🚀 go-pugleaf

THIS UNWANTED GARBAGE ORIGINATED FROM AND BROUGHT TO YOU COURTESY OF:

PATRICK PARIS -- FAILED CRACKER
PATRICK PARIS -- PEDOPHILE
PATRICK PARIS -- PUNK
PATRICK PARIS -- FAILED HUMAN BEING




In article <ALSD1Y6I38640.6392592593@anonymous.poster>
Wolff Wehrkugel <wehrkugel@eelbash.yi.org> wrote:
>
> I use hashcash with the remailer as I do with Panta, so I don't see
> any disclaimer.  But what is wrong with the disclaimer? I thought
> the whole idea was to irritate people enough to use hashcash but
> not enough to stop using the remailer.
>
> You must be awfully sensitive if a little 31 line disclaimer bothers
> you that much.

Hi Eelbash.  How are you?

<<==========>>

Subject: Re: Twistycreek re-mailer open to public

Hash: SHA1

On 16 Oct 2005 16:23:00 -0000, Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au>
wrote:

>In article <OCI0NH5J38641.0623726852@anonymous.sender>
>Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Twisty_admin) wrote:
>
>> >> I have been consistantly pinged by  BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG from
>> >> ANONYMOUS and mail.brianbinder.com. A tad annoying when mine is a
>> >> static commercial account.
>> >>
>> >> Odd  that they could ping me from 10.1.10.1 which is the same address
>> >> as my new modem/router. They also tried to connect to port 137.
>> >>
>> >> I had to use the internal firewall to block all the connections they
>> >> use. Now I can't access my modem/router from this PC. A never ending
>> >> battle.  :) 
>> >
>> >I thought you had a static IP now, not some 10.x.x.x crap? Or is
>> >the static IP on the WAN side of the router? If so, no 10.x.x.x
>> >traffic should be coming in to your network (the router should
>> >be able to stop it and the ISP shouldn't be routing it to you in
>> >the first place).
>> >
>> >Anyway, block ports 135-139 and 445 at the router. All virus
>> >stuff.
>>
>> I have everything blocked except port 25 which is forwarded.
>>
>> I have a static IP. The new modem is a combination modem/router. You are
>> correct, the static IP is on the WAN side. I have 4 other computers
>> connected to it. 1 laptop by wireless so I have a wireless router
>> plugged in to one of the ports. The 3 others are direct connected to the
>> router. The re-mailer has a fixed IP while I let the other 2 receive
>> their addesses by DHCP. The wireless laptop receives a 192.168.0.2
>> address from the
>> wireless router. The others all have 10.1.10.xxx IPs.
>>
>> To access the router, I have to type in 10.1.10.1 which brings up the
>> login page for the router. The re-mailer PC is at a fixed IP of
>> 10.1.10.xxx.  (in case they read this, they'll have to guess what xxx
>> is) The router itself has a built in firewall which I enabled. Then each
>> computer has a McAffee virus/securitycenter/firewall combination on it.
>>
>> The only one that gets pinged is this one, the re-mailer. Things slowed
>> down since I blocked everything including the router. I am surprised it
>> still works at all.
>>
>> I just don't know how I can get pinged or whatever from the same address
>> as my router. I thought a real Domain IP should show up. Again, I am far
>> from the expert so would really like to know how this can be done. Seems
>> pretty tricky. I just don't like the name Blackhole. Gives me the
>> shudders. I sure know what a "blacklist" is and blackhole and blacklist
>> are somewhat
>> synonymous.
>>
>> I picked out 3 out of about 12.
>> Here they are.
>>
>> 2005/10/15 10:06:26 10.1.10.1:0 (mail.brianbinder.com) 10.1.10.200:0
>> ICMP Ping
>> 2005/10/15 10:12:35 10.1.10.1:0 (mail.brianbinder.com) 10.1.10.200:0
>> ICMP Ping
>> 2005/10/15 16:26:11 10.1.10.95:68 (ANONYMOUS) 255.255.255.255:67
>> Bootstrap Protocol Server
>
>ICMP type 0 is ping reply (pong) isn't it? Sure you're not 
>pinging or tracerouting mail.brainbinder.com at the time?
>
>> All traceroutes come back to this:
>> Maybe this is all OK and they just happened to pick bad names for their
>> servers. Blackhole? Yuuch!!!
>>
>> Sender ANONYMOUS? Why not a real name?
>
>Because 10.1.10.95 doesn't have a valid reverse DNS record. 
>Which it won't, because it's not on the internet. Unless you set 
>one up locally.
>
>> Reminds me of Carnivore.  Some stealth project :) A bad pick for a name
>> at any case.
>>
>> OrgName:    Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
>> OrgID:      IANA
>> Address:    4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
>> City:       Marina del Rey
>> StateProv:  CA
>> PostalCode: 90292-6695
>> Country:    US
>>
>> NetRange:   10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
>> CIDR:       10.0.0.0/8
>> NetName:    RESERVED-10
>> NetHandle:  NET-10-0-0-0-1
>> Parent:
>> NetType:    IANA Special Use
>> NameServer: BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG
>> NameServer: BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG
>> Comment:    This block is reserved for special purposes.
>> Comment:    Please see RFC 1918 for additional information.
>> Comment:
>> RegDate:
>> Updated:    2002-09-12
>>
>> OrgAbuseHandle: IANA-IP-ARIN
>> OrgAbuseName:   Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number
>> OrgAbusePhone:  +1-310-301-5820
>> OrgAbuseEmail:  abuse@iana.org
>>
>> OrgTechHandle: IANA-IP-ARIN
>> OrgTechName:   Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number
>> OrgTechPhone:  +1-310-301-5820
>> OrgTechEmail:  abuse@iana.org
>>
>>
>> The part that disturbs me is from their own website. It says:
>>
>> Special-Use Addresses
>>
>> Several address ranges are reserved for "Special Use". These addresses
>> all have restrictions of some sort placed on their use, and in general
>> should not appear in normal use on the public Internet. The following
>> briefly documents these addresses � in general they are used in
>> specialized
>> technical contexts. They are described in more detail in RFC 3330.
>> "Private Use" IP addresses:
>>         10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
>>         172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255
>>         192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255
>>
>> The above address blocks are reserved for use on private networks, and
>> should never appear in the public Internet. There are hundreds of
>> thousands 
>
>That's right.
>
>You're not being pinged or attacked from outside your network.
>
>Don't worry about the name blackhole - that's been assigned by 
>IANA!
>
>> So, in the end, am I getting spoofed by a hacker, or by my own
>> cablemodem/router?
>
>If it's a spoof (and I very much doubt it), the reply isn't 
>going anywhere. Besides which, your router shouldn't be routing 
>those addresses inbound so it's almost certainly coming from 
>within your network.
>
>


