're describing seems like a
great idea, but it also assumes that you own and constantly use a
computer phone. But of course, these days most people fit that
profile.


Most such verification systems are set up to use either a text message
or email, so no worries. Some, like several of the financial
institutions I deal with will also confirm by voice to a designated
phone number.

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:16:57 +0100, "James Wilkinson"
wrote:

Hmmmmm, I dont use email for ANY of the things you mentioned. Then again
I dont do online banking, or use my *REAL* credit cards online. (I get
those disposible pre-paid cards for online shopping). For the cost of a
few postage stamps, I'd rather send a check to pay my bills, rather than
risk online identity theft. And I can also use my phone to pay some
bills, for example, I can use a thing where I phone one of my utilities
and they will accept payment from my checking account without an actual
paper check, and no credit card required.

You worry too much.

I dont worry much at all. I'm cautious, and being cutious, eliminates
worry.

I only use email to chit-chat with friends and relatives, and
occasionally contact a business to ask a question about their products.
So if someone wants to hack into my email, I hope they enjoy reading
about my latest home or car repairs, my findings at rummage sales, my
pets, and my bitching about the weather.

If you use real email instead of an online version, you don't get hacked.

Yea, good advice 'IF' "real email" exists. Where I live, on a farm,
there is only one local option for internet service. That's dialup. It
involves having a landline phone, and the internet is included with the
phone bill, whether I use it or not. It's no longer a separate cost for
the internet. However, this dialup service only allows one to connect to
the net. There is no email account, and no help provided if a person
cant connect. Since I REQUIRE a landline phone (my cellphone does not
work at my home - NO or very poor SIGNAL).

To get high speed internet, I would have to get a service like DISH.
Their cost would be a minimum of $120 per month. NO THANKS!
I dont want the TV part of it, but it's a package.

So, there is no "real email" available. I'm stuck with yahoo, gmail, or
other free email. Yea, I'm sure I could pay for some sort of email
provider, but why bother. Like I said, if hackers want to read my email,
let em. They'll get bored and leave quickly.

It costs me about $3 a month for postage stamps and the cost of blank
checks, to pay my bills. So, why would I want to pay a lot more than
that, to buy a more secure email provider..... Not to mention that
paying online (on dialup), takes 5 times as long as it does to fill out
a check and stuff it in my mailbox.

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:02:45 +0100, wrote:

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:16:57 +0100, "James Wilkinson"
wrote:

Hmmmmm, I dont use email for ANY of the things you mentioned. Then again
I dont do online banking, or use my *REAL* credit cards online. (I get
those disposible pre-paid cards for online shopping). For the cost of a
few postage stamps, I'd rather send a check to pay my bills, rather than
risk online identity theft. And I can also use my phone to pay some
bills, for example, I can use a thing where I phone one of my utilities
and they will accept payment from my checking account without an actual
paper check, and no credit card required.

You worry too much.

I dont worry much at all. I'm cautious, and being cutious, eliminates
worry.

Idiot. You're cautious because you worry. I just don't worry.

I only use email to chit-chat with friends and relatives, and
occasionally contact a business to ask a question about their products.
So if someone wants to hack into my email, I hope they enjoy reading
about my latest home or car repairs, my findings at rummage sales, my
pets, and my bitching about the weather.

If you use real email instead of an online version, you don't get hacked.

Yea, good advice 'IF' "real email" exists. Where I live, on a farm,
there is only one local option for internet service. That's dialup. It
involves having a landline phone, and the internet is included with the
phone bill, whether I use it or not. It's no longer a separate cost for
the internet. However, this dialup service only allows one to connect to
the net. There is no email account, and no help provided if a person
cant connect. Since I REQUIRE a landline phone (my cellphone does not
work at my home - NO or very poor SIGNAL).

To get high speed internet, I would have to get a service like DISH.
Their cost would be a minimum of $120 per month. NO THANKS!
I dont want the TV part of it, but it's a package.

So, there is no "real email" available. I'm stuck with yahoo, gmail, or
other free email. Yea, I'm sure I could pay for some sort of email
provider, but why bother. Like I said, if hackers want to read my email,
let em. They'll get bored and leave quickly.

It costs me about $3 a month for postage stamps and the cost of blank
checks, to pay my bills. So, why would I want to pay a lot more than
that, to buy a more secure email provider..... Not to mention that
paying online (on dialup), takes 5 times as long as it does to fill out
a check and stuff it in my mailbox.

Email is nothing to do with your internet connection speed, it's how you set it up. I download my emails properly to my own computer.

--
Just remember...if the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off.

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:22:48 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:
"Unquestionably Confused" wrote

| Actually, it's not the devices they are "tagging", it's the IP address
| which you are using. If I log in from either home or office where I
| have static IP addresses, I don't get the verification. If I log in
| from any other location, a pass code is sent to my smart phone and I
| have to enter it on the computer before my regular log in credentials
| are accepted.
|

This makes me feel old. I don't use webmail
to begin with. My cellphone, such as it is, is
a Tracphone that I turn on occasionally when
I need a phone booth. The system you're
describing seems like a great idea, but it also
assumes that you own and constantly use
a computer phone. But of course, these days
most people fit that profile.

There's no need for a "computer phone" just a phone that can receive phone calls or texts.

When I try to log into my bank from a "strange computer" it offers me
3 options:

Call me at xxx-xxx-dddd (the d's are the last 4 digits of my cell phone)
Text me at xxx-xxx-dddd
Email me at

Within seconds I get a 6 digit code via the method I chose.

Obviously you have to register the phone number and/or email address
with them.

On 9/26/2016 9:02 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:16:57 +0100, "James Wilkinson"

If you use real email instead of an online version, you don't get hacked.

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

So, there is no "real email" available. I'm stuck with yahoo, gmail, or
other free email.

Gmail offers POP service. And POP would work just fine with that old
version of the Agent newsreader you're using.

BTW Gmail also offers IMAP service and that's what I use with my Android
phone's email app (K-9).

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:39:06 +0100, AL wrote:

On 9/26/2016 9:02 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:16:57 +0100, "James Wilkinson"

If you use real email instead of an online version, you don't get hacked.

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3, stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

So, there is no "real email" available. I'm stuck with yahoo, gmail, or
other free email.

Gmail offers POP service. And POP would work just fine with that old
version of the Agent newsreader you're using.

BTW Gmail also offers IMAP service and that's what I use with my Android
phone's email app (K-9).




--
G.A.Y. - Got Aids Yet?

Mayayana has brought this to us :
"Diesel" wrote

The author doesn't seem to understand/grasp the different ways one
can accomplish cracking passwords, OR, you misunderstood what they
wrote. I didn't check your url, so can't confirm.


Maybe it would make sense to read it before
commenting on it? What is it about passwords
that suddenly turns people into world-class experts?

Maybe because passwords are such simple things.

[...]

I have no doubt that you most heartily agree
with everything you say. By my calculations,
figuring about 80 possible characters (a-z,
A-Z, 0-9, !@#, etc) you'll need to test each
character in each position, against all other
possibilities. There would be 10 pentillion possible
combinations if it were only numbers. Given the
character options it would be more.... I guess
something like 80 pentillion times 80, 20 times?
It's a base-80 number with 20 places. Darned
big, I'd say, in any case. Even for a CPU doing
3 billion operations per second it seems it would
take a very long time to just walk those numbers.

It isn't actually necessary to submit the same password that you
created, but that is a minor 'aside' point and you have already
indicated to me that you don't like those. To you it might just be
'picking a nit'.

The time required to go
and test them will depend on how quickly I can issue the new password
to be tested to the host/program asking for it. And, that's about the
only real limit there is with your examples.

I don't know why he even went there. Maybe I missed something about how
far the topic has drifted since the initial drift from the OP's actual
question. This 'keep knocking on the front door until it opens' method
can lead to trouble.

I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. It doesn't
matter at all how much time it takes for the server's algorithm to
check that you sent the right password, or to enforce a lockout timeout
after so many tries. The 'password strength' or perhaps more to the
point, the computational complexity of brute forcing it (length and
symbol range) or modified dictionary attacking it by commonly used
password list(Fluffy, Fido, GOD, etc) only helps to avoid the password
you use from appearing in the hash-to-password table the attacker is
using.

