Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux > #39142 > unrolled thread

Marek Novotny Verification

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux

Contents

  Marek Novotny Verification Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 01:09 +0000
    Re: Marek Novotny Verification Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 18:15 -0700
    Re: Marek Novotny Verification Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 18:17 -0700
    Re: Marek Novotny Verification Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-24 23:35 -0500
      Re: Marek Novotny Verification Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-24 21:48 -0700
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification F Volker <here@home.net> - 2016-09-25 12:22 +0700
          Re: Marek Novotny Verification Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2016-09-25 08:41 +0300
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-09-25 11:51 +0200
          Re: Marek Novotny Verification Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 13:37 +0000
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-09-25 10:29 +0000
          Re: Marek Novotny Verification Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 13:42 +0000
            Re: Marek Novotny Verification jrg <connyank@cox.net> - 2016-09-25 08:07 -0700
              Re: Marek Novotny Verification Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 15:09 +0000
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2016-09-25 05:56 -0700
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-25 09:56 -0500
    Re: Marek Novotny Verification William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-09-25 11:51 +0100
      Re: Marek Novotny Verification Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 13:40 +0000
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification F Volker <here@home.net> - 2016-09-26 05:49 +0700
          Re: Marek Novotny Verification Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2016-09-26 10:50 +0000
        Re: Marek Novotny Verification Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-09-26 06:47 -0400

#39142 — Marek Novotny Verification

There is an impostor posing as me here. 

My email address has always been marek.novotny@marspolar.com which is a
domain I own. Anyone else is a fraud.

While I do have a gmail address, that isn't it and I have never used
any gmail address on usenet. 

You can use any older posts of mine as verification. You should place
anything else you see in your kill file / score file. 

Some of you have traded emails with me in the past and can also verify
that I only use marek.novotny@marspolar.com. 

You can also use my github as my identification:
And again that's with my marek.novotny@marspolar.com address. 
I joined with that email address on January 9th, 2015. 

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#39144

On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 1:09:38 AM UTC, Marek Novotny wrote:
> There is an impostor posing as me here. 

There is Snit posing as you here.

> My email address has always been marek.novotny@marspolar.com which is a
> domain I own. Anyone else is a fraud.
> 
> While I do have a gmail address, that isn't it and I have never used
> any gmail address on usenet. 
> 
> You can use any older posts of mine as verification. You should place
> anything else you see in your kill file / score file. 
> 
> Some of you have traded emails with me in the past and can also verify
> that I only use marek.novotny@marspolar.com. 
> 
> You can also use my github as my identification:
> And again that's with my marek.novotny@marspolar.com address. 
> I joined with that email address on January 9th, 2015. 
> 
> -- 
> Marek Novotny
> https://github.com/marek-novotny

People are not as stupid as Snit needs them to be.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39147

On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 1:09:38 AM UTC, Marek Novotny wrote:
> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
> 
> My email address has always been marek.novotny@marspolar.com which is a
> domain I own. Anyone else is a fraud.
> 
> While I do have a gmail address, that isn't it and I have never used
> any gmail address on usenet. 
> 
> You can use any older posts of mine as verification. You should place
> anything else you see in your kill file / score file. 
> 
> Some of you have traded emails with me in the past and can also verify
> that I only use marek.novotny@marspolar.com. 
> 
> You can also use my github as my identification:
> And again that's with my marek.novotny@marspolar.com address. 
> I joined with that email address on January 9th, 2015. 
> 
> -- 
> Marek Novotny
> https://github.com/marek-novotny

You call Snit out on his crap in COLA but are not doing so here? Just checked and you have two different messages? Why?

Are you just trusting people here to figure out it is Snit on their own? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39167

On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 01:09:33 +0000, Marek Novotny wrote:

> There is an impostor posing as me here. 

That wasn't hard to figure out.  The imposter is not smart
enough to fool anyone.  Everyone that knows you is aware of
the fact that you use slrn not G00gle Gr0ups.  And everyone
knows your real email address.