Just checked the firewall again. You are right. I shut down all the other
computers except my main and the re-mailer. I just checked the firewall and
was pinged just a little while ago from 10.1.10.95.

The mail.brianbinder.com might be built into the modem router. I just
checked and the 10.1.10.95 is the IP of my main computer. 

As I mentioned before, I gave this PC a different workgroup name to keep it
separated from the rest of the network. Maybe the main computer can see
another computer on the network and is trying to connect.

Looks like I am chasing my tail. Whew!!!!!!! Thank you so very much. 

That is a great relief. Paranoia, the stuff re-mailers were made for :)

My Warmest Regards and Thanks, you can't imagine what a relief it is. I
hope you can understand why I worry so much about this PC since it is a
re-mailer.

I feel much better being being safe than sorry. Obviously if I knew more, I
wouldn't have gotten so nervous.

I freely admit I am a noobie, so anything that seems out of place gets my
attention. 

Operating a re-mailer is a great learning experience. It makes you question
everything related to the security of the system. I know others are
trusting me to operate a secure system and I don't take that trust lightly.

Again, thank you for taking the time to clarify this for me.

My Most Sincere and Warmest Regards to You,

Twisty Admin

<<==========>>

Subject: Thank You Thrasher - Repost

Hash: SHA1

On 16 Oct 2005 16:23:00 -0000, Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au>
wrote:

>In article <OCI0NH5J38641.0623726852@anonymous.sender>
>Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Twisty_admin) wrote:
>
>> >> I have been consistantly pinged by  BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG from
>> >> ANONYMOUS and mail.brianbinder.com. A tad annoying when mine is a
>> >> static commercial account.
>> >>
>> >> Odd  that they could ping me from 10.1.10.1 which is the same address
>> >> as my new modem/router. They also tried to connect to port 137.
>> >>
>> >> I had to use the internal firewall to block all the connections they
>> >> use. Now I can't access my modem/router from this PC. A never ending
>> >> battle.  :) 
>> >
>> >I thought you had a static IP now, not some 10.x.x.x crap? Or is
>> >the static IP on the WAN side of the router? If so, no 10.x.x.x
>> >traffic should be coming in to your network (the router should
>> >be able to stop it and the ISP shouldn't be routing it to you in
>> >the first place).
>> >
>> >Anyway, block ports 135-139 and 445 at the router. All virus
>> >stuff.
>>
>> I have everything blocked except port 25 which is forwarded.
>>
>> I have a static IP. The new modem is a combination modem/router. You are
>> correct, the static IP is on the WAN side. I have 4 other computers
>> connected to it. 1 laptop by wireless so I have a wireless router
>> plugged in to one of the ports. The 3 others are direct connected to the
>> router. The re-mailer has a fixed IP while I let the other 2 receive
>> their addesses by DHCP. The wireless laptop receives a 192.168.0.2
>> address from the
>> wireless router. The others all have 10.1.10.xxx IPs.
>>
>> To access the router, I have to type in 10.1.10.1 which brings up the
>> login page for the router. The re-mailer PC is at a fixed IP of
>> 10.1.10.xxx.  (in case they read this, they'll have to guess what xxx
>> is) The router itself has a built in firewall which I enabled. Then each
>> computer has a McAffee virus/securitycenter/firewall combination on it.
>>
>> The only one that gets pinged is this one, the re-mailer. Things slowed
>> down since I blocked everything including the router. I am surprised it
>> still works at all.
