You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   95-119   120-144   145-149    
 
Author Message
25 new of 149 responses total.
cross
response 120 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 05:56 UTC 2006

What does that have to do with anything?
mcnally
response 121 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 07:28 UTC 2006

 re #119:  
 Strictly hypothetically, let's imagine that someone logs in and tries
 to send 10,000 spam messages from an IP address that reverse-lookup
 tells us belongs to a student computer lab at a large public university,
 for example UCLA.  What good do you suppose that knowledge does us?
 Do we know who to contact at potentially any .edu-listed institution
 across the country if we have a problem?  Will that person respond to
 our inquiries?  Even if we do and even if they would, who's going to
 be willing to spend their time trying to track down each spammer that way?

 I'll grant that people connecting through a .edu address might be less
 likely to spam than other users (I don't know that for a fact, or have
 any real reason to believe it, but I'll certainly admit the possibility
 and even accept it for the sake of argument..)  But so what?
tod
response 122 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 17:27 UTC 2006

re #104
Is that so hard to believe?
nharmon
response 123 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 17:42 UTC 2006

Without proof? You bet.
tod
response 124 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 20:33 UTC 2006

WMD are hidden on Grex
nharmon
response 125 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 20:35 UTC 2006

I think triludaa has some Weapons of Mass Disturbance.
mcnally
response 126 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 22:10 UTC 2006

 Do you think he tested them on himself?
cross
response 127 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 23:41 UTC 2006

I think, that while it's possible that terrorists could use grex, it's
pretty unlikely.  Why wouldn't they go for something easier?
mcnally
response 128 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 23 23:45 UTC 2006

 Well, one thing we know about Grex is that "It gets easier.."
marcvh
response 129 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 24 00:11 UTC 2006

Maybe there's a sleeper cell in the 734 area code who isn't very well
funded and can't afford a real ISP.
tod
response 130 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 24 00:17 UTC 2006

Maybe GMail is only a matter of time and AOL and Yahoo mail are obviously not
viable communication mediums?
cross
response 131 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 24 00:45 UTC 2006

For what, though?  Yahoo and AOL might be the obvious choices.  Steganographic
techniques are still pretty effective.  Not to mention random postings on
blogs, and the like.  Terrorists communicating via Bill O'Reilly's blog would
almost be poetic.
mcnally
response 132 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 24 01:26 UTC 2006

 If I were part of al Qaeda I'd make sure to hide my messages in freerepublic
 posts..
tod
response 133 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 24 07:43 UTC 2006

Why hide them?  *snicker*
other
response 134 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 24 23:11 UTC 2006

I thought it was pretty obvious by now that terrorists DO communicate
via Bill O'Reilly's blog.
mcnally
response 135 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 25 00:00 UTC 2006

 Yes, but we're talking about so-called "Islamo-fascists",
 not the regular kind.
tod
response 136 of 149: Mark Unseen   Jan 25 04:38 UTC 2006

Fornier seems more like a Sean Hannity type...
wlevak
response 137 of 149: Mark Unseen   Mar 18 05:04 UTC 2006

OK, here is a simple verification scheme.  New users get a restricted account.
To get the unrestricted account, they must send Grex a self addressed stamped
envelope.  Someone at Grex sends them in this envelope, a computer generated
random password.  The user must report this password online to the Grex staff
who then removes the restrictions. Perhaps this last step could be automated.

This process uses the postal service to verify the name and address of the
user, or at least that the name and address are valid and the user is
receiving mail there.
fuzzball
response 138 of 149: Mark Unseen   Mar 30 14:26 UTC 2006

I think i get around 3 - 5 help requests every few days asking about 
how to get outgoing mail. I tell them is down for now for new users. 
so i was thinking about something.
would it be hard to setup a database of longtime trusted users <those 
of us that have been here since mid 90's> to have outgoing and 
incoming e-mail privilages, and those who are new <within a few 
months> not alowed outgoing/incoming e-mail unless they pay for an 
account here?
keesan
response 139 of 149: Mark Unseen   Mar 30 18:04 UTC 2006

How about a new category of half-member, who pays $3/month for outgoing mail
and does not get telnet or ftp privileges?   If spammers are not willing to
pay $6/month, probably they would not pay $3 either.  
kingjon
response 140 of 149: Mark Unseen   Mar 30 18:41 UTC 2006

I think making them pay for it may be unnecessary. Simply require some sort of
verification -- a couple of cents from Paypal could be one way (Paypal adds a
random number of cents to your bank account, then asks you how many it added,
to verify that it is in fact yours), while meeting someone official in person
could be another. The typing-in-a-word-on-the-screen thing could be a first
line of defense.

keesan
response 141 of 149: Mark Unseen   Mar 31 03:36 UTC 2006

Paypal does not work with the three browsers I tried it with (the ones at
grex).  
fuzzball
response 142 of 149: Mark Unseen   Apr 2 05:05 UTC 2006

yea, and i know a lot of people arent comfortable using paypal, or 
other means of online payment, and that may not have checking accounts 
or access to a moneyorder.
kingjon
response 143 of 149: Mark Unseen   Apr 2 09:58 UTC 2006

That's why I suggested it as "one way."

keesan
response 144 of 149: Mark Unseen   Apr 2 14:44 UTC 2006

Another way is to send a dollar bill in the mail.
 0-24   25-49   50-74   75-99   95-119   120-144   145-149    
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss