10 expanded posts ยท every known parent and child
> You have sent a message using the anonymous contact service. > You have been allocated the code name an118905. ... and so forth I did not send any message using the remailer and I would be grateful if the account were killed. Is everybody on the cypherpunks list getting this sort of harassment or is it just me? -- Jim Dixon
Jim Dixon writes > I did not send any message using the remailer and I would be grateful > if the account were killed. Is everybody on the cypherpunks list > getting this sort of harassment or is it just me? Yes. Everyone. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we James A. Donald are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. jamesd@netcom.com
> > You have sent a message using the anonymous contact service. > > You have been allocated the code name an118905. > ... and so forth > > I did not send any message using the remailer and I would be grateful > if the account were killed. Is everybody on the cypherpunks list > getting this sort of harassment or is it just me? me too, me too, but I don't use anonymous remailers anyway.
On Mon, 1 Aug 1994 solman@MIT.EDU wrote: > > > You have sent a message using the anonymous contact service. > > > You have been allocated the code name an118905. > > ... and so forth > > > > I did not send any message using the remailer and I would be grateful > > if the account were killed. Is everybody on the cypherpunks list > > getting this sort of harassment or is it just me? > > me too, me too, but I don't use anonymous remailers anyway. > No, and I don't either, but now someone else can use those accounts and LOOK like they are you or me (or anyone else here). Now suppose some twit decides to use one or more of those accounts to send threatening messages to the president or some other stupid thing... who are they going to come after, do you suppose? NOT a nice scenario! Lyman Finger lrh@crl.com for PGP 2.4 Public Key Block.
On Mon, 1 Aug 1994, Jim Dixon wrote: > > You have sent a message using the anonymous contact service. > > You have been allocated the code name an118905. > ... and so forth > > I did not send any message using the remailer and I would be grateful > if the account were killed. Is everybody on the cypherpunks list > getting this sort of harassment or is it just me? > -- > Jim Dixon > I, too have gotten a similar message, and only after sending my first message to the cypherpunks mailing list. I most certainly *DID NOT* send any message using the anonymous contact service and I DEFINITELY want that code name killed. I'll send the code number to Julf in a separate message. Jim, you are not alone! Lyman Finger lrh@crl.com for PGP 2.4 Public Key Block.
I didn't get any notices of being subscribed to penet.fi, so I guess not everyone on the cpunx list was hit. Either that or the mail daemon here found too much email in my mailbox and decided to digest the tuna or whatever the fuck message.
Arsen Ray Arachelian says: > I didn't get any notices of being subscribed to penet.fi, so I guess not > everyone on the cpunx list was hit. Either that or the mail daemon here > found too much email in my mailbox and decided to digest the tuna or > whatever the fuck message. Much more likely that you already had a penet address and it was compromised. Perry
Perry E. Metzger says: > Arsen Ray Arachelian says: > > I didn't get any notices of being subscribed to penet.fi, so I guess not > > everyone on the cpunx list was hit. Either that or the mail daemon here > > found too much email in my mailbox and decided to digest the tuna or > > whatever the fuck message. > > Much more likely that you already had a penet address and it was > compromised. Well, I have never been assigned a penet id -- not now and not earlier. (I've only been on this account for almost a year, and my memory isn't *that* bad.) This probably rules out the "who cypherpunks" attack. But then I haven't posted much to this group -- perhaps, whoever he/she is, is more interested in frequent/recent posters? -- Rolf (who is wondering if this post will result in a penet id...) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rolf Michelsen "Nostalgia isn't what it Email: rolf.michelsen@delab.sintef.no used to be..." Phone: +47 73 59 87 33 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 14:50:02 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Rolf Michelsen <Rolf.Michelsen@delab.sintef.no>
Perry E. Metzger says:
> Arsen Ray Arachelian says:
> > I didn't get any notices
>
> likely that you already had a penet address and it was compromised.
Well, I have never been assigned a penet id . . . . This probably
rules out the "who cypherpunks" attack.
If by "who cypherpunks" attack you mean that someone could be
subscribed using an an*@anon.penet.fi, you most certainly cannot rule
that out. an111447@anon.penet.fi continues to be subscribed:
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 94 07:58:00 PDT
From: Majordomo@toad.com
Subject: Majordomo results: who cypherpunks
. . .
an111447@anon.penet.fi
Perhaps someone could remove this address (or replace it with
na111447@anon.penet.fi) and/or get the anon.penet.fi administrator to
beat on this person (electronically of course).
RickOn Tue, 2 Aug 1994, Rick Busdiecker wrote: > Perhaps someone could remove this address (or replace it with > na111447@anon.penet.fi) and/or get the anon.penet.fi administrator to Sounds great. I think THIS LIST needs to take action like this. As far as I am concerned, mailing lists suck right now as there is almost no security. Someone can subscribe like this, they can subscribe someone else, or other things. Why hasn't he been yanked yet? Berzerk.