Re: Question about Google Groups spammers

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 15, 2007.

  1. On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <> wrote:
    >Borked Pseudo Mailed <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
    >
    >> As most of you already know, there is a serious pandemic problem facing
    >>readers
    >>in news groups. There is a glut of spammers and sock puppets who seem to spam
    >>with
    >>impunity, many through the Google Groups web to usenet interface. I am
    >>talking
    >>about commercial spam, people selling things, people who want your money. I
    >>had
    >>always thought that posting commerical spam links to groups with charters
    >>against it
    >>was considered abuse, and could get the spammer's account cancelled. That no
    >>longer
    >>seems to be the case, at least not with Google.
    >>
    >> Complaints to <> seem to be ignored. You copy the
    >>complete
    >>spam message with headers and send it to them, with "Commercial SPAM link
    >>complaint"
    >>or other obvious wording in the subject title, but no bananas. The spam
    >>continues,
    >>and new Google sock puppets keep popping up like summer dandelions.
    >>
    >> A few months ago, I began tracking the IP addresses in the spam and sock
    >>puppet
    >>message headers, of all spam that has been disrupting our groups, noticing
    >>that
    >>some
    >>of the messages had been cross posted to other groups, and in very odd
    >>combinations.
    >>
    >> I began to notice that the Google IP addresses in the spam headers are
    >>coming
    >>from all over the place, from Australia, the US, UK, everywhere that Google
    >>Groups
    >>is accessible.
    >>
    >> I don't get it. I can't believe that spammers around the world could be
    >>working
    >>in cahoots, could they? Have spammers created a global usenet link-exchange
    >>program,
    >>where they agree to constantly create new Google sock puppets, each from their
    >>own
    >>injection points that Google identifies by IP block, then keep posting each
    >>other's
    >>spammy links in usenet messages, and maybe to proprietary Google web groups
    >>too?
    >>
    >> I know there are plenty of other spammy ISPs and what not. But how many
    >>other
    >>Google Groups are there? It's like they are working tag teams. One Google
    >>user
    >>posts a newbie message "I am new here," "I need information." Then the
    >>spammer
    >>responds right on que, usually with their own Google Groups account, or other
    >>usenet
    >>service.
    >>
    >> So I guess I have two questions. Is an international spammer's
    >>"link-exchange"
    >>program really going on here? And if it is, then is there any practical way
    >>to
    >>stop
    >>them? Maybe I'm just being paranoid, or don't fully understand how the whole
    >>Google
    >>Groups posting thing works. Spam sucks. Whatever happened to the UDP?
    >>
    >>Paranoid
    >>

    >You're either a troll or eelbash, who, of course, never heard about
    >botnets.


    Actually, you've helped to suggest an answer to one of my two primary
    questions, to some extent, that it may be possible that spammers have
    automated programs that allow them to post and morph through the Google
    Groups interface. But isn't Google the world's leading search engine? Why,
    or how, would they allow malicious commercial spammers to take advantage
    of them?

    I'm not the reviled eelbash, but I'm probably ignorant enough about the
    subject matter on Internet spam, to qualify as a "troll" in the watchful eyes
    of Internet experts. I am just sick of the spam. If there is nothing that
    can be done about it, then I suppose that is that. Please say it isn't so.

    I've never heard of botnets before, so I searched that term inclusive of
    usenet AND spam AND google AND groups, which returns some interesting results.

    I read that the "24hoursupport.helpdesk" and "alt.internet.search-engines"
    groups might be of help on this, so I've added them to this reply.

    Paranoid
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 15, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Andy Walker Guest

    Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:

    >But isn't Google the world's leading search engine? Why,
    >or how, would they allow malicious commercial spammers to take advantage
    >of them?


    They get paid lots of money... IMHO Google=Greed

    > I'm not the reviled eelbash, but I'm probably ignorant enough about the
    >subject matter on Internet spam, to qualify as a "troll" in the watchful eyes
    >of Internet experts.


    That much is certain.

    Well *that* and you're anonymous proxy makes you look really fat.

    > I am just sick of the spam. If there is nothing that
    >can be done about it, then I suppose that is that. Please say it isn't so.


    You can always killfile google, which pretty much echoes my sentiments
    towards webtv and aol.

    > I've never heard of botnets before, so I searched that term inclusive of
    >usenet AND spam AND google AND groups, which returns some interesting results.


    Hahaha, that's pretty lame of you. Statistics don't lie; 99.9999% of
    all spam is attributable to zombies, and the remainder is sold in a
    can.

