AL Wed,
28 Sep 2016 17:56:17 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Glad you agree.

It doesn't have anything directly to do with your confusion concerning
how email works, though.

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.

Why in the hell would I hack a DNS server if I wanted your email? It's
more trouble than it's worth. Especially when other options exist for
such a purpose.

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

Yep. I did. I understand the subjects, though. You, obviously, do not.
You seem to have me confused for an end user. Or, the general public.
Couldn't resist, but you're providing a damn good example of exactly
what I meant in my discussion with Trader_4

I wouldn't normally do this, because sometimes it comes across as me
being arrogant, but, you've more than asked for it at this point. I'm
tired of going back and forth with you, a general user who doesn't
understand how the internet works, and yet, continues to post
elementary grade material as if you're going to teach me.

I'm a former blackhat vxer known as RaiD/SLAM. There isn't much I
haven't 'hacked' at some point in my 30+ years on a computer of some
kind. I've been doing IT work professionally (as in for a living) for
over twenty years now.

https://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/toadie.shtml

Here's virus bulletin 'outing' me back in 1999. Confirming (although I
denied it for years for my own safety; as in, I didn't want to deal
with the FBI)

https://www.virusbulletin.com/upload...999/199910.pdf

David Brooks (you can find his stalking arse in alt.comp.freeware) has
a jpeg of my name beside the other original persons who consisted of
Malwarebytes on the about button, with the old interface. He screenshot
it and loves to share it from time to time. Just ask him, I'm sure he'd
be more than happy to fork you a copy too.

FromTheRafters, Ronnn, hell, even Muggles can backup my statements;
they *ALL* know that I'm Raid...I've been on usenet for years. (decades
actually, but who's counting) Muggles doesn't **** with me anymore
because I participated in turning her real life upside down for some
things she did.

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

No. I was making a point.

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

That it is. However, your email doesn't travel though MANY SERVERS to
reach it's destination. As I said, in my original reply to you as well
as.. two followups now?

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

Yes and?

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

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

That's not a personal attack. It's an observation.

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??

Not so far, no. I missed an FBI raid by a very short period of time.
Melissa virus incident. I was the individual responsible for hooking
the codebreakers up with the server in TN. I wasn't 16 years old at the
time, and obviously, my first name isn't Justin; despite what timesnews
reported at the time, ON THE FRONT PAGE of the newspaper, no less.

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

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

*sigh* I wasn't using profanity towards you. I'm not known for being
politically correct, though. You really don't understand the subject
you're desperatly trying to 'teach me' about. You aren't doing yourself
any favors by continuing down this path with me. As, I will take you to
school; as I've done with the urls I shared in this post.

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.

That's true. A fair enough comment to make. However. I can actually
prove the statements I've written. If you'd like for me to do 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."

WOW...You really have NO clue how this works.



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

On 9/28/2016 4:00 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
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

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*.

A series of ROUTERS *and* SERVERS determine the Internet route:

"Internet data comes in the form of packets, which contain receiver,
sender and security information if required. ROUTERS AND SERVERS handle
the transmission of data by routing packets through the network toward
their final destination. This means that between two endpoints (a Web
page request made by a user and the server hosting the page, for
example), a series of ROUTERS AND SERVERS determine the route the
packets must take between the two computers."

http://techin.oureverydaylife.com/in...ters-5085.html

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

"your message, or at least little chunks of your message, travels
through an indeterminate set of systems and network devices, each of
which offers a point of interception. These systems may be owned or
operated by corporations and non-profit organizations, by colleges, by
governments and government agencies, or by telecom and other
connectivity providers. Given such a widely divergent group, it is easy
to see how either an unethical organization or a renegade employee may
easily gain access to the messages and traffic crossing their systems.
All of these factors combine to make the Internet itself the primary
source of message interception points."

http://www.nairaland.com/170659/e-ma...ted-hack-check

On 9/28/2016 6:52 PM, Diesel wrote:

Why in the hell would I hack a DNS server if I wanted your email?

In my earlier post you implied that since the DNS server didn't contain
the email itself it wasn't a hacking target. I showed that it was not
only a hacking target but actually used in a large Lenovo hack.

WOW...You really have NO clue how this works.

I just snipped many rambling paragraphs of your greatness and not one
word of rebuttal to my post. We must be done then?

AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 03:24:44 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

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*.