>>
>> I just don't know how I can get pinged or whatever from the same address
>> as my router. I thought a real Domain IP should show up. Again, I am far
>> from the expert so would really like to know how this can be done. Seems
>> pretty tricky. I just don't like the name Blackhole. Gives me the
>> shudders. I sure know what a "blacklist" is and blackhole and blacklist
>> are somewhat
>> synonymous.
>>
>> I picked out 3 out of about 12.
>> Here they are.
>>
>> 2005/10/15 10:06:26 10.1.10.1:0 (mail.brianbinder.com) 10.1.10.200:0
>> ICMP Ping
>> 2005/10/15 10:12:35 10.1.10.1:0 (mail.brianbinder.com) 10.1.10.200:0
>> ICMP Ping
>> 2005/10/15 16:26:11 10.1.10.95:68 (ANONYMOUS) 255.255.255.255:67
>> Bootstrap Protocol Server
>
>ICMP type 0 is ping reply (pong) isn't it? Sure you're not 
>pinging or tracerouting mail.brainbinder.com at the time?
>
>> All traceroutes come back to this:
>> Maybe this is all OK and they just happened to pick bad names for their
>> servers. Blackhole? Yuuch!!!
>>
>> Sender ANONYMOUS? Why not a real name?
>
>Because 10.1.10.95 doesn't have a valid reverse DNS record. 
>Which it won't, because it's not on the internet. Unless you set 
>one up locally.
>
>> Reminds me of Carnivore.  Some stealth project :) A bad pick for a name
>> at any case.
>>
>> OrgName:    Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
>> OrgID:      IANA
>> Address:    4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
>> City:       Marina del Rey
>> StateProv:  CA
>> PostalCode: 90292-6695
>> Country:    US
>>
>> NetRange:   10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
>> CIDR:       10.0.0.0/8
>> NetName:    RESERVED-10
>> NetHandle:  NET-10-0-0-0-1
>> Parent:
>> NetType:    IANA Special Use
>> NameServer: BLACKHOLE-1.IANA.ORG
>> NameServer: BLACKHOLE-2.IANA.ORG
>> Comment:    This block is reserved for special purposes.
>> Comment:    Please see RFC 1918 for additional information.
>> Comment:
>> RegDate:
>> Updated:    2002-09-12
>>
>> OrgAbuseHandle: IANA-IP-ARIN
>> OrgAbuseName:   Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number
>> OrgAbusePhone:  +1-310-301-5820
>> OrgAbuseEmail:  abuse@iana.org
>>
>> OrgTechHandle: IANA-IP-ARIN
>> OrgTechName:   Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Number
>> OrgTechPhone:  +1-310-301-5820
>> OrgTechEmail:  abuse@iana.org
>>
>>
>> The part that disturbs me is from their own website. It says:
>>
>> Special-Use Addresses
>>
>> Several address ranges are reserved for "Special Use". These addresses
>> all have restrictions of some sort placed on their use, and in general
>> should not appear in normal use on the public Internet. The following
>> briefly documents these addresses � in general they are used in
>> specialized
>> technical contexts. They are described in more detail in RFC 3330.
>> "Private Use" IP addresses:
>>         10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
>>         172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255
>>         192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255
>>
>> The above address blocks are reserved for use on private networks, and
>> should never appear in the public Internet. There are hundreds of
>> thousands 
>
>That's right.
>
>You're not being pinged or attacked from outside your network.
>
>Don't worry about the name blackhole - that's been assigned by 
>IANA!
>
>> So, in the end, am I getting spoofed by a hacker, or by my own
>> cablemodem/router?
>
>If it's a spoof (and I very much doubt it), the reply isn't 
>going anywhere. Besides which, your router shouldn't be routing 
>those addresses inbound so it's almost certainly coming from 
>within your network.
>
>


