"andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:48C### [at] hotmailcom...

> FYI I use
> a hotmail account in newsgroups for obvious reasons. I am not hiding
> behind a fictitious address.

What would the purpose of a legitimate (or legitimate looking) e-mail
address be if I don't wish to receive any e-mails?

> I will answer e-mails sent to that address
> and it reflects even my name IRL.

I don't care, so long as there aren't two "andrel"s to confuse. Avoiding
confusion to me is the only reason d'etre of a name or a handle.

> It is your choice. I think of this group as a group of (mostly) friends.
> Your choice sort of spoils that idea for me. Many people here use
> aliases and many use e-mail addresses that are either invalid or
> mangled. Yet, because they have a recognizable identity I can think of
> them as a human being. To me you're more a ghost than a human being.

I'm well aware that had I called myself "Sebastian", "Zippy", or even "mtu",
I would automatically command more respect. It's quite interesting, really.

> So
> again, it is absolutely your own choice on whether you want to be part
> of this group or not, but I (and perhaps others) might not respond to
> anything you say. (Obviously, I make an exception for this metadicussion.)

I prefer to discuss and challenge ideas, rather than get on a personal
level. To that end, a reduced audience is not a big problem.

Post a reply to this message

On 15-Sep-08 22:43, somebody wrote:
> "andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:48C### [at] hotmailcom...
> 
>> FYI I use
>> a hotmail account in newsgroups for obvious reasons. I am not hiding
>> behind a fictitious address.
> 
> What would the purpose of a legitimate (or legitimate looking) e-mail
> address be if I don't wish to receive any e-mails?

none at all.

> 
>> I will answer e-mails sent to that address
>> and it reflects even my name IRL.
> 
> I don't care, so long as there aren't two "andrel"s to confuse. Avoiding
> confusion to me is the only reason d'etre of a name or a handle.

It may be something more than that. If you know that I am a real person 
with a real background (and not a group or a 15 yo pretending to be 
someone else) it may indicate that what I write is probably sincere and 
that I am not trolling.

>> It is your choice. I think of this group as a group of (mostly) friends.
>> Your choice sort of spoils that idea for me. Many people here use
>> aliases and many use e-mail addresses that are either invalid or
>> mangled. Yet, because they have a recognizable identity I can think of
>> them as a human being. To me you're more a ghost than a human being.
> 
> I'm well aware that had I called myself "Sebastian", "Zippy", or even "mtu",
> I would automatically command more respect. It's quite interesting, really.

I know, I find that interesting too. One of the factors seems to be that 
'somebody' invokes not the image of a specific person, but of one that 
deliberately hides everything personal. We all hide things, but 
'somebody' is advertising to want only to take and does not intend to 
share. You could have called yourself 'antisocial' of 'psychopath' but 
even that would not have the same effect as nobody would take that 
serious. Even 'nobody' would be different as we can take that as a 
reference that you at least know your classics. I can only assume that 
you chose this alias to get a certain effect. Well congratulations, you 
achieved your goal.

>> So
>> again, it is absolutely your own choice on whether you want to be part
>> of this group or not, but I (and perhaps others) might not respond to
>> anything you say. (Obviously, I make an exception for this metadicussion.)
> 
> I prefer to discuss and challenge ideas, rather than get on a personal
> level. To that end, a reduced audience is not a big problem.

Let's hope that makes sense to you.

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> >  No, he spotted a technical security flaw in the computer system, and
> > pointed it out so that it could be fixed,

> But his mistake was to go several steps further, and actually "demonstrate" 
> the security floor by installing keyloggers and magnetic card readers, then 
> accessing 32 different student accounts illegally and sending his findings 
> to 37 of his mates.  Had he just written the document and sent it to the 
> university, fine.

