«

On 5 Aug 2005 08:49:07 GMT, Unruh <unruh-> wrote:

>"NotMe" <> writes:
>
>>Do not assume that if it is encrypted that at some point it will not be
>>decrypted, either today, tomorrow or some n-th day after tomorrow.
>
>And the conclusion anyone is to draw from this? /do not assume that time
>travel or mind reading cannot occur in the future. So what does that mean?
>One lives life rationally by examining alternatives and the liklihhod of
>them. One does not live by simply listing all possibilities no matter how
>outlandish and stopping at that point.

Of course not. Especially when it comes to individuals, the vast majority
of credit card and identity theft is still done via old fashioned social
engineering, digging through garbage, or gas station clerks who compile
lists.

As far as time travel or mind reading... we'll just have to take comfort in
the concept of mutually assured destruction. *Everyone* is going to have
some dirt. But in the end it will probably be far more of a benefit since
even the people with very weird experiences that they would never want to
admit will suddenly find thousands of other people who also felt they were
completely alone.


--
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of
thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible,
because there will be no words in which to express it."

- George Orwell as Syme in "1984"

In article <>, says...
> Leythos <> wrote:
> >In article <>, says...
> >>
> >> Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
> >> which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
> >> long distance business.
> >>
> >> 1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
> >> live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.
> >>
> >> (Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)
> >>
> >> 10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
> >> unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.
> >
> >11) Never say anything in E-Mail or Usenet or other medium that you
> >would not want to see in public/news/by your mother.
>
> Different list, so that should be item 1. However, you're not
> quite getting the picture (probably too young?).
>
> 1) Don't post anything to Usenet that you don't want your
> *grandchildren* to see, because they probably will.
>
> You worry about what you mother will see... I'm amazed at what
> my grandchildren know about.

I was on Usenet in 84, on the older net before that, getting paid for
code in the 70's, so I don't think I'm "younger".

Most people respect their mother more than their children and many
people don't have children - it's about the age thing, what we find
unacceptable in our moral values the newer generation is more tolerant
of, and so it goes.


--


remove 999 in order to email me

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 09:55:43 GMT, David Taylor <>
wrote:

>Without wishing to get into the issue of what is possible now or in the
>future, capturing and playing back VoIP is NOW:-
>http://vomit.xtdnet.nl/

Yech. You don't have to resort to such hacker tools to sniff VoIP.

The industry has a variety of commercial vendors who sell VoIP test,
quality monitoring, and call analysis tools. For example:
http://www.touchstone-inc.com/Produc...eQ/WinEyeQ.htm
http://www.niksun.com/Products_NetVoice.htm
http://www.telrex.com/callrex.htm
http://www.3com.com/voip/redbox.html
http://www.accuratealways.com
These are commonly found in telemarketing tanks and large corporate or
government networks.

Ethereal will also capture and decode most VoIP protocols and RTP
streams. It's a bit tricky but not impossible. Here's some clues:
http://www.voice2sniff.org
http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethere.../msg00092.html

There are some technical difficulties with wiretap via wireless which
are obvious to anyone that has ever tried to actually obtain useful
data from a wireless sniff or capture. I won't mention what they are
as I believe that aspiring criminals should learn such things the hard
way.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
AE6KS 831-336-2558

> The industry has a variety of commercial vendors who sell VoIP test,
> quality monitoring, and call analysis tools. For example:

Jeff, you're dangling that word "sell" again!

I don't think too many of dubious intent will be rushing to buy when
there's something for free which I took as the initial concern.

> Ethereal will also capture and decode most VoIP protocols and RTP
> streams. It's a bit tricky but not impossible. Here's some clues:
> http://www.voice2sniff.org
> http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethere.../msg00092.html

Yep, quite.

However either way, my point was that VoIP capture is NOW not something
that may happen in the future.

David.

Leythos <> wrote:
>In article <>, says...
>> Leythos <> wrote:
>> >In article <>, says...
>> >>
>> >> Let me explain 10 important things about telephones to you...
>> >> which comes from 34 years, before retiring, in the telephone
>> >> long distance business.
>> >>
>> >> 1) Do *not* *ever* say *anything* on a telephone that you cannot
>> >> live with seeing on the front page of tomorrows local newspaper.
>> >>
>> >> (Items 2 through 9 have precisely the same words as item 1.)
>> >>
>> >> 10) There is no such thing as a secure telephone connection,
>> >> unless *you* provide the encryption at both ends.
>> >
>> >11) Never say anything in E-Mail or Usenet or other medium that you
>> >would not want to see in public/news/by your mother.
>>
>> Different list, so that should be item 1. However, you're not
>> quite getting the picture (probably too young?).
>>
>> 1) Don't post anything to Usenet that you don't want your
>> *grandchildren* to see, because they probably will.
>>
>> You worry about what you mother will see... I'm amazed at what
>> my grandchildren know about.
>
>I was on Usenet in 84, on the older net before that, getting paid for
>code in the 70's, so I don't think I'm "younger".
>
>Most people respect their mother more than their children and many
>people don't have children - it's about the age thing, what we find
>unacceptable in our moral values the newer generation is more tolerant
>of, and so it goes.

You are *still* missing the point.

It isn't just what your contemporaries can see (which in the
case of a perspective employer can in fact be significant,
though I suppose your concern about your mother is equally
valid), but the fact that we are leaving a legacy that will
outlive us individually.