    > I read that the "24hoursupport.helpdesk" and "alt.internet.search-engines"
    >groups might be of help on this, so I've added them to this reply.
    >
    >Paranoid


    I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.
    Andy Walker, Apr 15, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Andy Walker <> wrote:
    >Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    >
    >>But isn't Google the world's leading search engine? Why,
    >>or how, would they allow malicious commercial spammers to take advantage
    >>of them?

    >
    >They get paid lots of money... IMHO Google=Greed
    >
    >> I'm not the reviled eelbash, but I'm probably ignorant enough about the
    >>subject matter on Internet spam, to qualify as a "troll" in the watchful eyes
    >>of Internet experts.

    >
    >That much is certain.
    >
    >Well *that* and you're anonymous proxy makes you look really fat.
    >
    >> I am just sick of the spam. If there is nothing that
    >>can be done about it, then I suppose that is that. Please say it isn't so.

    >
    >You can always killfile google, which pretty much echoes my sentiments
    >towards webtv and aol.
    >
    >> I've never heard of botnets before, so I searched that term inclusive of
    >>usenet AND spam AND google AND groups, which returns some interesting results.

    >
    >Hahaha, that's pretty lame of you. Statistics don't lie; 99.9999% of
    >all spam is attributable to zombies, and the remainder is sold in a
    >can.
    >
    >> I read that the "24hoursupport.helpdesk" and "alt.internet.search-engines"
    >>groups might be of help on this, so I've added them to this reply.
    >>
    >>Paranoid

    >
    >I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.


    Your spelling of judg-e-ment is so noted. ;)

    How about some answers?
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 15, 2007
    #3
  4. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:50:17 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:

    >>
    >>I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.

    >
    > Your spelling of judg-e-ment is so noted. ;)
    >


    What's special about Andy spelling judgement correctly?

    --
    Registered Linux User 413057.
    Both Mandriva 2007 and Ubuntu 6.06
    You can have it all. My empire of hurt.
    Aardvark, Apr 15, 2007
    #4
  5. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    *alan* Guest

    "Borked Pseudo Mailed" wrote
    > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Andy Walker wrote:


    [snip]

    >>I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.

    >
    > Your spelling of judg-e-ment is so noted. ;)


    And what, pray tell, is so winkingly noteworthy of that spelling?

    --
    Alan
    *alan*, Apr 15, 2007
    #5
  6. >>On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <> wrote:
    >>>Borked Pseudo Mailed <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> As most of you already know, there is a serious pandemic problem facing
    >>>>readers
    >>>>in news groups. There is a glut of spammers and sock puppets who seem to
    >>>>spam
    >>>>with
    >>>>impunity, many through the Google Groups web to usenet interface. I am
    >>>>talking
    >>>>about commercial spam, people selling things, people who want your money. I
    >>>>had
    >>>>always thought that posting commerical spam links to groups with charters
    >>>>against it
    >>>>was considered abuse, and could get the spammer's account cancelled. That
    >>>>no
    >>>>longer
    >>>>seems to be the case, at least not with Google.
    >>>>
    >>>> Complaints to <> seem to be ignored. You copy the
    >>>>complete
    >>>>spam message with headers and send it to them, with "Commercial SPAM link
    >>>>complaint"
    >>>>or other obvious wording in the subject title, but no bananas. The spam
    >>>>continues,
    >>>>and new Google sock puppets keep popping up like summer dandelions.
    >>>>
    >>>> A few months ago, I began tracking the IP addresses in the spam and sock
    >>>>puppet
    >>>>message headers, of all spam that has been disrupting our groups, noticing
    >>>>that
    >>>>some
    >>>>of the messages had been cross posted to other groups, and in very odd
    >>>>combinations.
    >>>>
    >>>> I began to notice that the Google IP addresses in the spam headers are
    >>>>coming
    >>>>from all over the place, from Australia, the US, UK, everywhere that Google
    >>>>Groups
    >>>>is accessible.
    >>>>
    >>>> I don't get it. I can't believe that spammers around the world could be
    >>>>working
    >>>>in cahoots, could they? Have spammers created a global usenet link-exchange
    >>>>program,
    >>>>where they agree to constantly create new Google sock puppets, each from
    >>>>their
    >>>>own
    >>>>injection points that Google identifies by IP block, then keep posting each
    >>>>other's
    >>>>spammy links in usenet messages, and maybe to proprietary Google web groups
    >>>>too?
    >>>>
    >>>> I know there are plenty of other spammy ISPs and what not. But how many
    >>>>other
    >>>>Google Groups are there? It's like they are working tag teams. One Google
    >>>>user
    >>>>posts a newbie message "I am new here," "I need information." Then the
    >>>>spammer
    >>>>responds right on que, usually with their own Google Groups account, or
    >>>>other
    >>>>usenet
    >>>>service.
    >>>>
    >>>> So I guess I have two questions. Is an international spammer's
    >>>>"link-exchange"
    >>>>program really going on here? And if it is, then is there any practical way
    >>>>to
    >>>>stop
    >>>>them? Maybe I'm just being paranoid, or don't fully understand how the
    >>>>whole
    >>>>Google
    >>>>Groups posting thing works. Spam sucks. Whatever happened to the UDP?
    >>>>
    >>>>Paranoid
    >>>>
    >>>You're either a troll or eelbash, who, of course, never heard about
    >>>botnets.