-- 
<Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453
"We are all born ignorant, but one
must work hard to remain stupid."
  -Benjamin Franklin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39168

On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 01:09:33 +0000, Marek Novotny wrote:
>
>> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
>
> That wasn't hard to figure out.  The imposter is not smart
> enough to fool anyone.  Everyone that knows you is aware of
> the fact that you use slrn not G00gle Gr0ups.  And everyone
> knows your real email address.

Yup...

Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?

If the guy reading the post isn't setup for verification then it seems
moot to me. Thoughts?

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39170

On 09/25/2016 11:48 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 01:09:33 +0000, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>>> There is an impostor posing as me here.
>>
>> That wasn't hard to figure out.  The imposter is not smart
>> enough to fool anyone.  Everyone that knows you is aware of
>> the fact that you use slrn not G00gle Gr0ups.  And everyone
>> knows your real email address.
>
> Yup...
>
> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?

Adding GnuPG signatures to posts within an unmoderated Usenet 
environment... What on earth would this accomplish, I wonder?

> If the guy reading the post isn't setup for verification then it seems
> moot to me. Thoughts?
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39171

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

F. Volker [2016-09-25 12:22:06+07] wrote:

> On 09/25/2016 11:48 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value
>> in adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
>
> Adding GnuPG signatures to posts within an unmoderated Usenet
> environment... What on earth would this accomplish, I wonder?

We may not have really verified each others keys in person but when
someone consistently signs with the same key the identity's reputation
grows.

You don't know me but with gpg signatures I verify that this message and
most stuff (commits, tags) in my Github repositories (see the signature)
is produced by the same identity. Someone may have seen me elsewhere,
for example in Debian user mailing list, and I sign with this same key
there too. That's at least some collection of data that makes a
consistent "person" identity, even if an unknown one.

-- 
/// Teemu Likonen   - .-..   <https://github.com/tlikonen> //
// PGP: 4E10 55DC 84E9 DFF6 13D7 8557 719D 69D3 2453 9450 ///

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39172

On 2016-09-25 06:48, Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 01:09:33 +0000, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>>> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
>>
>> That wasn't hard to figure out.  The imposter is not smart
>> enough to fool anyone.  Everyone that knows you is aware of
>> the fact that you use slrn not G00gle Gr0ups.  And everyone
>> knows your real email address.

I didn't till today :-)

> Yup...
> 
> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
> 
> If the guy reading the post isn't setup for verification then it seems
> moot to me. Thoughts?

I do that on email but didn't bother to do it here. The problem is that
it is readers who have to verify the signature. I mean, an imposter can
also create another PGP signature. We can know that each signature is
different, but unless one keeps tracks of all signatures, as there is no
organization for verification, it is problematic to authenticate.

Another possibility are PKCS signatures.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39180

On 2016-09-25, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@invalid.es> wrote:
> On 2016-09-25 06:48, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 01:09:33 +0000, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
>>>
>>> That wasn't hard to figure out.  The imposter is not smart
>>> enough to fool anyone.  Everyone that knows you is aware of
>>> the fact that you use slrn not G00gle Gr0ups.  And everyone
>>> knows your real email address.
>
> I didn't till today :-)
>
>> Yup...
>> 
>> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
>> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
>> 
>> If the guy reading the post isn't setup for verification then it seems
>> moot to me. Thoughts?
>
> I do that on email but didn't bother to do it here. The problem is that
> it is readers who have to verify the signature. I mean, an imposter can
> also create another PGP signature. We can know that each signature is
> different, but unless one keeps tracks of all signatures, as there is no
> organization for verification, it is problematic to authenticate.

That's been my experience with GnuPG as well. Worse actually. I can't
even get friends to use it for email so it doesn't seem to matter since
no one I know is willing to adopt it. 

> Another possibility are PKCS signatures.

I wouldn't even know how to set that up in slrn. The slrn macro for
GnuPG is a little confusing to me as well and again, I don't know anyone
else signing or managing key rings. 

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39175

On 2016-09-25, Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?

seems kind of pointless. something with more easily accessible keys
(like DKIM) might be better, but how many clients are there that support
verifying either?