If your password is weak, the 'two step verification' idea works for
better Yahoo security, but you better not have used the same password
for another weaker site because it and your email or username on Yahoo
are now possibly known to the attacker(s).

On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you click
on the right (wrong?) link. You could be hacked by a man in the middle
attack. You could get your account stolen or read by social engineering.
You could get your account read or stolen by a password hack. And my
guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 4:04:17 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you click
on the right (wrong?) link. You could be hacked by a man in the middle
attack. You could get your account stolen or read by social engineering.
You could get your account read or stolen by a password hack. And my
guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

Al,

Do yourself a favor and don't try to have an intelligent conversation
with JW. In fact, don't try to have *any* conversation with JW.

It's a waste of time and energy.

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:04:07 +0100, AL wrote:

On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

The protocol is irrelevant, it's where the mail is stored.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you click
on the right (wrong?) link.

You must have a really stupid browser if it allows a server to access your email data.

You could be hacked by a man in the middle
attack.

Doesn't happen. Email hacks happen to things like Yahoo where millions of people store their emails in one place, and where anyone can access it freely if they have the password. Nobody can get the emails off your computer, even with your password.

You could get your account stolen or read by social engineering.
You could get your account read or stolen by a password hack. And my
guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

That only allows them to read any emails you've not yet downloaded.

--
A recent study found that the average Aussie walks about 900 miles a year.
Another study found that Aussies drink, on average, 22 gallons of alcohol a year.
That means that, on average, Aussies get about 41 miles to the gallon!

"AL" wrote

|
| Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you click
| on the right (wrong?) link.

That's true, but "real" email is different. First,
it's not free, so there's some expectation of
service. It's also stored on your computer and
using POP3 exclusively with real email means
your email on the server is deleted when you
download it. Yes, your computer can
be hacked. But freebie online services present
other risks. This issue is a good example.

There's also the issue of not really owning
your email. Court cases have defined your email
as owned by the service. (They don't subpoena
you for your email. They subpoena Yahoo, Google,
Hotmail, or whatever.) You also sacrifice privacy
in that most freebie webmail providers claim the
right to read your email for the purpose of targetted
ads. Freebie webmail is not your email, any more
than freebie Facebook pages are yours to customize
as you like.

As the geeks like to say, if you're not paying
for the service then you're the product.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 4:04:17 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you
click on the right (wrong?) link. You could be hacked by a man in
the middle attack. You could get your account stolen or read by
social engineering. You could get your account read or stolen by a
password hack. And my guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

Al,

Do yourself a favor and don't try to have an intelligent conversation
with JW. In fact, don't try to have *any* conversation with JW.

It's a waste of time and energy.

I'm pleased to see your post. Wilkinson is a very well known unemployed
troll. His name is Peter Hucker and it exists in a ****ty little one
bedroomed bungalow with NO hot running water!
He has numerous socks.
Oh, lets have a giggle with his quotes.
The nights are drawing in PHucker. Dark days are coming your way. I hold a
grudge.

__________________________________________________ ___

"I have driven a Ford Sierra 1.6 at 90mph on single track roads
with passing places in the NW of Scotland. ****ing great fun"!

"Vauxhalls and Fords are mass produced. VWs are engineered".

"I am proud of being nicked 10 times, and even prouder of talking my way out
of twice that number of offences".
"Make that 12. 9 speeding offences, 2 seatbelts, and 1 unroadworthy
vehicle".

On rape:
"What is wrong is raping someone. It doesn't matter if they are an adult
or a child".
"The problem there is our prudishness. People ought to have sex with
everyone all the time".

On Jimmy Savile:
"If he had done it against their will, they would have come forwards
earlier. The fact that they didn't suggests either he did nothing at all,
or the children liked it".

"Journalists are not human".

"I don't give a **** about the law".
"**** the law".
"It's only illegal is you get caught".
"Something being illegal does not matter".
"The law is irrelevant".

"I am honest".
"Theft is illegal".
"When I was 11 I stole candles from a church".

"I have never found out the purpose of underpants".

"Women are inferior".
"Crying is unnecessary and pathetic. So is screaming. Why do women scream
when they're frightened? Perhaps they realise they're inferior and are
calling for the nearest man"?

"I believe that UFOs have visited us but not in recent times".
"I don't believe in UFOs".
"When someone says "UFO", they do not mean 4000 years ago. Then they would
just be "FO" as they hadn't invented flying yet".

"My IQ is superiour to that of most people".
"I am inferior in some ways but superior in other ways".
"I admit I should not have been born".
"Jobs are for sheeple".

"Some men are hot".

"I can sleep outside in a temperature of -20C wearing only shorts".

"I once took a dump behind some bushes and slid down a hill to wipe my
arse".

"I do not post waffling bull**** or childish insults".
"He is indeed very stupid, and easy to make fun of".

"I am currently eating a sandwich made with bread that has been in my fridge
THREE WEEKS past the sell by date. It is not dry, it is not mouldy, it is
identical to the day I bought it".

"And there's nothing wrong with jumping red lights if you don't cause an
accident"

"I don't want to drive at the speed limit. It's absurdly slow and in fact I
find it more dangerous. It's so tedious I'm in danger of falling asleep.
"Whoever made up the limits must have a really slow brain".
"I think it's stupid to follow a law which is baseless. The law on red
lights is to stop you hitting someone. If there is nobody there, you
cannot hit them".

"If the guy behind me has his lights on too bright. I let him past then
tailgate him with my full beam on until he switches his off".

"I like driving fast and scaring people".

"People who don't know how to shave don't know how to behave."

On mental health:
"Being sectioned just means you are different from others, it doesn't mean
you are wrong".

"If I wanted you to stab me with a knife and kill me, you should not get
into trouble for it".
"I would kill my sister if I thought I'd get away with it".
"I'm not what most people think of as human".

"I have an IQ of 140".
"I am seldom wrong".
"There is no reason the data stored in our heads cannot be transferred".

"I will not accept money from my neighbours for doing them a favour"
"My neighbour just paid me £40 to brush moss off the roof of her porch
extension. It took me 10 minutes."

"Pain is not harmful. The victim may well want rid of it, but it's no
reason for anyone to rush there".

"Dogs are supposed to live in packs of other dogs, running wild. Not sat in
a house all day".

"We should be allowed to do as we wish within reason. For example":
"Smoke weed in a public place, drive as fast as we like, and do both of
those stark naked. Oh and **** in public".

"Careful drivers tend to get in my way".

"I can only predict two minutes into the future".



Sociopath.
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
"As I've told you before, that's quite normal. It's just not prim and
proper like you, you silly snob".

_________________________
As for the pillock known as Bod.
He lives in a caravan on a caravan site, he is mostly doped up and has been
for well over 30 years. Trailer Park Trash.
He tried to buy his council house for sweet **** all, he failed as he is a
lazy **** all. This **** charged me money for sleeping on the floor of his
******** house!
A failed plumber, I won't mention his brats.

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 23:35:06 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 4:04:17 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you
click on the right (wrong?) link. You could be hacked by a man in
the middle attack. You could get your account stolen or read by
social engineering. You could get your account read or stolen by a
password hack. And my guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

Al,

Do yourself a favor and don't try to have an intelligent conversation
with JW. In fact, don't try to have *any* conversation with JW.

It's a waste of time and energy.

I'm pleased to see your post. Wilkinson is a very well known unemployed
troll. His name is Peter Hucker and it exists in a ****ty little one
bedroomed bungalow with NO hot running water!
He has numerous socks.
Oh, lets have a giggle with his quotes.
The nights are drawing in PHucker. Dark days are coming your way. I hold a
grudge.

__________________________________________________ ___

"I have driven a Ford Sierra 1.6 at 90mph on single track roads
with passing places in the NW of Scotland. ****ing great fun"!

"Vauxhalls and Fords are mass produced. VWs are engineered".

"I am proud of being nicked 10 times, and even prouder of talking my way out
of twice that number of offences".
"Make that 12. 9 speeding offences, 2 seatbelts, and 1 unroadworthy
vehicle".