You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face...

http://techin.oureverydaylife.com/in...rvers-routers-
5085.html

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

"your message, or at least little chunks of your message, travels
through an indeterminate set of systems and network devices, each
of which offers a point of interception. These systems may be
owned or operated by corporations and non-profit organizations, by
colleges, by governments and government agencies, or by telecom
and other connectivity providers. Given such a widely divergent
group, it is easy to see how either an unethical organization or a
renegade employee may easily gain access to the messages and
traffic crossing their systems. All of these factors combine to
make the Internet itself the primary source of message
interception points."

Umm, based on what you've copy pasted (how many hours have you been
using a search engine to try to support your argument?) if someone
did 'snoop', they MIGHT get a piece of an email, or a PIECE of the
header that goes to the email. Since as you put it, the pieces take
different 'routes' on their way. So if they're 'snooping' on their
own network, they won't get the entire email. I'm just going by what
you carefully pasted here. [g]

You should stop digging that hole now. It's deep enough.



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

AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 03:24:48 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 9/28/2016 6:52 PM, Diesel wrote:

Why in the hell would I hack a DNS server if I wanted your email?

In my earlier post you implied that since the DNS server didn't
contain the email itself it wasn't a hacking target. I showed that
it was not only a hacking target but actually used in a large
Lenovo hack.

A DNS server does NOT process your email. if I want your email, I'm
not going to play around with DNS servers, there's a damn good chance
I won't tag one that you even use! So, I'd be wasting my time with
that route. (get the pun?)

Did you skim the urls you posted? As, it seems pretty clear (to me
atleast, possibly DerbyDad03 as well) you did...Had you actually read
and understood the contents of your own urls, let alone the ones I've
shared, you wouldn't still be posting your nonsense.

I just snipped many rambling paragraphs of your greatness and not
one word of rebuttal to my post. We must be done then?

I've been disputing your nonsense since you replied to me, the first
time.

I'm getting the impression you've had a chance to use a search engine
and fact check my claims of who I am and what I've been involved in
then? :-) You never know who you'll run across on the internet. BFG

Btw,

Thanks for demonstrating EXACTLY what I meant by the general public
and their inability to understand the 'evidence' that could be
presented at a trial for a hacker. It doesn't matter how many expert
witnesses testify for either side, if YOU can't grasp the material
being discussed. As I tried to explain to trader, You (general
public) couldn't possibly be one of my peers as a result. My peers
understand this stuff.

With that said, Allow me to also state for the record that I'm a
retired Blackhat. I have been for nearly seventeen years now. As in,
I no longer write nor release destructive code. I do however still
participate in other aspects of the Hacking scene so I'm actually a
Grayhat now.

Your hard disk might even have some of my or another co founders work
present on it. That is, if you're into mp3s and divx/xvid dvdrips.

You may now use your favorite search engine to lookup those terms and
skim them as you did the urls you shared here. It's not like you
could do any worse than you already have.


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

On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 6:55:24 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 03:24:44 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

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*.

You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face...


Hold on a sec...you snipped something that *I* (DerbyDad03) posted in an
attempt to point out to Al exactly what you point out below:

"if someone did 'snoop', they MIGHT get a piece of an email, or a PIECE of
the header that goes to the email."

You'll see that immediately following that statement I queried of Al:

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

I'm on your side. Al is confused as to how the internet works but doesn't
seem to want to admit his ignorance.


http://techin.oureverydaylife.com/in...rvers-routers-
5085.html

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

"your message, or at least little chunks of your message, travels
through an indeterminate set of systems and network devices, each
of which offers a point of interception. These systems may be
owned or operated by corporations and non-profit organizations, by
colleges, by governments and government agencies, or by telecom
and other connectivity providers. Given such a widely divergent
group, it is easy to see how either an unethical organization or a
renegade employee may easily gain access to the messages and
traffic crossing their systems. All of these factors combine to
make the Internet itself the primary source of message
interception points."

Umm, based on what you've copy pasted (how many hours have you been
using a search engine to try to support your argument?) if someone
did 'snoop', they MIGHT get a piece of an email, or a PIECE of the
header that goes to the email. Since as you put it, the pieces take
different 'routes' on their way. So if they're 'snooping' on their
own network, they won't get the entire email. I'm just going by what
you carefully pasted here. [g]

You should stop digging that hole now. It's deep enough.



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

"AL" wrote

| 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...
|

Those are the most common attack "vectors". If I
remember correctly, Flash is currently #1. Wordpress
is preferred for driveby installing malware because
Wordpress sites are often easy to compromise. (I
get hackers several times a day at my own site. They
try various GET requests that they know might be
vulnerable, like wp-login.php, /wp-admin/...,
wp/content/..., etc. They just travel the Web doing
that, looking for unlocked doors.