-- 
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39182

On 2016-09-25, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
> On 2016-09-25, Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
>> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
>> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
>
> seems kind of pointless. something with more easily accessible keys
> (like DKIM) might be better, but how many clients are there that support
> verifying either?

I've never even heard of this one. I like slrn and if not supported that
would be an issue. 

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39187

On 09/25/2016 06:42 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2016-09-25, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>> On 2016-09-25, Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
>>> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
>>> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
>>
>> seems kind of pointless. something with more easily accessible keys
>> (like DKIM) might be better, but how many clients are there that support
>> verifying either?
>
> I've never even heard of this one. I like slrn and if not supported that
> would be an issue.
>

You've not heard of DKIM since it is pretty useless.
slrn wouldn't be your problem - just about all clients handle it.
spammers have used it since day2, however,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39188

On 2016-09-25, jrg <connyank@cox.net> wrote:
> On 09/25/2016 06:42 AM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2016-09-25, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>>> On 2016-09-25, Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
>>>> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
>>>
>>> seems kind of pointless. something with more easily accessible keys
>>> (like DKIM) might be better, but how many clients are there that support
>>> verifying either?
>>
>> I've never even heard of this one. I like slrn and if not supported that
>> would be an issue.
>>
>
> You've not heard of DKIM since it is pretty useless.
> slrn wouldn't be your problem - just about all clients handle it.
> spammers have used it since day2, however,

Thanks

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39179

Marek Novotny wrote:
> Do you see value in adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it
> overkill?

For the purposes of what we are talking about, clearsigning does not 
solve the problem because of what you say below.

> If the guy reading the post isn't setup for verification then it
> seems moot to me. Thoughts?

That is correct.  The true power of clearsigning involves a web of trust 
process for the public key and the involvement of those who would verify 
your clearsign into the scheme of verification.

IMO clearsigning in newsgroups should be limited to newsgroups in which 
people are practicing the use of such tools, such as alt.security.pgp.

In the case of newsgroup spoofs and forgeries, other strategies can be 
employed if necessary.  The strategy depending on how 'aggressive' the 
adversary is.  This GG example is trivial.

For newsgroups, if you are choosing to use/expose an email address which 
belongs to you, 'legitimate' news servers which enforce policies against 
forgeries will act against those who would use their servers to forget 
you.

The email address doesn't solve all of the problems; some people don't 
want to expose a good email address other limitations.

Another strategy is to use a news server which stamps your nntp posting 
host, such as sunsite.dk/dotsrc.org




-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39185

On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 21:48:46 -0700, Marek Novotny wrote:

> On 2016-09-25, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 01:09:33 +0000, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>
>>> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
>>
>> That wasn't hard to figure out.  The imposter is not smart
>> enough to fool anyone.  Everyone that knows you is aware of
>> the fact that you use slrn not G00gle Gr0ups.  And everyone
>> knows your real email address.
> 
> Yup...
> 
> Question for you, and anyone else for that matter. Do you see value in
> adding GnuPG signatures to your posts? Or is it overkill?
> 
> If the guy reading the post isn't setup for verification then it seems
> moot to me. Thoughts?

I don't see much use doing it.  Your last sentence pretty well
answered your own question.

-- 
<Wildman> GNU/Linux user #557453
The cow died so I don't need your bull!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39173

On 25/9/2016 02:09 in alt.os.linux, Marek Novotny posted:

> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
>
> My email address has always been marek.novotny@marspolar.com which is a
> domain I own. Anyone else is a fraud.
>
> While I do have a gmail address, that isn't it and I have never used
> any gmail address on usenet. 
>
> You can use any older posts of mine as verification. You should place
> anything else you see in your kill file / score file. 
>
> Some of you have traded emails with me in the past and can also verify
> that I only use marek.novotny@marspolar.com. 
>
> You can also use my github as my identification:
> And again that's with my marek.novotny@marspolar.com address. 
> I joined with that email address on January 9th, 2015. 