    >>
    >> Actually, you've helped to suggest an answer to one of my two primary
    >>questions, to some extent, that it may be possible that spammers have
    >>automated programs that allow them to post and morph through the Google
    >>Groups interface. But isn't Google the world's leading search engine? Why,
    >>or how, would they allow malicious commercial spammers to take advantage
    >>of them?
    >>
    >> I'm not the reviled eelbash, but I'm probably ignorant enough about the
    >>subject matter on Internet spam, to qualify as a "troll" in the watchful eyes
    >>of Internet experts. I am just sick of the spam. If there is nothing that
    >>can be done about it, then I suppose that is that. Please say it isn't so.
    >>
    >> I've never heard of botnets before, so I searched that term inclusive of
    >>usenet AND spam AND google AND groups, which returns some interesting results.
    >>
    >> I read that the "24hoursupport.helpdesk" and "alt.internet.search-engines"
    >>groups might be of help on this, so I've added them to this reply.
    >>
    >>Paranoid
    >>


    On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <> wrote:
    >I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam. Anybody
    >who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an asshole.


    OK.

    How about some straight answers? Why are spammers constantly spamming usenet and
    morphing sock puppets specifically through the Google Groups web to usenet interface,
    and getting away with it? Is it a stupid question?

    If nothing can be done to stop the spammers who constantly spam through their
    googlegroups.com web to usenet accounts, with impunity, then that is that. But I am
    surprised that so many computer experts here openly support spamming through the
    millions of abusive Google Groups accounts, unless they, you, are among the
    commercial spammers who abuse their Google Groups accounts.

    That does not bode well for Google. But what do they care? Google executives
    are making money hand over fist from commercial spammers.

    No wonder Google says "do no evil." They don't want anybody encroaching on their
    billion dollar turf.


    Paranoid
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 15, 2007
    #6
  7. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Paul B Guest

    On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 11:56:22 GMT, Aardvark <>
    wrote:

    >On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:50:17 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    >
    >>>
    >>>I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.

    >>
    >> Your spelling of judg-e-ment is so noted. ;)
    >>

    >
    >What's special about Andy spelling judgement correctly?


    This will explain his ignorance.
    http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/judgement.html

    --
    Handmade jewelry, Texas :
    http://www.houstoncrafts.com/Swarovski/crystal-bracelet-303.html
    http://www.houstoncrafts.com/gemstone/bracelet-406.html
    http://www.houstoncrafts.com/houston-crafts-handcrafted-jewelry/new-beaded-jewelry-june.html
    Paul B, Apr 15, 2007
    #7
  8. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:22:08 +0100, Paul B wrote:

    > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 11:56:22 GMT, Aardvark <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:50:17 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    >>
    >>>>
    >>>>I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.
    >>>
    >>> Your spelling of judg-e-ment is so noted. ;)
    >>>

    >>
    >>What's special about Andy spelling judgement correctly?

    >
    > This will explain his ignorance.
    > http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/judgement.html
    >


    Well that's a horse of a different colour :)

    --
    Registered Linux User 413057.
    Both Mandriva 2007 and Ubuntu 6.06
    You can have it all. My empire of hurt.
    Aardvark, Apr 15, 2007
    #8
  9. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 09:50:59 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:

    >
    > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam. Anybody
    >>who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an asshole.


    **** me! I've never seen a copy of OE so b0rked. Its post quoting is
    totally out of kilter.

    --
    Registered Linux User 413057.
    Both Mandriva 2007 and Ubuntu 6.06
    You can have it all. My empire of hurt.
    Aardvark, Apr 15, 2007
    #9
  10. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Rick Merrill Guest

    Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    [snip]
    > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <> wrote:
    >> I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam. Anybody
    >> who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an asshole.

    >
    > OK.
    >
    > How about some straight answers? Why are spammers constantly spamming usenet and
    > morphing sock puppets specifically through the Google Groups web to usenet interface,
    > and getting away with it? Is it a stupid question?
    >


    Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
    ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
    more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the user
    places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop it.