On rape:
"What is wrong is raping someone. It doesn't matter if they are an adult
or a child".
"The problem there is our prudishness. People ought to have sex with
everyone all the time".

On Jimmy Savile:
"If he had done it against their will, they would have come forwards
earlier. The fact that they didn't suggests either he did nothing at all,
or the children liked it".

"Journalists are not human".

"I don't give a **** about the law".
"**** the law".
"It's only illegal is you get caught".
"Something being illegal does not matter".
"The law is irrelevant".

"I am honest".
"Theft is illegal".
"When I was 11 I stole candles from a church".

"I have never found out the purpose of underpants".

"Women are inferior".
"Crying is unnecessary and pathetic. So is screaming. Why do women scream
when they're frightened? Perhaps they realise they're inferior and are
calling for the nearest man"?

"I believe that UFOs have visited us but not in recent times".
"I don't believe in UFOs".
"When someone says "UFO", they do not mean 4000 years ago. Then they would
just be "FO" as they hadn't invented flying yet".

"My IQ is superiour to that of most people".
"I am inferior in some ways but superior in other ways".
"I admit I should not have been born".
"Jobs are for sheeple".

"Some men are hot".

"I can sleep outside in a temperature of -20C wearing only shorts".

"I once took a dump behind some bushes and slid down a hill to wipe my
arse".

"I do not post waffling bull**** or childish insults".
"He is indeed very stupid, and easy to make fun of".

"I am currently eating a sandwich made with bread that has been in my fridge
THREE WEEKS past the sell by date. It is not dry, it is not mouldy, it is
identical to the day I bought it".

"And there's nothing wrong with jumping red lights if you don't cause an
accident"

"I don't want to drive at the speed limit. It's absurdly slow and in fact I
find it more dangerous. It's so tedious I'm in danger of falling asleep.
"Whoever made up the limits must have a really slow brain".
"I think it's stupid to follow a law which is baseless. The law on red
lights is to stop you hitting someone. If there is nobody there, you
cannot hit them".

"If the guy behind me has his lights on too bright. I let him past then
tailgate him with my full beam on until he switches his off".

"I like driving fast and scaring people".

"People who don't know how to shave don't know how to behave."

On mental health:
"Being sectioned just means you are different from others, it doesn't mean
you are wrong".

"If I wanted you to stab me with a knife and kill me, you should not get
into trouble for it".
"I would kill my sister if I thought I'd get away with it".
"I'm not what most people think of as human".

"I have an IQ of 140".
"I am seldom wrong".
"There is no reason the data stored in our heads cannot be transferred".

"I will not accept money from my neighbours for doing them a favour"
"My neighbour just paid me £40 to brush moss off the roof of her porch
extension. It took me 10 minutes."

"Pain is not harmful. The victim may well want rid of it, but it's no
reason for anyone to rush there".

"Dogs are supposed to live in packs of other dogs, running wild. Not sat in
a house all day".

"We should be allowed to do as we wish within reason. For example":
"Smoke weed in a public place, drive as fast as we like, and do both of
those stark naked. Oh and **** in public".

"Careful drivers tend to get in my way".

"I can only predict two minutes into the future".



Sociopath.
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
"As I've told you before, that's quite normal. It's just not prim and
proper like you, you silly snob".

_________________________
As for the pillock known as Bod.
He lives in a caravan on a caravan site, he is mostly doped up and has been
for well over 30 years. Trailer Park Trash.
He tried to buy his council house for sweet **** all, he failed as he is a
lazy **** all. This **** charged me money for sleeping on the floor of his
******** house!
A failed plumber, I won't mention his brats.

**** off you screwed up psychopath stalker.

--
Confucius say man with hole in pocket feel cocky all day.

On 9/26/2016 2:03 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"AL" wrote

| | Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you
click | on the right (wrong?) link.

That's true, but "real" email is different. First, it's not free, so
there's some expectation of service.

What service do you get that I don't get from free Gmail?

It's also stored on your computer and using POP3 exclusively with
real email means your email on the server is deleted when you
download it.

Your email is stored on your providers server while it's waiting
(hours?) for you to download it. Could be hacked then. Also your email
goes through many servers during the trip to its destination. Could be
hacked then.

Yes, your computer can be hacked. But freebie online services
present other risks. This issue is a good example.

I find server email storage a benefit. My saved emails can be accessed
from any of my devices (phone, tablets, PCs, etc). Any change (reading,
deleting, drafts, etc) I make on one is reflected to all.

There's also the issue of not really owning your email. Court cases
have defined your email as owned by the service. (They don't
subpoena you for your email. They subpoena Yahoo, Google, Hotmail, or
whatever.)

A warrant can also be served at your house. And they will take your
computer and all those locally stored emails.

You also sacrifice privacy in that most freebie webmail providers
claim the right to read your email for the purpose of targetted ads.

Google *computers* do read my email for ad placement. Just like your
ISP's computer (server) reads your email for processing. A computer
reading my email doesn't bother me much...as long as there
are no humans looking over its shoulder.

Freebie webmail is not your email, any more than freebie Facebook
pages are yours to customize as you like.

If you send me an email then it's owned by Google?? 8-O

As the geeks like to say, if you're not paying for the service then
you're the product.

That's true. But it doesn't make the service bad. Do you use encryption?
Might help with the hackers. Google provides it for free...

"AL" wrote

| That's true, but "real" email is different. First, it's not free, so
| there's some expectation of service.
|
| What service do you get that I don't get from free Gmail?
|

If I have a problem I can contact a person. I'm
paying for service. They provide email, they don't
show me ads, and they don't claim the right to
read my email or store my email for their own purposes.
Their POP3 service is exactly that. POP3 should not
leave email on the server, but Google considers
your email to be as much their property as yours.
They keep copies. It was revealed years ago that
if you delete your email from GMail it only deletes
your access to it. In other words, it's the diference
between me getting a product I pay for and you
getting whatever Google thinks will keep you around
while providing them the most profit.

| It's also stored on your computer and using POP3 exclusively with
| real email means your email on the server is deleted when you
| download it.
|
| Your email is stored on your providers server while it's waiting
| (hours?) for you to download it. Could be hacked then. Also your email
| goes through many servers during the trip to its destination. Could be
| hacked then.
|
Yes. Everything's hackable. That wasn't the point.
The point is that my email is mine and I can delete
it from the server. You can't. (See above.)

| Yes, your computer can be hacked. But freebie online services
| present other risks. This issue is a good example.
|
| I find server email storage a benefit. My saved emails can be accessed
| from any of my devices (phone, tablets, PCs, etc). Any change (reading,
| deleting, drafts, etc) I make on one is reflected to all.
|
That's one of the possible benefits of webmail.
It's also one of the risks. But freebie webmail
doesn't give you the choice.

| There's also the issue of not really owning your email. Court cases
| have defined your email as owned by the service. (They don't
| subpoena you for your email. They subpoena Yahoo, Google, Hotmail, or
| whatever.)
|
| A warrant can also be served at your house. And they will take your
| computer and all those locally stored emails.
|
Yes, of course. There are all sorts of situations
where you could be subject to law enforcement actions.
So what? You keep missing the point. *You don't
own your GMail. Google does.*

https://web.archive.org/web/20060509...3-6050295.html


| You also sacrifice privacy in that most freebie webmail providers
| claim the right to read your email for the purpose of targetted ads.
|
| Google *computers* do read my email for ad placement. Just like your
| ISP's computer (server) reads your email for processing. A computer
| reading my email doesn't bother me much...as long as there
| are no humans looking over its shoulder.
|

That's your choice. They claim the right to read it.
I don't see any reason to trust them. It's like coming
home to find a man in my house and he says, "Oh,
don't worry. I'm just a salesman. I only broke in to
see how you live so I can sell you stuff." Call me
crazy, but I just can't see trusting the word or integrity
of that man.

