Re: Another cotse.net bug: 14 aliases deleted w/o warning.

On 24 Jul 2004 02:31:40 GMT, "[ Doc Jeff ]" <>
wrote:

>You deleted an alias that had sub-aliases (for want of a better term)
?
>Did you think that you could delete the parent without also removing
the
>children?

SUB-aliases? Wow, making us stuff just to have your way! And you're
another cotse.net VOLUNTEER? Ha, that just proves my point further,
about questionable service.

>The local port doesn't matter at all. You could use 127.0.0.1:60000
if you
>chose to do so.

Yeah, well tell the other volunteers about it. He (or she) therefore
did *not advise my client w/anything relevant...he just gave a quick
answer because he's either lazy or ignorant. It could even have been
*you. No surprise there, since you make up things as you go (such as
"sub aliases").

>You do realise that the online (IRC) help is staffed by volunteers,
don't
>you. People who are, you know, actually human? People who can make a
>mistake once in awhile... Jeez. Step off already.

I allow for that. But when I am told by Steve and his apologists that
it's "strange" no one responded to my helpdesk query within 24 hrs....
then they are lying: it's *not strange at all. Okay, once in a while I
can accept that. But when they consistantly don't answer queries, it's
only reasonable for me to point this out here, in a newsgroup.

You can't have it both ways: claim that *all queries are answered
within 24 hrs....and then do not do so, consistently. And some of the
folks at IRC online help apparantly enjoy giving misinformation,
rather than asking some standard questions to narrow down the problem.

>> http://www.proxomitron.info/
>
>Didn't that become a dead product?

Aren't you the crude dude. You *know the author (a young man) recently
died (in May I think)...because I mentioned that in my original
article that started this thread. Proxomitron will remain a powerful
privacy tool for at least several more years. And longer, assuming
that some of his dedicated and talented admirers will continue
evolving this program.

If you really believe cotse.net is all so wonderful, then howz cum you
feel you must make things up (IOW: lie)? It was certainly hitting
below the belt to use the death of a talented hacker dedicated to
providing a powerful privacy tool for free...by calling his program a
"dead product". You only serve to prove my point at the poor help
provided by volunteers. You probably couldn't get a job doing this,
precisely because you make things up...but Steve will take you on
board, won't he? If he had any sense, he'd fire volunteers like you.
Oh, wait, you're not employed, so you *can't be fired. Sorry!

>> firewall protection,
>>
>> http://www.zonelabs.com/
>
>Remind me sometime to show you about your quality firewall there...
Try
>Outpost instead or Tiny...

I know of them, too. However, Zone Alarm has consistantly rated higher
than any other that is offered for free. However, those two you
mentioned are perfectly fine, also.

>> http://www.hushmail.com/
>
>Which requires Java to use... very secure when they can see what
you're
>doing... Tsk.

PGP is another way to go, and there are good utilities out there to
simply its use. Java and Javascript can enhance security, if used the
right way. Hushmal uses it the right way. The javascript is necessary,
in order to encrypt one's mail *before sending it out. To encrypt
during transmission, or on hushmail's server provides an opening for a
hacker to intercept the msg. before it's encrypted.

>> All of these can be accomplished via freeware. (The
services/products I
>> just listed are *all free for personal use.)
>
>Then may I invite you to go use them and stop bothering Cotse's
customers
>here?

I am not bothering anyone who cares to know the truth about this
service...only the apologists. I *am developing my free package for
myself and others to use...and will cease using cotse.net in due time.
I don't care to pay for a security service that lies about its quality
and reliablity. Just common sense.

By your blatantly MAKING THINGS UP, you only served to affirm my
disappointed conclusions about his service. You certainly didn't do
your (pseudo) BOSS any favor!

Chief Thracian Usenet

On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 19:11:12 -0000 (GMT), in article
<dXNlcjAwMDA=.8541710ca3b99b56ab0d9693de16d531@109 0696272.nulluser.com>,
"Chief Thracian Usenet" <chief_thracian-no->
wrote:

>On 24 Jul 2004 02:31:40 GMT, "[ Doc Jeff ]" <>
>wrote:
>
>>You deleted an alias that had sub-aliases (for want of a better term)
>?
>>Did you think that you could delete the parent without also removing
>the
>>children?
>
>SUB-aliases? Wow, making us stuff just to have your way! And you're
>another cotse.net VOLUNTEER? Ha, that just proves my point further,
>about questionable service.
>

Haha. It proves nothing, excepet the fact that you have no idea what
Cotse's Goldlist's aliases are, or how they work..

You stupid ignoramus. Do you not know how Cotse's Goldlist alias
works? Are your clients as stupid as you are? Can they not set up
Cotse tunnels on their own? Do they not know the difference betweeen a
local port and a remote port?

>>The local port doesn't matter at all. You could use 127.0.0.1:60000
>if you
>>chose to do so.
>
>Yeah, well tell the other volunteers about it. He (or she) therefore
>did *not advise my client w/anything relevant...he just gave a quick
>answer because he's either lazy or ignorant. It could even have been
>*you. No surprise there, since you make up things as you go (such as
>"sub aliases").
>

Hey, your client is stupid. He/She has no idea how to set up Cotse.
Period!