    > If nothing can be done to stop the spammers who constantly spam through their
    > googlegroups.com web to usenet accounts, with impunity, then that is that. But I am
    > surprised that so many computer experts here openly support spamming through the
    > millions of abusive Google Groups accounts, unless they, you, are among the
    > commercial spammers who abuse their Google Groups accounts.
    >
    > That does not bode well for Google. But what do they care? Google executives
    > are making money hand over fist from commercial spammers.
    >
    > No wonder Google says "do no evil." They don't want anybody encroaching on their
    > billion dollar turf.

    [click]
    Rick Merrill, Apr 15, 2007
    #10
  11. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    john sumner Guest

    Rick Merrill wrote:
    > Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
    > ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
    > more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the user
    > places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop it.


    I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are ways
    of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
    something like that
    john sumner, Apr 15, 2007
    #11
  12. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Rick Merrill Guest

    john sumner wrote:
    > Rick Merrill wrote:
    >> Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
    >> ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
    >> more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the
    >> user places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop it.

    >
    > I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are ways
    > of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
    > something like that


    Yes, the ISP has records that connect IP with physical location and the
    police can get that pretty easily.
    Rick Merrill, Apr 16, 2007
    #12
  13. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    john sumner Guest

    Rick Merrill wrote:
    > john sumner wrote:
    >> Rick Merrill wrote:
    >>> Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
    >>> ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
    >>> more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the
    >>> user places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop
    >>> it.

    >>
    >> I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are ways
    >> of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
    >> something like that

    >
    > Yes, the ISP has records that connect IP with physical location and the
    > police can get that pretty easily.

    What about libraries rick?i know here in broward county fl you have to
    put your library card so i think that is one way to keep an ass clown
    from doing something like that.
    john sumner, Apr 16, 2007
    #13
  14. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Frosty Guest

    On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:22:08 +0100 in 24hoursupport.helpdesk Paul B
    <>, intended to write something
    intelligible, but instead wrote :

    <snip>

    >--
    >Handmade jewelry, Texas :
    >http://www.houstoncrafts.com/Swarovski/crystal-bracelet-303.html
    >http://www.houstoncrafts.com/gemstone/bracelet-406.html
    >http://www.houstoncrafts.com/houston-crafts-handcrafted-jewelry/new-beaded-jewelry-june.html


    Why do you bead stringers insist on calling yourselves "jewelers?"
    We real jewelers study 20, 30 years to be expert in our craft and
    folks like you, who just happen to have opposable thumbs, come along
    and just steal the title and run with it.

    Bah!
    --
    We now return you to 24hoursupport.helpdesk (other ng's snipped) which
    is already in progress.
    Frosty, Apr 16, 2007
    #14
  15. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Rick Merrill Guest

    john sumner wrote:
    > Rick Merrill wrote:
    >> john sumner wrote:
    >>> Rick Merrill wrote:
    >>>> Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily.
    >>>> Many ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a
    >>>> path for more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls,
    >>>> and the user places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do
    >>>> squat to stop it.
    >>>
    >>> I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are ways
    >>> of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
    >>> something like that

    >>
    >> Yes, the ISP has records that connect IP with physical location and
    >> the police can get that pretty easily.

    > What about libraries rick?i know here in broward county fl you have to
    > put your library card so i think that is one way to keep an ass clown
    > from doing something like that.


    Libraries and "internet cafes" remain open connections for scammers.
    Most 419 are originated that way: a hour later they are gonzo!

    I don't know what the libraries are doing for tracking, just for
    limiting access AFAIK.
    Rick Merrill, Apr 16, 2007
    #15
  16. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    john sumner Guest

    Rick Merrill wrote:
    > Libraries and "internet cafes" remain open connections for scammers.
    > Most 419 are originated that way: a hour later they are gonzo!
    >
    > I don't know what the libraries are doing for tracking, just for
    > limiting access AFAIK.


    Internet cafes i can see, but i think the libraries have ways of nailing
    people.
    john sumner, Apr 16, 2007
    #16
  17. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Rick Merrill Guest

    john sumner wrote:
    > Rick Merrill wrote:
    >> Libraries and "internet cafes" remain open connections for scammers.
    >> Most 419 are originated that way: a hour later they are gonzo!
    >>
    >> I don't know what the libraries are doing for tracking, just for
    >> limiting access AFAIK.

    >
    > Internet cafes i can see, but i think the libraries have ways of nailing
    > people.


    Some library searches require you to enter your card ## but I've
    not used the public access email or WWW.