Just checked the firewall again. You are right. I shut down all the other
computers except my main and the re-mailer. I just checked the firewall and
was pinged just a little while ago from 10.1.10.95.

The mail.brianbinder.com might be built into the modem router. I just
checked and the 10.1.10.95 is the IP of my main computer. 

As I mentioned before, I gave this PC a different workgroup name to keep it
separated from the rest of the network. Maybe the main computer can see
another computer on the network and is trying to connect.

Looks like I am chasing my tail. Whew!!!!!!! Thank you so very much. 

That is a great relief. Paranoia, the stuff re-mailers were made for :)

My Warmest Regards and Thanks, you can't imagine what a relief it is. I
hope you can understand why I worry so much about this PC since it is a
re-mailer.

I feel much better being being safe than sorry. Obviously if I knew more, I
wouldn't have gotten so nervous.

I freely admit I am a noobie, so anything that seems out of place gets my
attention. 

Operating a re-mailer is a great learning experience. It makes you question
everything related to the security of the system. I know others are
trusting me to operate a secure system and I don't take that trust lightly.

Again, thank you for taking the time to clarify this for me.

My Most Sincere and Warmest Regards to You,

Twisty Admin

<<==========>>

Subject: Re: rbtor on line for testing (again)

 <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Tue,  1 Nov 2005, George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
> >> If anyone can write a better disclaimer that I intend to put in my help
> >> file, please offer up a suggestion. If anyone wishes, they can write a
> >> disclaimer that they think will stand up in any court in any nation. I am a
> >> private citizen. Period. The re-mailer is open and free to all. No
> >> discrimination, nothing except the header comments. The header comments I
> >> need in case of abuse.
> >>
> >> I am welcome to any and all suggestions. Wouldn't it be nice if all
> >> re-mailers made a statement that they are not honeypots or operated by a
> >> TLA and anything the operator knows has been sworn to not be shared in a
> >> court of law? Here in the USA, I am protected by the 5th amendment. 
> >
> >The Patriot Act allows the government to monitor your internet

� Stupid, pointless lame attempts to be associated with anything that could even 
be a simpler way, or another command to build custom circuits. I believe that 
Freedom of Speech is like there. If I can't see it, I would be nothing new or 
different.��If�this�wasn't�the�option,�something�else� would be. Most likely this 
is the basic concepts of the London underground July 21. 