You *and* your clients are idiots! Simple.

>>You do realise that the online (IRC) help is staffed by volunteers,
>don't
>>you. People who are, you know, actually human? People who can make a
>>mistake once in awhile... Jeez. Step off already.
>
>I allow for that. But when I am told by Steve and his apologists that
>it's "strange" no one responded to my helpdesk query within 24 hrs....
>then they are lying: it's *not strange at all. Okay, once in a while I
>can accept that. But when they consistantly don't answer queries, it's
>only reasonable for me to point this out here, in a newsgroup.
>

The only thing that is strange is that your moronic stupidity is
*still* unable to work out how Cotse aliases works.

>You can't have it both ways: claim that *all queries are answered
>within 24 hrs....and then do not do so, consistently. And some of the
>folks at IRC online help apparantly enjoy giving misinformation,
>rather than asking some standard questions to narrow down the problem.
>

Maybe they are just ignoring you? I certainly don't make it a habit of
answering trolls/morons/fukkheads in this ng.

>>> http://www.proxomitron.info/
>>
>>Didn't that become a dead product?
>
>Aren't you the crude dude. You *know the author (a young man) recently
>died (in May I think)...because I mentioned that in my original
>article that started this thread. Proxomitron will remain a powerful
>privacy tool for at least several more years. And longer, assuming
>that some of his dedicated and talented admirers will continue
>evolving this program.
>

No, the author is dead. The product is dead.

Simple really.

>If you really believe cotse.net is all so wonderful, then howz cum you
>feel you must make things up (IOW: lie)? It was certainly hitting
>below the belt to use the death of a talented hacker dedicated to
>providing a powerful privacy tool for free...by calling his program a
>"dead product". You only serve to prove my point at the poor help
>provided by volunteers. You probably couldn't get a job doing this,
>precisely because you make things up...but Steve will take you on
>board, won't he? If he had any sense, he'd fire volunteers like you.
>Oh, wait, you're not employed, so you *can't be fired. Sorry!
>
>>> firewall protection,
>>>
>>> http://www.zonelabs.com/
>>
>>Remind me sometime to show you about your quality firewall there...
>Try
>>Outpost instead or Tiny...
>
>I know of them, too. However, Zone Alarm has consistantly rated higher
>than any other that is offered for free. However, those two you
>mentioned are perfectly fine, also.
>

So stupid is as stupid does heh?

>>> http://www.hushmail.com/
>>
>>Which requires Java to use... very secure when they can see what
>you're
>>doing... Tsk.
>
>PGP is another way to go, and there are good utilities out there to
>simply its use. Java and Javascript can enhance security, if used the
>right way. Hushmal uses it the right way. The javascript is necessary,
>in order to encrypt one's mail *before sending it out. To encrypt
>during transmission, or on hushmail's server provides an opening for a
>hacker to intercept the msg. before it's encrypted.
>
>>> All of these can be accomplished via freeware. (The
>services/products I
>>> just listed are *all free for personal use.)
>>
>>Then may I invite you to go use them and stop bothering Cotse's
>customers
>>here?
>
>I am not bothering anyone who cares to know the truth about this
>service...only the apologists. I *am developing my free package for
>myself and others to use...and will cease using cotse.net in due time.
>I don't care to pay for a security service that lies about its quality
>and reliablity. Just common sense.
>

Wrong. You are simply spreading FUD, you idiotic troll. Nobody here is
taking you seriously.

>By your blatantly MAKING THINGS UP, you only served to affirm my
>disappointed conclusions about his service. You certainly didn't do
>your (pseudo) BOSS any favor!
>

So why don't you request a refund then?

Go somewhere else if you're that unhappy with Cotse. Nobody is forcing
you to stay with them.

Your continual moaning without any action means you are just a stupid
ineffective whining troll.

Nothing more, nothing less.

John Smith

On 24 Jul 2004 02:31:40 GMT, "[ Doc Jeff ]" <>
wrote:

>"Chief Thracian Usenet" <chief_thracian-no->
wrote
>in
>news:dXNlcjAwMDA=.52ac62d8d5c6b69aaba28ae8eecd98f :
>
>> I had 39 aliases listed with my cotse.net account...some of which
were
>> just subscription addies to different lists.
>
>My goodness but that's a lot...

Not when cotse.net suggests you use a seperate alias for each online
subscription you use...then if you get any spam, you'll know who
caused it. Actually, 39 is not very many at all, if that is how you
want to use your aliases.

Quoting from cotse's own help file
https://www.cotse.net/support/aliases.html:

"With your Cotse Account you receive "Unlimited Aliases", if you
choose to use any at all, it's totally up to you.
<snip>
As an example, I have around 100 filters setup in my desktop email
client. "

>It is not a security breach. It is user ignorance.