    From what I hear there are dozens of 'anonymizers" (sounds like a
    skinflint!) that people use to hide their actual location.
    Rick Merrill, Apr 16, 2007
    #17
  18. On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Rick Merrill <> wrote:
    >Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
    >[snip]
    >> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>> I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam.
    >>> Anybody
    >>> who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an asshole.

    >>
    >> OK.
    >>
    >> How about some straight answers? Why are spammers constantly spamming
    >> usenet and
    >> morphing sock puppets specifically through the Google Groups web to usenet
    >> interface,
    >> and getting away with it? Is it a stupid question?
    >>

    >
    >Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
    >ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
    >more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the user
    >places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop it.
    >
    >

    So you're saying that, even if they wanted to, Google can do little or nothing
    to stop spammers from abusing their Google Groups accounts by posting commercial
    spam, and constantly creating new sock puppets to help them promote their
    commerical spam, that has been regularly flooding thousands of news groups. Then
    what is this address, , supposed to be for? I guess they
    don't consider commerical spamming any kind of abuse, nothing that rises to the
    level of getting that commerical spammer's Google Groups account cancelled.

    I guess that answers the second question, that either there is no practical
    way to stop it, or the desire on the part of Google to stop them is nonexistent,
    persuaded, perhaps, by some financial interests in allowing Google Groups account
    abusers to continue with their commercial spamming activities, unchecked.

    But that doesn't address the first question, which someone else suggested was
    accomplished by something called "botnets," noticing that commerical spam
    originating from Google Groups account abusers shows IP blocks coming from all
    over the free world. How do they do this? Is it an international usenet
    "link-exchange" program, or is it being done by sophisticated computer hackers,
    what gives?

    I find it fascinating that, so far, no one seems to want to address this first
    question, perhaps afraid that the all powerful Google overlords might drop their
    PR for criticizing them in public?


    Paranoid
    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 16, 2007
    #18
  19. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Default User Guest

    On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:30:37 -0600 (MDT), Borked Pseudo Mailed
    <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

    > I find it fascinating that, so far, no one seems to want to address this first
    >question, perhaps afraid that the all powerful Google overlords might drop their
    >PR for criticizing them in public?


    Both your questions were addressed, you apparently don't want to accept the
    answers.

    1) Blackhole all google messages.

    2) Botnets, or Zombie networks are nothing new and use regular "campaign"
    updates from their handlers to send out spam in *all* its forms.
    Default User, Apr 16, 2007
    #19
  20. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Ed Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA256

    john sumner <> wrote in
    news:evu6tp$oah$:

    > Rick Merrill wrote:
    >> Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
    >> ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
    >> more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the
    >> user places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop
    >> it.

    >
    > I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are
    > ways of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
    > something like that


    Not if they used something like this

    http://eelbash.yi.org:8080/scriptes/remail.php

    (or a chain of anonymous remailers and a mail2news gateway) to send it.
    In that case they'd be untraceable.

    - --
    HTTP://peculiarplace.com/joseph.shtml
    HTTP://peculiarplace.com/joseph2.shtml
    HTTP://peculiarplace.com/keymanage.shtml
    HTTP://peculiarplace.com/keysign.shtml


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.52

    iQEVAwUBRiPUMHV+YnyE1GYEAQiCTAf+IN+IoyBGzUDSwF2xTJhmjCeLd67jvuf/
    k1TFsLHwpo9TYOCMyr/r59ZPeIMcbm1e+jl4zI2qM/USoKyW4tA6d4sXF7meIGZ2
    xY9OWx7Hs24ciKc9RG9e8dugS+EFbEkxv6sUqGy/ouDpVKWfnINguOVVsIN/DBpo
    IDZti9sZ8IJIlL5YofR+7+tMK/PGXmSM6OHd4FOQBlgltxalNR3F3TJGdpDxHuxy
    o2iq/lI6C+SyVZuUpEsBkl34HtZKnKCLwBmBsgKdQ4mMWikkp7jTcH+iS5K0JaDL
    VlvJViscpewekrDJN3MUJTLxI3PUlSa6Taz3fZHLajReG4wYsSNC7A==
    =CQbZ
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Ed, Apr 16, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Re: Question about Google Groups spammers

    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 15, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    962
    Borked Pseudo Mailed
    Apr 15, 2007
  2. Anonymous

    Re: Question about Google Groups spammers

    Anonymous, Apr 15, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    845
    Anonymous
    Apr 15, 2007
  3. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Re: Question about Google Groups spammers

    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Apr 18, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    636
    Whiskers
    Apr 18, 2007
  4. Kevin C Baer
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,105
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    734
    sandy58
    Sep 20, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page