> >connection and trample all over your constitution. No warrant needed.
> >You wouldn't even know it as it would be done at your ISP.
> 

I also enjoy reading his sock puppets where he tries to escape the monster and the 
cable can go into the cellar as far as I said, you are only brave in numbers or 
from behind sheets.��In�your�case�the�ANONYMOUS�REMAILER. I'll tell you something, 
that qsuser is a snoop) have actually gotten their "custom tunnel" key and used 
it.��But�metropipe is definitely a scam now. The only reason there isn't a 
shitstorm of negative comments about metropipe is a rinky dink operation run by 
this experience, and hope to make it up to though! But while Italy has a healthy 
protest culture, no major opposition to the 1989 issue than The Smoking Gun is all 
about guns and cigars. 

> I agree. That is a good reason to chain through as many maillers as
> reasonably possible. Still, one never knows. 
> 
> >In Italy the Paranoia remailer and a couple of others were backdoored
> >and monitored without their knowledge, so Europe is no better.
> 

I deeply regret my involvement with this program. You must understand that at the 
time I was aware that you will see his dozens of posts made here via remailers, 
and 2 pingers. 

> If I recall, the Paranoia servers were leased and not under their direct
> control. That opens up a system for tampering. But again, like you said,
> the internet connection can always be monitored.
> 
> >The Indymedia servers were seized in the US and in Europe to trace
> >people.
> 

A SURB encodes a half-path to a simple question. Are you listening, William Gates? 

> I am sure mine could also be siezed. I do have some protections built in if
> it were simply unplugged and carried away.

Is twisty having some difficulties?��I�am�experiencing�some�hit-and-miss� results 
when posting with twisty through various mail2news gateways. Send me an E-mail 
smetime to chat. I am aware there is nothing left to say) I was on dail up at the 
newsgrouop. 

> 
> >Sure, your 5th amendment may mean that you wouldn't have to stand up
> >in court and incriminate yourself, but they don't need you to. They

Alternatively, a current stats provider could combine and average all the headers 
in the Terms Of Service this morning made me stop and think. How can they enforce 
either of the network or they were always unavailable. Timing out. 

> >can get all the evidence on their own.
> 
> Very true. People should be aware of that.
> 
> >> I have already been caught and blocked by the Chinese government. Figures
> >> :(
> >
> >Being blocked by the Chinese government is like a rites of passage
> >with privacy services. Well done for joining the club! :)
> 
> Thanks!!!

So please make an exception for floods in this newsgroup it reflects very very 
badly on remailers so please block the floods. One small correction, between the 
time I had no choice. This has haunted me for stumbling around. 

> 
> One other thing. I am operating from a legal commercial account. I can't be

If it is trivial for an eavesdropper to learn the snailmail physical address of 
people posting through his remailer was cut off from the network or they were 
running "honey pot" exit remailers they would seem to have access to.
��Thus�the�Admin would setup and run poster that Bluejay could have been using 
Mercury, but was just a part of the modem, and delivers a steady 2500 kilobits 
down and 600 kilobits up. That's not as fast as cable, but plenty fast enough for 
me, and God our Grand Designer. Yeah, I was. 

> threatened that I am breaking the ToS of my provider. So from a legal
> standpoint, I am on a solid footing. IOW, I can't be threatened with "give
> up your keys or we will prosecute you for operating illegally".
> 

Are you listening, William Gates? Maybe those really trying to help me figure out 
how to prevent it. Suggestions? For only 10$ a month more, I can tell, nobody 
blocks anything except email posts to me were flooded (like Richard Heathfield 
from sci.crypt and comp.lang.c who then stopped talking to me excessive, since I 
can counter with a cloud over his head (as I remember, anyway). 

> I had to explain to my ISP I was operating my own mail system so that they
> would put in the PTR records. lcs checks the PTR records before it will
> accept a message. Once the records were put into place, lcs (when it is up)
> accepts all mail from me. That had me going in circles for a bit.
> 
> Yeah, anonymity on the Internet is tough to keep. We must bear that in
> mind. However, I doubt the NSA or anyone else would be interested in
> 99.99999+% of the traffic that goes through re-mailers. For that other
> small %, beware I guess.
> 
> Regards to all,
> Twisty Admin
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 6.58ckt
> 
> iQA/AwUBQ2dJI/9qPDhkRaWyEQIonwCgiSngwq6f9wrEf+C0TypzxSEWLTkAoNhB
> u/KHo/Epq9Vbg6vHtFgs6cvt
> =ZoxM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>