- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tatercrispies ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; bill machen ; bill
machen
Cc: bill machen ; kat ; John Draper
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] I'm calling for LycosEU heads and team to
resign or be sacked
two
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:52:30 GMT, n3td3v said:
I think heads should roll over this. I think its the worst act a
corporation has ever undertaken in the history of the internet.
Hmm.. I don't know. Verisign's hijacking of *.com wildcards and several
different Microsoft
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/03/2004
07:50:36 PM:
And if the spammers don't like my packets being sent to their
system,
all they have to do is send me a polite e-mail asking to be removed
from my flood-list. It is really quite simple!
Wow. Obviously you are not responsible for
Hi,
Bob Smith wrote:
The Internet has always been about vigilante justice. Aside from
exceptionally egregious cases of wrongdoing, like sexually explicit
material with children, fraud, or flagrant piracy, the Internet
exists and operates beyond the boundaries of any one nation's laws.
It is up
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:52:30 GMT, n3td3v said:
I think heads should roll over this. I think its the worst act a
corporation has ever undertaken in the history of the internet.
Hmm.. I don't know. Verisign's hijacking of *.com wildcards and several
different Microsoft stunts may very well
Self regulate is NOT self retaliate.
Why not? Why can't retaliation be a form of regulation? Is your
objection in general, or is there a specific to this case?
To go back to a previous message; in attacking spammers, I see the end
result as being the greater good. Despite what another
Jason wrote:
It is an effective method to make your voice heard using a different
form and it is not only acceptable it is a form of peaceful protest IMHO.
My question is how effective at stopping spam can it actually be?
For this to work, you not only have to DDoS dedicated SPAM systems, you
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:52:30 +, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The argument that Lycos EU are not DDos'ing is not washable. Its DDoS
plain and simple.
Of course it's a form of DDoS. But who started it? Remember, Lycos
provides e-mail services which the spammers have been taking advantage
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, n3td3v wrote:
It is and never will be an acceptable and effective way to beat spam or
any other misuse of the internet. [...]
Spammers and hax0rs will not allow Lycos EU to build its bot network
of screensavers, if and when the site comes back online again.
Why would they
On 05/12/04 01:06 +0100, Pavel Kankovsky wrote:
snip
(*) For instance, one of our servers was joe-jobbed in June. The poor
machine was unable to handle the extra traffic (400-500 mails/hour) and
per hour? Try a few thousand per minute.
http://nixcartel.org/~devdas/minute.png
(those are real
I think heads should roll over this. I think its the worst act a
corporation has ever undertaken in the history of the internet. I
think it sends out a bad example to the rest of the security community
that DDoS is acceptable. It is and never will be an acceptable and
effective way to beat spam or
I think heads should roll over this. I think its the worst act a corporation
has ever undertaken in the history of the internet.
So speaketh n3td3v, prohpet, visionary, lord and leader of Full Disclosure.
The Internet has always been about vigilante justice. Aside from
exceptionally egregious
I think heads should roll over this. I think its the worst act a
corporation has ever undertaken in the history of the internet.
So speaketh n3td3v, prohpet, visionary, lord and leader of Full Disclosure.
The Internet has always been about vigilante justice. Aside from
exceptionally egregious
On 03 Dec 2004, at 16:38, Bob Smith wrote:
Everyone who downloaded that screensaver did so intentionally, this
wasn't a trojan operating behind the scenes. The participants were
willing combatants, the engine happened to come from Lycos this time,
but there have been other efforts in the past as
And if the spammers don't like my packets being sent to their system,
all they have to do is send me a polite e-mail asking to be removed
from my flood-list. It is really quite simple!
Wow. Obviously you are not responsible for authorizing payment to transit
providers and have no idea how
For those who don't want to figure it out for themselves, here's a diff
from this to the second message. Go figure.
On 03 Dec 2004, at 16:38, Bob Smith wrote:
I think heads should roll over this. I think its the worst act a
corporation has ever undertaken in the history of the internet.
So
You really think generating *terabytes* of junk traffic is a good way
to solve problems?
As n3td3v said, legitimizing this sort of attack would be a justification
of DDoSes of all sorts. Someone has a web site you don't like? DDoS it!
Idiot on IRC? DDoS him! Who cares if it slows down traffic
Yes when n3td3v says jump, major corporations around the world say how high.
Lol.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of n3td3v
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Full-Disclosure] I'm calling for LycosEU
18 matches
Mail list logo