I saw an apropos article in the NYT today. It seems
Yahoo has had a number of serious security breaches
under Marissa Mayer. She didn't want to risk that more
people might leave the email service due to inconvenient
security measures. And measures like encryption that
would prevent even Yahoo from reading your email would
have thwarted their targetted ad spyware. So they were
hacked repeatedly. The pro-Mayer crowd called the security
people the Paranoids. Eventually most of the Paranoids
were hired away by other companies.

Paranoid and tinfoil hat namecalling is almost always
"the first refuge of the ostrich".

on 9/29/2016, Mayayana supposed :
"AL" wrote

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...


Those are the most common attack "vectors". If I
remember correctly, Flash is currently #1. Wordpress
is preferred for driveby installing malware because
Wordpress sites are often easy to compromise. (I
get hackers several times a day at my own site. They
try various GET requests that they know might be
vulnerable, like wp-login.php, /wp-admin/...,
wp/content/..., etc. They just travel the Web doing
that, looking for unlocked doors.

I saw an apropos article in the NYT today. It seems
Yahoo has had a number of serious security breaches
under Marissa Mayer. She didn't want to risk that more
people might leave the email service due to inconvenient
security measures. And measures like encryption that
would prevent even Yahoo from reading your email would
have thwarted their targetted ad spyware. So they were
hacked repeatedly. The pro-Mayer crowd called the security
people the Paranoids. Eventually most of the Paranoids
were hired away by other companies.

Paranoid and tinfoil hat namecalling is almost always
"the first refuge of the ostrich".

A little paranoia is good securitywise but too much is bad for user
experience. It's hard to know where to draw the line. I can't argue
against your choices for your experience, but they are just a tad too
much for mine. Only a tad though, and a very small tad at that, maybe
only half a tad.

After serious thinking DerbyDad03 wrote :
On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 6:55:24 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 03:24:44 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

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*.

You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face...


Hold on a sec...you snipped something that *I* (DerbyDad03) posted in an
attempt to point out to Al exactly what you point out below:

"if someone did 'snoop', they MIGHT get a piece of an email, or a PIECE of
the header that goes to the email."

You'll see that immediately following that statement I queried of Al:

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

I'm on your side. Al is confused as to how the internet works but doesn't
seem to want to admit his ignorance.

In my interpretation of Diesel's post, he included you in the
'clued-in' crowd. AL seems to be a computer tech without all that much
network tech knowledge. Not that that is any kind of sin or anything.
Diesel seems to have 'no love' for computer techs who haven't earned
their chops, especially when they offer advice which they shouldn't.

On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 11:40:34 AM UTC-4, FromTheRafters wrote:
After serious thinking DerbyDad03 wrote :
On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 6:55:24 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 03:24:44 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

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*.

You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face...


Hold on a sec...you snipped something that *I* (DerbyDad03) posted in an
attempt to point out to Al exactly what you point out below:

"if someone did 'snoop', they MIGHT get a piece of an email, or a PIECE of
the header that goes to the email."

You'll see that immediately following that statement I queried of Al:

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

I'm on your side. Al is confused as to how the internet works but doesn't
seem to want to admit his ignorance.

In my interpretation of Diesel's post, he included you in the
'clued-in' crowd.

I gotta disagree. He responded to AL's post and included what I said with no
attribution to me. That paragraph appears to the most casual observer to
be attributed to AL via "AL wrote..."

Diesel then immediately followed with:

"You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face..."

Since I have no face to save, there would be no reason for him to say
that about my words. Later in that post, he responds to AL's response
to me, so I believe that he is talking to AL the entire time, but
accidentally thought that AL had said what *I* actually said. Unfortunately,
when that paragraph is included on a standalone basis, it loses all of the
context that I meant it have when I said it to AL.

It happens...Diesel may not have realized that I jumped in the middle
of his conversation with AL. It's no big deal, I just wanted to set
the record straight before AL jumps all over him for the mis-quote.

DerbyDad03 explained :

[...]

It happens...Diesel may not have realized that I jumped in the middle
of his conversation with AL. It's no big deal, I just wanted to set
the record straight before AL jumps all over him for the mis-quote.

Okay. I went back and forth with someone here attributing (not by
attribution lines) things someone else had said to me. Finally I
pointed out that it wasn't me who said those obviously wrong things. It
happens a lot in Usenet discussions, so it is good to get it
straightened out.