Keeping catchall "on" as system default is indeed a security breach.
It should preferably be "off" system-wide...or (second choice) users
should have control over whether they want this "on" or "off". There
is no explanation of their alias settings re. "catchall", so most
users remain clueless.

>You were told ad nauseum
>how to fix it to your liking but you obviously have chosen not to.

Thracian explained ad nauseum why this is a breach, and even consulted
other admins to be sure he was correct in his assumption.

>Please don't make me gnaw your face off for this.

I thought Geoffrey Dahmer was killed in prison. Or is this a "Silence
of the Lambs" shtick? Either way, such violent language only serves to
weaken your case.

>Learn to use the goldlist feature. It's not so hard.

That is a bandaid measure, which does not make the security breach
disappear. Thracian surmised that Steve does not have catchall "on" by
choice, but because that function was left out of the version of the
mail service he presently used. Instead of admitting that, Steve most
likely pretended he has catchall "on" by choice. His example of why
someone would like it "on" was trivial (as Thracian correctly stated),
and not worth the security risk.

>It's ALWAYS a good idea to make a backup of anything you do.

No excuse for the sudden deletion of his aliases. Some would even call
it a "cop out".

>You deleted an alias that had sub-aliases (for want of a better
term)?
>Did you think that you could delete the parent without also removing
the
>children?

There is no sub-alias feature in cotse.net...at least, not one that's
documented, or made available in a user's account. If anything, all
aliases created are a sub-alias of one's original user name, in
Thracian's case that is: .

Why then wouldn't all aliases be erased, when one deletes just one?
That is what your kind of reasoning implies.

You're another apologist, pullling rabbits out of your hat in order to
cover for blatant errors in cotse.net's system.

>> So, WARNING TO ALL COTSE.NET USERS:
>
>Please don't do that. Such warnings should only come from Steve
Gielda.

They should, but they're not. So a user is in the awkward position of
speaking out, only to be mostly harassed and insulted. With Steve
himself participating in this crude behavior, including making up
excuses for this or that glitch, bug, or poor service.

>YOU erased them! Nobody did it for you, YOU did it. Blaming Cotse for
>erasing them is like blaming your underwear for having a hole. You
created
>the crap (or in this case deleted it) so YOU are responsible...

There are no "sub-aliases". Each aliases is made independently, with
no further option such as "sub-alias". Each when deleted, should not
delete any other. I'm sure Steve knows about this glitch too, but
rather than alert people (so they can be sure to create a text
backup), he'd rather keep it swept under the carpet.

>> Caveat emptor.
>
>That's good advice in any case.

Especially when it comes to online security services that don't
acknowledge known glitches, and whose help

>You do realise that the online (IRC) help is staffed by volunteers,
don't
>you. People who are, you know, actually human? People who can make a
>mistake once in awhile... Jeez. Step off already.

Sure. But when cotse.net advertises itself as "the best", and "all
queries are answered within 24 hrs."...it ought to stand by this. When
Thracian has made about 10 queries in a few weeks, with only 2 or 3
responded to, I'd say that his pointing this out is only fair. If
cotse.net says they are using volunteers, not all queries will be
answered promptly, please be patient"...then they wouldn't be lying
about their service as it really is.

>Cotse has always gone by word of mouth. That's how I found out about
it.
>I've had my account close to two years and have yet to have a single
issue
>that couldn't be fixed either through my own study or help sought
from the
>helpdesk. That's why I volunteer my time in there.

Word of mouth? That's a large part of what Usenet's about. It is the
online equivalent of "word of mouth"...something that's "hot" (really
good) is quickly shared in newsgroups. I haven't come across any
discussions of alt.cotse, in doing a google-usenet search outside of
alt.cotse itself.

>> http://www.hushmail.com/
>
>Which requires Java to use... very secure when they can see what
you're
>doing... Tsk.

I believe that is necessary in order to encode the messages on a
user's hard drive, before transmission. If the javascript is not used
for any surreptitious reason, it is very secure.

One can learn to use PGP instead, if you do not want any javascript in
your world. Even Steve admitted the usefulness of javascript by
services that respect user privacy.

>Then may I invite you to go use them and stop bothering Cotse's
customers
>here?

He's doing cotse customers a favor, by alerting them to glitches they
otherwise wouldn't know about, since not acknowledged.

marvin9999

On 25 Jul 2004 13:42:24 -0700,
(marvin9999) wrote:

>>> http://www.hushmail.com/
>>
>>Which requires Java to use... very secure when they can see
what
>you're
>>doing... Tsk.
>
>I believe that is necessary in order to encode the messages on a
>user's hard drive, before transmission. If the javascript is
not used
>for any surreptitious reason, it is very secure.
>

Do pay attention.....Java and Javascript are two completely
different things.

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer

On 25 Jul 2004 13:42:24 -0700, in article
<>,
(marvin9999) wrote:


[SNIP]

~sigh~

Nice try Chief Thracian Usenet/marvin9999. Morphing yourself to
pretend you have sockpuppets now are we? That's pretty sad.

Pity you gave yourself away, it was a nice try though.

Anonymous