You've expressed that you like GMail and don't
have any problem with anything they do. Presumably
you think it's a good deal to trade your rights to
save the price of a cup of coffee. That's up to you.
You asked what was different between freebie webmail
and real email. I explained it. For some of us the
difference matters. Personally I have my domain
email auto-delete junk webmail and don't correspond
any more than necessary with friends and family who
use it. I haven't agreed to let Googlites or Yahooans
read and store my personal correspondence.

"Mayayana"
Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:49:33 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

"Diesel" wrote

| The author doesn't seem to understand/grasp the different ways
| one can accomplish cracking passwords, OR, you misunderstood what
| they wrote. I didn't check your url, so can't confirm.
|

Maybe it would make sense to read it before
commenting on it? What is it about passwords
that suddenly turns people into world-class experts?

passwords by themselves really aren't that complex to understand...


| No example you've provided so far is any threat to brute force.
| You aren't even trying. lol. If the site will let me keep trying
| until I get it right, I need nothing more than a quick and dirty
| character generator that continues to increase the amount of
| characters until I get it. Yes, it's that simple. Yes, I can
| write one to generate ALL possible 20 character combinations you
| can possibly think of, in say.. 10-15 minutes.

Then no password is of any value unless the
testing entity introduces a pause between
entries. Then again, there is at least a brief
pause across a network. Hmm.

You really are in way over your head with this...

I have no doubt that you most heartily agree
with everything you say.

ROFL. Actually, that's not what's going on here. I'm going by first
hand knowledge.

Obviously. That's why it's a password. Each check
takes time, even if it's only a little time. Simply
making computer code walk through a series of
numbers has no relevance to actually testing
passwords.

You're wrong.

That seems to be the main point of the article.
(The one I linked to, which you're too smart
to read.) A long password you can remember,
that avoids predictable patterns, is stronger and
also more practical than a shorter, seemingly
arcane series of punctuation marks.

Heh. the problem is with the passwords you suggested, actually.


--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 23:09:30 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:

If I have a problem I can contact a person. I'm
paying for service. They provide email, they don't
show me ads, and they don't claim the right to
read my email or store my email for their own purposes.
Their POP3 service is exactly that. POP3 should not
leave email on the server, but Google considers
your email to be as much their property as yours.
They keep copies. It was revealed years ago that
if you delete your email from GMail it only deletes
your access to it. In other words, it's the diference
between me getting a product I pay for and you
getting whatever Google thinks will keep you around
while providing them the most profit.

Larry Ellison said if you are not paying for the product, you are the
product.

On 9/26/2016 8:09 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"AL" wrote

| What service do you get that I don't get from free Gmail? |

If I have a problem I can contact a person. I'm paying for service.

Free Gmail has no live person to contact, that's true. But there is
ample online help. Do you have such problems with your service that you
need a live person?

Their POP3 service is exactly that. POP3 should not leave email on
the server,

Gmail's POP service leaves email on the server because it has to
synchronize with other devices that use protocols that need that email
on the server.

it's the diference between me getting a product I pay for and you
getting whatever Google thinks will keep you around while providing
them the most profit.

I stick with Gmail because I get good service. Such as having Two-step
verification for better security. Does your provider have it?

*You don't own your GMail. Google does.*

"You have control over your data. We provide you with tools to delete
and export your data so that you can take your data with you at any
time, use external services in conjunction with Google Apps, or stop
using our services altogether."

https://support.google.com/work/answer/6056650?hl=en

Personally I have my domain email auto-delete junk webmail and don't
correspond any more than necessary with friends and family who use
it. I haven't agreed to let Googlites or Yahooans read and store my
personal correspondence.

Oh my. A bit paranoid I see... 8-O

On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:39:06 -0700, AL wrote:


Gmail offers POP service. And POP would work just fine with that old
version of the Agent newsreader you're using.

I did not mention it, but I DO use POP service with Gmail. But I use
Thunderbird, not Agent for it. Doing email on the web is too slow on
dialup, but pop email with Tbird is pretty fast and easy unless someone
sends me a very large photo, and my friends know not to send large ones.

"Mayayana"
Tue, 27 Sep 2016 03:09:30 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Yes. Everything's hackable. That wasn't the point.
The point is that my email is mine and I can delete
it from the server. You can't. (See above.)

Uhh. No, contrary to some movies, not everything is 'hackable' in the
gaining unauthorized access in the digital world sense. You can
delete it from your server, but, depending on the server software
you're using, you might just be marking a spot on an index/table that
tells the software this is free space now and it can hold xxx bytes
worth of data, store something else there if it's within the range.
Until that happens, the 'contents' of your deleted email can most
likely, be recovered.

| Google *computers* do read my email for ad placement. Just like
| your ISP's computer (server) reads your email for processing. A
| computer reading my email doesn't bother me much...as long as
| there are no humans looking over its shoulder.
|

That's your choice. They claim the right to read it.
I don't see any reason to trust them. It's like coming
home to find a man in my house and he says, "Oh,
don't worry. I'm just a salesman. I only broke in to
see how you live so I can sell you stuff." Call me
crazy, but I just can't see trusting the word or integrity
of that man.

Encryption can prevent the snooping concerns you have. Google has
many a computer, but, I presently know of nothing that can 'crack'
properly implemented, PGP for example. If you do, feel free to share.

You've expressed that you like GMail and don't
have any problem with anything they do. Presumably
you think it's a good deal to trade your rights to
save the price of a cup of coffee. That's up to you.
You asked what was different between freebie webmail
and real email. I explained it. For some of us the
difference matters. Personally I have my domain
email auto-delete junk webmail and don't correspond
any more than necessary with friends and family who
use it. I haven't agreed to let Googlites or Yahooans
read and store my personal correspondence.

Hmm...So, you aren't running your own server? You're using a 3rd
party? if true, you only have their 'word' that nothing is snooping
on you. Blind trust, much?

--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

AL Tue,
27 Sep 2016 01:59:05 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Also your email goes through many servers during the trip to its
destination. Could be hacked then.

Er, No.. it doesn't. it's not like usenet. For example, I have an email
server package running on equipment sitting a few feet from where I am.
Any emails sent to it will be delivered right to it. Likewise, if I
want to send you something, my server is going to chat directly with
your email provider and drop it off in your mailbox. It doesn't work
like the post office, or, usenet for that matter. Due to the nature of
the protocols in use and the fact it has to 'ride the net', it's still
possible for man in the middle attacks of various kinds, but, we aren't
discussing that aspect.



--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

"AL" wrote

| *You don't own your GMail. Google does.*
|
| "You have control over your data. We provide you with tools to delete
| and export your data so that you can take your data with you at any
| time, use external services in conjunction with Google Apps, or stop
| using our services altogether."
|
| https://support.google.com/work/answer/6056650?hl=en
|

Yes. They lie. Apparently you didn't read the link
that you've removed from your response. (Nor did
you fully read my explanation about "deleting"
Google email.)
Google also lied about collecting wifi data from
houses with their streetview cars. Google is no longer
a brilliant search engine run by two cute kids. It's a
publicly traded advertising company, run by a man
who's publicly stated that if you think you need privacy
then maybe you're doing something you shouldn't
be doing. It's also, by far, the most widespread
spyware operation on the Internet, with ads, fonts,
analytics, or other Google links on nearly every
commercial website.

| Personally I have my domain email auto-delete junk webmail and don't
| correspond any more than necessary with friends and family who use
| it. I haven't agreed to let Googlites or Yahooans read and store my
| personal correspondence.
|
| Oh my. A bit paranoid I see...

It's not a matter of paranoia. It's a sense of
common decency. People using freebie webmail
have allowed commercial companies to own
their private correspondence, in exchange for
convenience, and/or because they don't understand
how to set up email on their computer and/or to
save a few cents. I consider that to be a bad
precedent socially. Commercial companies shouldn't
own the resources of the citizenry. Worse, the
webmail users' laziness means that I unwillingly share
my correspondence with the same companies.

You see paranoia because you don't understand
why anyone would value anything above
convenience. You don't think of yourself as a citizen.
You're a "consumer". Maybe you'd be happy to have
Alka Seltzer ads on your car if the company would
give you a coupon for a free cup of coffee? I find
that undignified, as well as being an inappropriate
commercialization of the public sphere. If you don't
understand that view then I'm not sure I could explain
it.