If posters want to be taken seriously by anyone, today or
tomorrow, they need to write for an audience that includes "your
*grandchildren*", and that is true for people who are 15 years
old just as well as it is for people who a childless at 85 years
of age.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 17:32:21 GMT, David Taylor <>
wrote:

>> The industry has a variety of commercial vendors who sell VoIP test,
>> quality monitoring, and call analysis tools. For example:
>
>Jeff, you're dangling that word "sell" again!

Well, yes. I'm in the business of separating my customers from their
money. As a greedy businessman, I consider it appropriate for
customer to help subsidize my decadent and lavish lifestyle. So far,
one person sent me $15 via paypal for my sage advice. It's a start.

I just wanted to point out that sniffers and monitors are commonly
available, even if you do have to pay for them.

>I don't think too many of dubious intent will be rushing to buy when
>there's something for free which I took as the initial concern.

Well, Ethereal is free as are the various plug-in decoders.

Here's a free JAVA based VoIP sniffer I found on Sourceforge:
http://jvoip-sip.sourceforge.net/index.php
One problem is that it's mostly in Italian.

>> Ethereal will also capture and decode most VoIP protocols and RTP
>> streams. It's a bit tricky but not impossible. Here's some clues:
>> http://www.voice2sniff.org
>> http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethere.../msg00092.html

>Yep, quite.
>However either way, my point was that VoIP capture is NOW not something
>that may happen in the future.

Agreed. Wireless VoIP sniffing is easy enough and can be done. Also,
there's a problem with some clients. The voice payload might be
encrypted but the SIP setup data is by necessity unencrypted.
Therefore, I can extract what phone numbers or IP's are being called,
and who's originating the call, which is quite useful information.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
AE6KS 831-336-2558

> http://jvoip-sip.sourceforge.net/index.php
> One problem is that it's mostly in Italian.

C'mon, Google translation services are always fun!

> Agreed. Wireless VoIP sniffing is easy enough and can be done. Also,
> there's a problem with some clients. The voice payload might be
> encrypted but the SIP setup data is by necessity unencrypted.

Yes, frustratingly I have both Vonage and an alternate service. Only
Vonage was their router to be connected to the cable modem and my Sipura
wants to be connected there too. I asked Vonage what the SIP account
details were as the firmware is crippled and doesn't display the SIP
page and although their router is a 2 POTS port, I couldn't enter my
second provider for the same crippled firmware reason. I was going to
simply sniff the Vonage auth data but in the end just did a bit of
reconfiguration and the result works.

David.

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:05:05 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson)
wrote:

>If posters want to be taken seriously by anyone, today or
>tomorrow, they need to write for an audience that includes "your
>*grandchildren*", and that is true for people who are 15 years
>old just as well as it is for people who a childless at 85 years
>of age.

Wouldn't that kind of ruin the stew? It's like going out on a first date
having pre-conceived every line you will speak so that you make a good
impression. That is perhaps useful as a means to an end, but rarely
anything approaching the truth. Maybe our descendents would prefer a more
realistic view of us just being ourselves.

Sometimes I wish we had some stories of America's founding fathers getting
soused and falling off their horses. Not that I believe that having myths
and legends is necessarily bad. But would we value the Declaration of
Independence any less if we were to find out that Thomas Jefferson was
wearing a dress and six petticoats when he wrote it?

I don't think so. In fact that would really kind of drive home the concept
of the individuals right to pursue happiness.

Thomas Jefferson - a hell of a guy, and my kind of woman...

--
The plans differ; the planners are all alike...

- Fredric Bastiat

CyberDroog <> wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:05:05 -0800, (Floyd L. Davidson)
>wrote:
>
>>If posters want to be taken seriously by anyone, today or
>>tomorrow, they need to write for an audience that includes "your
>>*grandchildren*", and that is true for people who are 15 years
>>old just as well as it is for people who a childless at 85 years
>>of age.
>
>Wouldn't that kind of ruin the stew? It's like going out on a first date
>having pre-conceived every line you will speak so that you make a good

You do not need to "pre-conceive" every line before the date
starts. But *thinking* before talking is clearly a good idea on
first dates as well as in Usenet posts.

>impression. That is perhaps useful as a means to an end, but rarely
>anything approaching the truth. Maybe our descendents would prefer a more
>realistic view of us just being ourselves.

If the "real you" spouts off without thinking, go for it!

>Sometimes I wish we had some stories of America's founding fathers getting
>soused and falling off their horses. Not that I believe that having myths
>and legends is necessarily bad. But would we value the Declaration of
>Independence any less if we were to find out that Thomas Jefferson was
>wearing a dress and six petticoats when he wrote it?

Why not? J Edgar Hoover was wearing something like that when
he made the FBI into a legend...

>I don't think so. In fact that would really kind of drive home the concept
>of the individuals right to pursue happiness.
>
>Thomas Jefferson - a hell of a guy, and my kind of woman...

Well, apparently several Presidents felt somewhat that way about
Hoover too.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

CyberDroog wrote:

>
> Sometimes I wish we had some stories of America's founding fathers getting
> soused and falling off their horses. Not that I believe that having myths
> and legends is necessarily bad. But would we value the Declaration of
> Independence any less if we were to find out that Thomas Jefferson was
> wearing a dress and six petticoats when he wrote it?

I think you need to read more history - there are plenty of such stories.



--
Tony Lawrence
Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com