On 9/29/2016 3:55 AM, Diesel wrote:
AL wrote:

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*.

You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face...

Nope. That's from DerbyDad's post. Newsreader problems?

But it's basically true. Your email server does not connect directly to
my email provider as you claim. There's the big bad Internet with all
its forwarding devices in the middle.

On 9/29/2016 3:55 AM, Diesel wrote:
AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 03:24:48 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 9/28/2016 6:52 PM, Diesel wrote:

In my earlier post you implied that since the DNS server didn't
contain the email itself it wasn't a hacking target. I showed that
it was not only a hacking target but actually used in a large
Lenovo hack.

A DNS server does NOT process your email. if I want your email, I'm
not going to play around with DNS servers,

Perhaps not you, but other hackers have used this method and hit big pay
dirt.

Did you skim the urls you posted? As, it seems pretty clear (to me
atleast, possibly DerbyDad03 as well) you did...Had you actually read
and understood the contents of your own urls, let alone the ones I've
shared, you wouldn't still be posting your nonsense.

I just snipped many rambling paragraphs of your greatness and not
one word of rebuttal to my post. We must be done then?

I've been disputing your nonsense since you replied to me, the first
time.

I'm getting the impression you've had a chance to use a search engine
and fact check my claims of who I am and what I've been involved in
then? :-) You never know who you'll run across on the internet. BFG

Btw,

Thanks for demonstrating EXACTLY what I meant by the general public
and their inability to understand the 'evidence' that could be
presented at a trial for a hacker. It doesn't matter how many expert
witnesses testify for either side, if YOU can't grasp the material
being discussed. As I tried to explain to trader, You (general
public) couldn't possibly be one of my peers as a result. My peers
understand this stuff.

With that said, Allow me to also state for the record that I'm a
retired Blackhat. I have been for nearly seventeen years now. As in,
I no longer write nor release destructive code. I do however still
participate in other aspects of the Hacking scene so I'm actually a
Grayhat now.

Your hard disk might even have some of my or another co founders work
present on it. That is, if you're into mp3s and divx/xvid dvdrips.

You may now use your favorite search engine to lookup those terms and
skim them as you did the urls you shared here. It's not like you
could do any worse than you already have.

More bravado with no rebuttal. I guess we're done.

AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 17:52:51 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

More bravado with no rebuttal. I guess we're done.

Do you need to use a dictionary? Yes, we're done. You don't know WTF
you're writing about. I hope you'll take that into consideration next
time you get the bright idea of trying to school me. It'll be a cold
snowy day in hell.



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

DerbyDad03
Thu, 29
Sep 2016 13:13:55 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

You've copy/pasted a description of the basic concept of how the
internet works in what looks to be a desperate attempt to save
face...


Hold on a sec...you snipped something that *I* (DerbyDad03) posted
in an attempt to point out to Al exactly what you point out below:

Sorry. I didn't realize I'd snipped anything from you. I did read
your reply, but, I wasn't addressing you with my commentary. You seem
to understand how the internet works well enough, based on the
question you asked of him.

"if someone did 'snoop', they MIGHT get a piece of an email, or a
PIECE of the header that goes to the email."

You'll see that immediately following that statement I queried of
Al:

There seems to be some confusion by one of us. I wrote that early
this morning. ;p Your reply was prior to that specific comment
written by me. Mine is actually redundant.

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

I'm on your side. Al is confused as to how the internet works but
doesn't seem to want to admit his ignorance.

Agreed.




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

AL Thu, 29 Sep
2016 17:52:46 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:


But it's basically true. Your email server does not connect
directly to my email provider as you claim. There's the big bad
Internet with all its forwarding devices in the middle.

Yes, it does. directly in the sense of what which is possible via the
internet, anyhow. My email server reaches out to your email server
directly, as I said. It doesn't pass the email off to servers in the
middle and have them deliver it to you, as you seemed to think it did.


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

DerbyDad03
Thu, 29
Sep 2016 15:57:17 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:


Since I have no face to save, there would be no reason for him to
say that about my words. Later in that post, he responds to AL's
response to me, so I believe that he is talking to AL the entire
time, but accidentally thought that AL had said what *I* actually
said.

That's what happened, yes. My apologies. I was in a bit of a rush. Had
to be someplace. I'm sure you know how that goes.

It happens...Diesel may not have realized that I jumped in the
middle of his conversation with AL. It's no big deal, I just
wanted to set the record straight before AL jumps all over him for
the mis-quote.

Thanks for being professional about my screwup. That's rare with the
typical usenet groups I hang out in.



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