There's also a separate issue here that's worth
noting, which has nothing to do with the argument
over freebie webmail: Very popular services can
be more risky. Adobe Flash, Adobe Acrobat Reader
browser plugin, freebie webmail, Skype, Wordpress
websites.... Anything used by a large percentage of
people is an attractive target. Flash gets targetted
because it's buggy, but also because it's ubiquitous.
Wordpress sites get hacked because there are lots
of them and the bugs in Wordpress tools have been
many. So the payoff for hacking them can be big.
Yahoo email is a similar case. It's a very big target.
So it's a good idea to avoid the popular brand when
possible.

James Wilkinson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 23:35:06 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 4:04:17 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you
click on the right (wrong?) link. You could be hacked by a man in
the middle attack. You could get your account stolen or read by
social engineering. You could get your account read or stolen by a
password hack. And my guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

Al,

Do yourself a favor and don't try to have an intelligent
conversation with JW. In fact, don't try to have *any* conversation
with JW. It's a waste of time and energy.

I'm pleased to see your post. Wilkinson is a very well known
unemployed troll. His name is Peter Hucker and it exists in a ****ty
little one bedroomed bungalow with NO hot running water!
He has numerous socks.
Oh, lets have a giggle with his quotes.
The nights are drawing in PHucker. Dark days are coming your way. I
hold a grudge.

__________________________________________________ ___

"I have driven a Ford Sierra 1.6 at 90mph on single track roads
with passing places in the NW of Scotland. ****ing great fun"!

"Vauxhalls and Fords are mass produced. VWs are engineered".

"I am proud of being nicked 10 times, and even prouder of talking my
way out of twice that number of offences".
"Make that 12. 9 speeding offences, 2 seatbelts, and 1 unroadworthy
vehicle".

On rape:
"What is wrong is raping someone. It doesn't matter if they are an
adult or a child".
"The problem there is our prudishness. People ought to have sex with
everyone all the time".

On Jimmy Savile:
"If he had done it against their will, they would have come forwards
earlier. The fact that they didn't suggests either he did nothing
at all, or the children liked it".

"Journalists are not human".

"I don't give a **** about the law".
"**** the law".
"It's only illegal is you get caught".
"Something being illegal does not matter".
"The law is irrelevant".

"I am honest".
"Theft is illegal".
"When I was 11 I stole candles from a church".

"I have never found out the purpose of underpants".

"Women are inferior".
"Crying is unnecessary and pathetic. So is screaming. Why do women
scream when they're frightened? Perhaps they realise they're
inferior and are calling for the nearest man"?

"I believe that UFOs have visited us but not in recent times".
"I don't believe in UFOs".
"When someone says "UFO", they do not mean 4000 years ago. Then
they would just be "FO" as they hadn't invented flying yet".

"My IQ is superiour to that of most people".
"I am inferior in some ways but superior in other ways".
"I admit I should not have been born".
"Jobs are for sheeple".

"Some men are hot".

"I can sleep outside in a temperature of -20C wearing only shorts".

"I once took a dump behind some bushes and slid down a hill to wipe
my arse".

"I do not post waffling bull**** or childish insults".
"He is indeed very stupid, and easy to make fun of".

"I am currently eating a sandwich made with bread that has been in
my fridge THREE WEEKS past the sell by date. It is not dry, it is
not mouldy, it is identical to the day I bought it".

"And there's nothing wrong with jumping red lights if you don't
cause an accident"

"I don't want to drive at the speed limit. It's absurdly slow and
in fact I find it more dangerous. It's so tedious I'm in danger of
falling asleep. "Whoever made up the limits must have a really slow
brain". "I think it's stupid to follow a law which is baseless. The
law on red lights is to stop you hitting someone. If there is
nobody there, you cannot hit them".

"If the guy behind me has his lights on too bright. I let him past
then tailgate him with my full beam on until he switches his off".

"I like driving fast and scaring people".

"People who don't know how to shave don't know how to behave."

On mental health:
"Being sectioned just means you are different from others, it
doesn't mean you are wrong".

"If I wanted you to stab me with a knife and kill me, you should not
get into trouble for it".
"I would kill my sister if I thought I'd get away with it".
"I'm not what most people think of as human".

"I have an IQ of 140".
"I am seldom wrong".
"There is no reason the data stored in our heads cannot be
transferred". "I will not accept money from my neighbours for doing them
a favour"
"My neighbour just paid me £40 to brush moss off the roof of her
porch extension. It took me 10 minutes."

"Pain is not harmful. The victim may well want rid of it, but it's
no reason for anyone to rush there".

"Dogs are supposed to live in packs of other dogs, running wild. Not sat
in a house all day".

"We should be allowed to do as we wish within reason. For example":
"Smoke weed in a public place, drive as fast as we like, and do both
of those stark naked. Oh and **** in public".

"Careful drivers tend to get in my way".

"I can only predict two minutes into the future".



Sociopath.
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
"As I've told you before, that's quite normal. It's just not prim
and proper like you, you silly snob".

_________________________
As for the pillock known as Bod.
He lives in a caravan on a caravan site, he is mostly doped up and
has been for well over 30 years. Trailer Park Trash.
He tried to buy his council house for sweet **** all, he failed as
he is a lazy **** all. This **** charged me money for sleeping on
the floor of his ******** house!
A failed plumber, I won't mention his brats.

**** off you screwed up psychopath stalker.

Get off my back and I will leave you alone.

On 9/27/2016 2:26 AM, Diesel wrote:
AL Tue, 27
Sep 2016 01:59:05 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Also your email goes through many servers during the trip to its
destination. Could be hacked then.


Er, No..

Sender SMPT server DNS server Internet-*many servers* depending on
the route Domain MTA server User Account Recipient

http://www.howtogeek.com/56002/htg-e...es-email-work/

if I want to send you something, my server is going to chat directly
with your email provider and drop it off in your mailbox.

If we both had the same provider perhaps 'chat directly' might apply.
Otherwise it'll have to take the multi-server trip like everyone else.

It doesn't work like the post office, or, usenet for that matter. Due
to the nature of the protocols in use and

the fact it has to 'ride the net',

'ride the net' involves multi-servers.

it's still possible for man in the middle attacks of various kinds,
but, we aren't discussing that aspect.

A man in the middle attack (hack) is exactly what I mean. Anybody along
the way could hack his email. Gosh now he's gonna really be paranoid...

On 9/27/2016 6:32 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"AL" wrote

| Personally I have my domain email auto-delete junk webmail and don't
| correspond any more than necessary with friends and family who use
| it. I haven't agreed to let Googlites or Yahooans read and store my
| personal correspondence.
|
| Oh my. A bit paranoid I see...

It's not a matter of paranoia. It's a sense of
common decency.

I dunno. Telling family and friends not to email you because you're
scared of what the big bad Google might do to your computer sounds a bit
paranoid to me.

You're a "consumer".

I am that.

Maybe you'd be happy to have
Alka Seltzer ads on your car if the company would
give you a coupon for a free cup of coffee?

No. But I do like saving money and coupons help.

I find
that undignified, as well as being an inappropriate
commercialization of the public sphere.

I should hide my face while I save money?

Very popular services can
be more risky. Adobe Flash, Adobe Acrobat Reader
browser plugin, freebie webmail, Skype, Wordpress
websites.... Anything used by a large percentage of
people is an attractive target. Flash gets targetted
because it's buggy, but also because it's ubiquitous.
Wordpress sites get hacked because there are lots
of them and the bugs in Wordpress tools have been
many. So the payoff for hacking them can be big.
Yahoo email is a similar case. It's a very big target.
So it's a good idea to avoid the popular brand when
possible.

That's quite a list. No paranoia though, huh...

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 16:45:13 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

James Wilkinson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 23:35:06 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 4:04:17 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/26/2016 12:10 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:

What is "real" email?? Any email web or otherwise can be hacked.

POP3,

POP is no more "real" than any other protocol.

stored on your own computer, so you can make sure nobody gets in.

Your email could be hacked even from inside your computer if you
click on the right (wrong?) link. You could be hacked by a man in
the middle attack. You could get your account stolen or read by
social engineering. You could get your account read or stolen by a
password hack. And my guess is that you employ no encryption.