  Yes, that caused tons of expensive damage, so he must be punished. That
will teach him to never tell about his hacking again. Next time he will
just hack and don't tell anyone. That way everybody will be happy.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:
> "Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
> news:48cd392c@news.povray.org...
>> somebody wrote:
>> > You should. If you did, you'd only waste the rest of your night. If you
>> > read your e-mail in the morning and get my e-mail, you'll waste the
>> > rest of the day.
> 
>> o_O
>>
>> Are you seriously
> 
> Well, you answered your own question there, didn't you?
> 
>> suggesting I should read my email in the middle of the
>> night just in case somebody mailed me with my financial information?

Huh?!

Post a reply to this message

"Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
news:48cef56a@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > "Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message
> >> somebody wrote:

> >> > You should. If you did, you'd only waste the rest of your night. If
you
> >> > read your e-mail in the morning and get my e-mail, you'll waste the
> >> > rest of the day.

> >> o_O
> >>
> >> Are you seriously

> > Well, you answered your own question there, didn't you?

> Huh?!

I was of course not serious. Can one not indulge in non-emoticonated levity
any more?

Post a reply to this message

>> But his mistake was to go several steps further, and actually 
>> "demonstrate"
>> the security floor by installing keyloggers and magnetic card readers, 
>> then
>> accessing 32 different student accounts illegally and sending his 
>> findings
>> to 37 of his mates.  Had he just written the document and sent it to the
>> university, fine.
>
>  Yes, that caused tons of expensive damage, so he must be punished.

Would you be happy if your details had been sent to 37 of his mates?  I 
guess those 32 students that had their data published had to go and change 
all their details, and the university had to go and check all their accounts 
with them to see if there was anything on their debit cards that shouldn't 
have been.  SO yes, I'm sure a lot of people are having to waste a lot of 
time now that they shouldn't have done, and yes he should be punished so 
that others don't do the same.

> That
> will teach him to never tell about his hacking again.

No, that will teach him to actually go ahead and carry out an illegal 
security hack on 32 students, rather than informing the authorities about 
it.  How on Earth can you say that installing a disguised magnetic card 
reader to skim cards does not deserve to be punished?

Post a reply to this message

"scott" <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote in message
news:48cf65d4$1@news.povray.org...

> > That
> > will teach him to never tell about his hacking again.

> No, that will teach him to actually go ahead and carry out an illegal
> security hack on 32 students, rather than informing the authorities about
> it.  How on Earth can you say that installing a disguised magnetic card
> reader to skim cards does not deserve to be punished?

Forget punishment, that's not even the point. Warp and some others think
that *reporting* of the incident was wrong, and that the hacker should have
been rewarded instead, which is an order of magnitude harder to understand.

Post a reply to this message

> Forget punishment, that's not even the point. Warp and some others think
> that *reporting* of the incident was wrong, and that the hacker should 
> have
> been rewarded instead, which is an order of magnitude harder to 
> understand.

Yeh, I didn't really understand why Warp said:

"That will teach him to never tell about his hacking again."

When the *telling* about the security hole is not the problem, the problem 
is when he actually *did* the hacking on 32 students, and even much worse, 
distributed the data to lots of people (and not just the system owners).

I know for sure that I could install a keylogger on my colleagues computer 
and get his password.  Does that mean that I should be allowed to do it 
without permission from the system owners and send the results to my 
friends, "for the sake of improving security"?  Absolutely no way, not in a 
million years.

Post a reply to this message

somebody <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> Warp and some others think
> that *reporting* of the incident was wrong,

  That's not what I have said. When I have said something like that it has
been pure sarcasm.

> and that the hacker should have
> been rewarded instead

  I never talked about rewards (except sarcastically), and that sentence
of yours doesn't even make sense with the firt one.

  You are badly twisting what I have said.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> Yeh, I didn't really understand why Warp said:

> "That will teach him to never tell about his hacking again."

  Do you understand what the concept "sarcasm" means?

> I know for sure that I could install a keylogger on my colleagues computer 
> and get his password.  Does that mean that I should be allowed to do it 
> without permission from the system owners and send the results to my 
> friends, "for the sake of improving security"?  Absolutely no way, not in a 
> million years.

  And exactly what are you doing to prevent some malicious person from
doing so? Are you simply taking a "not my problem" stance?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message