There's no extra safety in POP.

Al,

Do yourself a favor and don't try to have an intelligent
conversation with JW. In fact, don't try to have *any* conversation
with JW. It's a waste of time and energy.

I'm pleased to see your post. Wilkinson is a very well known
unemployed troll. His name is Peter Hucker and it exists in a ****ty
little one bedroomed bungalow with NO hot running water!
He has numerous socks.
Oh, lets have a giggle with his quotes.
The nights are drawing in PHucker. Dark days are coming your way. I
hold a grudge.

__________________________________________________ ___

"I have driven a Ford Sierra 1.6 at 90mph on single track roads
with passing places in the NW of Scotland. ****ing great fun"!

"Vauxhalls and Fords are mass produced. VWs are engineered".

"I am proud of being nicked 10 times, and even prouder of talking my
way out of twice that number of offences".
"Make that 12. 9 speeding offences, 2 seatbelts, and 1 unroadworthy
vehicle".

On rape:
"What is wrong is raping someone. It doesn't matter if they are an
adult or a child".
"The problem there is our prudishness. People ought to have sex with
everyone all the time".

On Jimmy Savile:
"If he had done it against their will, they would have come forwards
earlier. The fact that they didn't suggests either he did nothing
at all, or the children liked it".

"Journalists are not human".

"I don't give a **** about the law".
"**** the law".
"It's only illegal is you get caught".
"Something being illegal does not matter".
"The law is irrelevant".

"I am honest".
"Theft is illegal".
"When I was 11 I stole candles from a church".

"I have never found out the purpose of underpants".

"Women are inferior".
"Crying is unnecessary and pathetic. So is screaming. Why do women
scream when they're frightened? Perhaps they realise they're
inferior and are calling for the nearest man"?

"I believe that UFOs have visited us but not in recent times".
"I don't believe in UFOs".
"When someone says "UFO", they do not mean 4000 years ago. Then
they would just be "FO" as they hadn't invented flying yet".

"My IQ is superiour to that of most people".
"I am inferior in some ways but superior in other ways".
"I admit I should not have been born".
"Jobs are for sheeple".

"Some men are hot".

"I can sleep outside in a temperature of -20C wearing only shorts".

"I once took a dump behind some bushes and slid down a hill to wipe
my arse".

"I do not post waffling bull**** or childish insults".
"He is indeed very stupid, and easy to make fun of".

"I am currently eating a sandwich made with bread that has been in
my fridge THREE WEEKS past the sell by date. It is not dry, it is
not mouldy, it is identical to the day I bought it".

"And there's nothing wrong with jumping red lights if you don't
cause an accident"

"I don't want to drive at the speed limit. It's absurdly slow and
in fact I find it more dangerous. It's so tedious I'm in danger of
falling asleep. "Whoever made up the limits must have a really slow
brain". "I think it's stupid to follow a law which is baseless. The
law on red lights is to stop you hitting someone. If there is
nobody there, you cannot hit them".

"If the guy behind me has his lights on too bright. I let him past
then tailgate him with my full beam on until he switches his off".

"I like driving fast and scaring people".

"People who don't know how to shave don't know how to behave."

On mental health:
"Being sectioned just means you are different from others, it
doesn't mean you are wrong".

"If I wanted you to stab me with a knife and kill me, you should not
get into trouble for it".
"I would kill my sister if I thought I'd get away with it".
"I'm not what most people think of as human".

"I have an IQ of 140".
"I am seldom wrong".
"There is no reason the data stored in our heads cannot be
transferred". "I will not accept money from my neighbours for doing them
a favour"
"My neighbour just paid me £40 to brush moss off the roof of her
porch extension. It took me 10 minutes."

"Pain is not harmful. The victim may well want rid of it, but it's
no reason for anyone to rush there".

"Dogs are supposed to live in packs of other dogs, running wild. Not sat
in a house all day".

"We should be allowed to do as we wish within reason. For example":
"Smoke weed in a public place, drive as fast as we like, and do both
of those stark naked. Oh and **** in public".

"Careful drivers tend to get in my way".

"I can only predict two minutes into the future".



Sociopath.
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
"As I've told you before, that's quite normal. It's just not prim
and proper like you, you silly snob".

_________________________
As for the pillock known as Bod.
He lives in a caravan on a caravan site, he is mostly doped up and
has been for well over 30 years. Trailer Park Trash.
He tried to buy his council house for sweet **** all, he failed as
he is a lazy **** all. This **** charged me money for sleeping on
the floor of his ******** house!
A failed plumber, I won't mention his brats.

**** off you screwed up psychopath stalker.

Get off my back and I will leave you alone.

You started it.

--
"Oh, Jason, take me!" she panted, her breasts heaving like a student on 31p-a-pint night.

AL Tue,
27 Sep 2016 23:10:51 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Er, No..

Sender SMPT server DNS server Internet-*many servers*
depending on the route Domain MTA server User Account
Recipient

You seem to be confused on the roles they play. DNS server doesn't get
your email, doesn't forward your email to anyplace. Doesn't even know
you plan to send an email and could care less. And your email isn't
going to 'many servers' in route to the destination, either. MTA server
is the destination server which will get a copy of the email, as that's
the intent in the first place. It'll place the email into the proper
user mailbox because, it's the server that has your mailbox in the
first place.

And it's like this actually: SMTP asks DNS for IP address to the server
you're using to send the email (so that it can login and send the email
to the sending server aka, MTA) From there, the sending server asks the
DNS server for the IP address to the destination server or MTA. Once
the sending server or MTA has that information, it attempts to contact
the destination server or MTA and deliver the email to it. The
destination server or MTA then places the email into your mailbox, vs
others present on it. Your email isn't being passed to the DNS server
in the process, either. The DNS server isn't forwarding your email
along, anywhere. It's providing both servers the IP address so that
they can exchange a friendly greeting and then send/accept the email
and place it into the proper mailbox for you to retrieve it.

The DNS server is for your convenience so we can use something easy to
remember, like gmail.com instead of 74.125.21.83 which is the IP
address for gmail.com. Your client (your email client) has no idea what
gmail.com is, and, could care less. It's interested in an IP address to
contact. It also needs to know the IP address to the server you're
using to send from, as again, it cannot do anything with yahoo.com or
gmail.com, etc. It needs an IP address. Which is where the DNS server
comes into play. Your email is exchanged between the SMTP (your client)
to the sending server and then the sending server asks DNS for the IP
to the destination server and passes your email off to it, if possible.

So, your email goes from your client to your server then to my server.
That's how it works. That's what the article in the url you provided
told you, but, you didn't understand what you were reading based on
your reply.

DNS allows domains to exist, without having to memorize individual IP
addresses. It's for human convenience and that's all. Contrary to what
you think, when you type a domain name into your web browser or email
client, your browser and email client can't use it to do anything more
than request help from a DNS server to give them the IP address to the
domain you're attempting to contact. They don't know (or care) what a
'domain' is.

Depending on the server configuration on either end, it may accept the
email even if the address isn't valid. IE: no such user actually exists
on it. In that case, it's being stored for Adminstrator review or just
deleted, outright.

Your email goes from my server to gmail, once the IP address is
provided by the DNS server. Your email is not being bounced around
other 'servers' in route.

http://www.howtogeek.com/56002/htg-e...es-email-work/

Re-read your own url. You'll find it matches what I just told you
above. I've also included links explaining what you think are all
seperate 'servers' getting a copy of the email in route. They aren't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_transfer_agent

Within Internet message handling services (MHS), a message transfer
agent[1] or mail transfer agent[2] (MTA) or mail relay is software that
transfers electronic mail messages from one computer to another using a
client/server application architecture. An MTA implements both the
client (sending) and server (receiving) portions of the Simple Mail
Transfer Protocol.[3]

The terms mail server, mail exchanger, and MX host may also refer to a
computer performing the MTA function. The Domain Name System (DNS)
associates a mail server to a domain with an MX record containing the
domain name of the host(s) providing MTA services.

A mail server is a computer that serves as an electronic post office
for email. Mail exchanged across networks is passed between mail
servers that run specially designed software. This software is built
around agreed-upon, standardized protocols for handling mail messages
and any data files (such as images, multimedia or documents) that might
be attached to them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System

The Domain Name System (DNS) is a hierarchical decentralized naming
system for computers, services, or any resource connected to the
Internet or a private network. It associates various information with
domain names assigned to each of the participating entities. Most
prominently, it translates more readily memorized domain names to the
numerical IP addresses needed for the purpose of locating and
identifying computer services and devices with the underlying network
protocols. By providing a worldwide, distributed directory service, the
Domain Name System is an essential component of the functionality of
the Internet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mx_record

A mail exchanger record (MX record) is a type of resource record in the
Domain Name System that specifies a mail server responsible for
accepting email messages on behalf of a recipient's domain, and a
preference value used to prioritize mail delivery if multiple mail
servers are available. The set of MX records of a domain name specifies
how email should be routed with the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
(SMTP).

Btw, MX records are NOT required to send the email. My server will
attempt to send it to the IP address the DNS server provided it if no
such MX record exists for it. Otherwise, it'll use the MX record
specified by the DNS server; because your domain might have a seperate
IP address for the email server vs one it's using for the web server
that's hosting your site.

Either way, it just wants an IP address to establish contact with. If
the server is unreachable, my server will attempt to send it again
several more times, later. If my server is told that no such email
address exists on the target email server, it won't attempt to re-send
it later as it knows it can't possibly ever deliver it to the address I
specified.

OTH, if the destination server reached by the IP address the DNS server
provided it does accept the email, it delivers it to that server, NOT
the DNS server.

It's upto the destination server or MTA to place it into YOUR mailbox
vs someone elses mailbox on the destination server. And, depending on
the server setup, it may accept any incoming emails even if the address
isn't valid. In that case, the email isn't sitting in a normal
'mailbox', it's either been deleted when my email server signs off or
is in que for administrator review.

If we both had the same provider perhaps 'chat directly' might
apply. Otherwise it'll have to take the multi-server trip like
everyone else.

You're a perfect example of what I was discussing with Trader_4
concerning peers. You were provided information in the url you posted,
yet, didn't understand it and formed an incorrect opinion based on your
misunderstanding the contents of the article. A prime demonstration of
why the general public isn't capable of making correct decisions based
on the information provided if they know nothing about it.

In your case, it's even worse. You actually do think you know what
you're writing about, but, you clearly do not.

You thought DNS, etc were all getting copies of your email AND passing
it along to the next 'server' in the chain. Which is NOT how it works.

'ride the net' involves multi-servers.

Not in the sense you think, it doesn't. In fact, if I specify an IP
address instead of the domain name, it's not involving the DNS server
at all. It's going to establish contact directly with the IP address I
specified and attempt to deliver the email to the server at that IP
address, if one answers on the standard port.

A man in the middle attack (hack) is exactly what I mean. Anybody
along the way could hack his email. Gosh now he's gonna really be
paranoid...

Anybody along what way? The email isn't provided to the DNS server. The
MTA server is the destination. It transfers the email it got from my
server to YOUR mailbox (if possible) vs someone elses mailbox on it.

Your email is transferred in plain text, of course, so I could snoop on
it as it leaves and the adminstrator(s) of the destination email server
(aka, MTA) can pull it up anytime they like while their server waits
for you to login and retrieve it. If you're concerned about that,
encryption is your friend.


--
MID:
Hmmm. I most certainly don't understand how I can access a copy of a
zip file but then not be able to unzip it so I can watch it. That
seems VERY clever!
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145716711400

On 9/27/2016 6:50 PM, Diesel wrote:

DNS server doesn't get your email, doesn't forward your email to
anyplace. Doesn't even know you plan to send an email and could care
less.

A DNS server can be hacked.

"How Hackers Can Hijack Your Website And Read Your Email, Without
Hacking Your Company...the attackers are also posting screenshots of
private emails sent to your company on Twitter...they can do that by
meddling with your Domain Name System (DNS) records...attackers were
able to compromise Malaysian registrar Webnic.cc, that looks after the
DNS entries Lenovo.com and some 600,000 other websites...By altering the
DNS entries for Lenovo, the hackers were able to redirect web traffic
trying to visit Lenovo.com to a web server under their control...the
Lizard Squad hackers were now able to receive emails sent to Lenovo.com,"

http://www.tripwire.com/state-of-sec...-your-company/

And your email isn't going to 'many servers'

Depends on the route.

"Internet backbones are the largest data connections on the Internet.
They require high-speed bandwidth connections and high-performance
*SERVERS* /routers."

https://www.techopedia.com/definitio...ernet-backbone

in route to the destination, either.

hacking can occur en route.

"How to Hack the Backbone of the Internet"
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/how...f-the-internet

"The internet backbone — the infrastructure of networks upon which
internet traffic travels — went from being a passive infrastructure for
communication to an active weapon for attacks...In this case, packet
injection is used for “man-on-the-side” attacks"
https://www.wired.com/2013/11/this-i...into-a-weapon/

And it's like this actually: SMTP...

SMPT can be hacked.

"How to Extract Email Addresses from an SMTP Server"
http://null-byte.wonderhowto.com/how...erver-0160814/

So, your email goes from your client to your server then to my
server. That's how it works.

Maybe if we were hooked by a direct wire. Otherwise depending on the
route there's likely many routers/SERVERS in between.

The email isn't provided to the DNS server.

Doesn't have to be. See DNS hack above.

The MTA server is the destination. It transfers the email it got from
my server to YOUR mailbox (if possible) vs someone elses mailbox on
it.

And available to ISP personnel for their hacking enjoyment?

Your email is transferred in plain text, of course, so I could snoop
on it as it leaves and the adminstrator(s) of the destination email
server (aka, MTA) can pull it up anytime they like while their server
waits for you to login and retrieve it. If you're concerned about
that, encryption is your friend.

I'm not the paranoid one. And the chances of any of the above happening
to me or the paranoid one are nil IMO. But I don't think I can convince him.

AL Wed,
28 Sep 2016 04:47:12 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 9/27/2016 6:50 PM, Diesel wrote:

DNS server doesn't get your email, doesn't forward your email to
anyplace. Doesn't even know you plan to send an email and could
care less.

A DNS server can be hacked.

Yes, that's entirely possible. you could 'reconfigure' the DNS server
to fork an entirely different IP address than the one of the real
destination server and setup a honeypot to capture incoming emails;
you'd have to be sure you told your email server not to deny any
incoming emails because the mailbox doesn't actually exist though.
Easily done using for example, Mail enable. If that's something you
want to do.

None of that has anything to do with what I was originally writing
about though. The DNS server itself still isn't getting a copy of
your email. As that's not what it's for.

As your computer really doesn't know what to do with a domain name
(not to be confused with a local area network domain controller;
entirely different beastie); that's for your comfort, it just wants
an IP address. Domain names are far easier to remember than a pile of
IP addresses.

Depends on the route.

Email isn't setup like usenet or irc for that matter. Please, do
yourself a favor, re-read your own url and the ones I took the time
to provide you in my previous reply. It's a much more 'direct' path.

Yes, you could 'hack' a DNS server and redirect queries for specific
domain names to an IP of your choosing, but, that isn't what we're
discussing. You're under the misconception that your email travels
through many servers before reaching the intended one. And, that's
not the case.

If you didn't specify a domain, but an IP address instead, It'll
attempt to contact the IP you provided instead. Even if the DNS
server you're using is compromised, providing an IP instead of a
domain name negates it, as it's not going to be queried.

hacking can occur en route.

Only if we're using domains and trusting DNS servers that could be
compromised. If we're using hard coded WAN side IP addresses, then,
not so much, no. That would require ISP or better level 'hacking' of
sorts. Most likely, an inside job. OR! Duping you into doing
something stupid and compromising your own machine by configuring it
to use a specific DNS server so you can control the IP address it
returns when queried. Note, I said, a specific DNS server. And it
would still have to be queried to provide the rogue IP address. If
you don't use the domain name, the compromised DNS server plays no
part.

SMPT can be hacked.

It's SMTP, but, I digress.

Maybe if we were hooked by a direct wire. Otherwise depending on
the route there's likely many routers/SERVERS in between.

A router isn't a 'server'; Although it may have a server package of
sorts on board for local/remote administration, etc. They have a tiny
web server for this purpose, built in. It could also have a telnet
server, if you prefer configuration via console. Some have both.

You seem to be grasping at straws here. A rogue router could do
malicious things, certainly. You're being overly paranoid at this
stage, though. And, still showing that you really don't understand
how an email you send gets to it's destination. What's worse, you've
demonstrated that you don't understand most/any? of the material
being discussed at the urls you provided originally or in your follow
up post...

At the same time though, you are making a very good example of why I
think the general public isn't qualified on their own merits to
determine my fate in a trial involving hacking. YOU don't understand
WTF you're writing about.

Doesn't have to be. See DNS hack above.

Apples and oranges to be blunt.

I know a considerable amount about this; rogue software, deception,
etc. Malwarebytes paid me well for my knowledge and expertise on the
subject.

Even if you did compromise a top level DNS server for awhile , You
haven't gained control of all of them. What's worse, if the DNS
server I use already has an IP address for a domain I want to
contact, it's not going to ask the top level DNS server you hacked
anything. It'll only ask DNS servers higher up the food chain until
it reaches one that's familiar with the domain I'm asking about and
gets an IP from it and again, lemme stress, this only happens if it
doesn't already have a record of that domain.

From the second url I shared with you, previously, that, you didn't
read...much?

Address resolution mechanism

Domain name resolvers determine the domain name servers responsible
for the domain name in question by a sequence of queries starting
with the right-most (top-level) domain label.
A DNS recursor consults three name servers to resolve the address
www.wikipedia.org.

For proper operation of its domain name resolver, a network host is
configured with an initial cache (hints) of the known addresses of
the root name servers. The hints are updated periodically by an
administrator by retrieving a dataset from a reliable source.

Assuming the resolver has no cached records to accelerate the
process, the resolution process starts with a query to one of the
root servers. In typical operation, the root servers do not answer
directly, but respond with a referral to more authoritative servers,
e.g., a query for "www.wikipedia.org" is referred to the org servers.
The resolver now queries the servers referred to, and iteratively
repeat this process until it receives an authoritative answer. The
diagram illustrates this process for the host www.wikipedia.org.

This mechanism would place a large traffic burden on the root
servers, if every resolution on the Internet would require starting
at the root. In practice caching is used in DNS servers to off-load
the root servers, and as a result, root name servers actually are
involved in only a fraction of all requests.

And people would notice something is seriously wrong. Lots of people.
As they did with the lizard squad hack you mentioned. it didn't take
them long to figure out some bull**** was going on with a DNS server
and a bogus web site. Didn't take a rocket scientist to isolate the
compromised DNS server, either. It was obvious.

And available to ISP personnel for their hacking enjoyment?

Your ISP can technically see everything your box is doing that isn't
encrypted, yes. That's always been the case as they are your link to
the internet and they have an upstream beyond them as well that can
also see what your machine has been doing as well as everyone else
machines that use that particular ISP.

If you're using encryption, they can only see that you reached out to
so and so server at such and such IP, but, they cannot view the
contents of what you exchanged with that particular server.

What your alluding to is a form of a man in the middle attack. I
don't disagree with that. I disagree with the idea that you think
your email is traveling all sorts of different places before it
reaches it's 'final destination' as that isn't so.

It's not difficult for the administrator of the email server you
use/correspond with to spy on you, if they want. I can pull up the
contents of ANY of the users mailboxes on mine, with ease. I don't as
a rule, but I can.

It's more like the BBS days, actually. It's the SysOps equipment and
he/she has access to your message posts, and 'private' emails sent to
other users on the board. It's why my boards would inform people that
nothing they do on my system should be considered private as I do
have full access to any/all information exchanges. If you're using
encryption, obviously I can't 'read' what you wrote (assuming you
used something 'real' vs some crack pot home brew garbage that I can
crack), but I know you wrote something and I know who you wrote it
to.

Your ISP is no different in that respect. Nor is the owner of the
email server you use or the owner of the email server you sent the
email to. It's best to assume that unless your comms are encrypted
with a solid cypher, either end administration can read them at will.

I'm not the paranoid one. And the chances of any of the above
happening to me or the paranoid one are nil IMO. But I don't think
I can convince him.

The chances are extremely remote as long as you follow safer hex
practices, yes. None of this has anything to do with your original
suggestion that many servers are getting copies of your email,
though. That's not how it works.

--
People you encounter every day are fighting battles you know nothing
about. Be kind.

On 9/28/2016 4:28 AM, Diesel wrote:
AL Wed, 28
Sep 2016 04:47:12 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 9/27/2016 6:50 PM, Diesel wrote:

A DNS server can be hacked.

Yes, that's entirely possible.

Glad you agree.

The DNS server itself still isn't getting a copy of your email.

True. But hacking a DNS server to get an email has the same end result.

hacking can occur en route.

Only if we're using domains and trusting DNS servers that could be
compromised.

You didn't read my links with examples of en route hacks?

SMPT can be hacked.

It's SMTP, but, I digress.

Attacking typos now? That's a sign of having a weak argument.

Maybe if we were hooked by a direct wire. Otherwise depending on
the route there's likely many routers/SERVERS in between.

A router isn't a 'server';

My links showed the Internet is composed of many SERVERS/routers.

You seem to be grasping at straws here. A rogue router could do
malicious things, certainly.

My links showed how various agencies have hacked these SERVERS/routers.

You're being overly paranoid at this stage, though.

Personal attacks now? That's a sign of having a weak argument.

At the same time though, you are making a very good example of why I
think the general public isn't qualified on their own merits to
determine my fate in a trial involving hacking.

Whoa. You've been arrested for hacking??

YOU don't understand WTF you're writing about.

Profanity now? That's a sign of having a weak argument.

I know a considerable amount about this; rogue software, deception,
etc. Malwarebytes paid me well for my knowledge and expertise on the
subject.

We can claim to be anything we want to be on Usenet.

I disagree with the idea that you think your email is traveling all
sorts of different places before it reaches it's 'final destination'
as that isn't so.

"When you send an e-mail to someone, the message breaks up into packets
that travel across the network. Different packets from the same message
don't have to follow the same path. That's part of what makes the
Internet so robust and fast. Packets will travel from one machine to
another until they reach their destination."

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ip-convergence2.htm

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 1:56:30 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/28/2016 4:28 AM, Diesel wrote:

...snip...


I disagree with the idea that you think your email is traveling all
sorts of different places before it reaches it's 'final destination'
as that isn't so.

"When you send an e-mail to someone, the message breaks up into packets
that travel across the network. Different packets from the same message
don't have to follow the same path. That's part of what makes the
Internet so robust and fast. Packets will travel from one machine to
another until they reach their destination."

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ip-convergence2.htm

Please tell us what "machines" they are referring to in that article.

On 9/28/2016 12:59 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 1:56:30 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:

"When you send an e-mail to someone, the message breaks up into packets
that travel across the network. Different packets from the same message
don't have to follow the same path. That's part of what makes the
Internet so robust and fast. Packets will travel from one machine to
another until they reach their destination."

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ip-convergence2.htm

Please tell us what "machines" they are referring to in that article.

SERVERS/routers on the Internet of course.

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 5:57:12 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:
On 9/28/2016 12:59 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 1:56:30 PM UTC-4, AL wrote:

"When you send an e-mail to someone, the message breaks up into packets
that travel across the network. Different packets from the same message
don't have to follow the same path. That's part of what makes the
Internet so robust and fast. Packets will travel from one machine to
another until they reach their destination."

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/ip-convergence2.htm

Please tell us what "machines" they are referring to in that article.

SERVERS/routers on the Internet of course.

So my email leaves my email *server*, gets split up into numerous pieces, those pieces
follow different paths through various *routers* and eventually get put back together at
the destination *server*.

Excluding the source and destination *servers*, where is the potential for my email to be
intercepted in that scenario?