Well if the imposter is posting via googlegroups, as Wildman says, it
would account for why I didn't see it. 
I've had googlegroups kf'd for a long time, & a *lot* of other Usenet
users have done the same.

http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

-- 
If your primary interest in computing is downloading music for your 
whatever, or playing games, you belong in the cattle pen Mr Gates built.

Windows is specifically designed for people who don't understand 
computing and don't want to be bothered.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39181

On 2016-09-25, William Poaster <wp@dev.null> wrote:
> On 25/9/2016 02:09 in alt.os.linux, Marek Novotny posted:
>
>> There is an impostor posing as me here. 
>>
>> My email address has always been marek.novotny@marspolar.com which is a
>> domain I own. Anyone else is a fraud.
>>
>> While I do have a gmail address, that isn't it and I have never used
>> any gmail address on usenet. 
>>
>> You can use any older posts of mine as verification. You should place
>> anything else you see in your kill file / score file. 
>>
>> Some of you have traded emails with me in the past and can also verify
>> that I only use marek.novotny@marspolar.com. 
>>
>> You can also use my github as my identification:
>> And again that's with my marek.novotny@marspolar.com address. 
>> I joined with that email address on January 9th, 2015. 
>
> Well if the imposter is posting via googlegroups, as Wildman says, it
> would account for why I didn't see it. 
> I've had googlegroups kf'd for a long time, & a *lot* of other Usenet
> users have done the same.
>
> http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

I'm with you on this. I dislike the non-adherence to 72 column wide
posting which I am forever fixing on replies to those who use Google
Groups. Yet another reason I don't like Google. They should stay out of
the usenet business... They don't get it and they make it miserable for
everyone else. 

-- 
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39201

On 09/25/2016 08:40 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:

[snip]

> I dislike the non-adherence to 72 column wide
> posting which I am forever fixing on replies to those who use Google
> Groups. Yet another reason I don't like Google. They should stay out of
> the usenet business... They don't get it and they make it miserable for
> everyone else.

It seems the masses don't share your understandings...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39215

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

F Volker wrote:
> On 09/25/2016 08:40 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I dislike the non-adherence to 72 column wide
>> posting which I am forever fixing on replies to those who use Google
>> Groups. Yet another reason I don't like Google. They should stay out of
>> the usenet business... They don't get it and they make it miserable for
>> everyone else.
>
> It seems the masses don't share your understandings...

Hence it being Sep 8427, 1993


- -- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJX6Pz5AAoJEI4R3fMSeaKBKeQIAJX3VfCLkj3CTH0DfmKPwdwe
WhHwNlIkyanKRHl9Q2ordvPjIMa348NvkqiJZrJEnBwAXW7thDGUu4p6mFE2/ugG
0564+sBKqUlFsrg4bDykbviZJxe6DVl1z7yT2E6a+daRloBNBwKmMT9eDYh+jrG6
/PfKzMkGyoi1vpjzk2LDL2l2TkNQAAgKNQ+ob9tUEjq9p4a5tzzz8DVmcInm/ToI
J9P5Zpc3SgjkZr7PcNgi9MvFB1eKqsLa7PxQBV942LCBYx8TEXYz3DRAh04yIicb
kLeZ3tm59Sb5865QoFxN5wJohuUAVXExcts6wi5m0L9wjvftUg/sVD3YD23DDAY=
=ZH4O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39214

Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> writes:

> On 2016-09-25, William Poaster <wp@dev.null> wrote:
>>
>> Well if the imposter is posting via googlegroups, as Wildman says, it
>> would account for why I didn't see it. 
>> I've had googlegroups kf'd for a long time, & a *lot* of other Usenet
>> users have done the same.
>>
>> http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
>
> I'm with you on this. I dislike the non-adherence to 72 column wide
> posting which I am forever fixing on replies to those who use Google
> Groups. Yet another reason I don't like Google. They should stay out of
> the usenet business... They don't get it and they make it miserable for
> everyone else. 

Google _does_ get the Usenet business. They see it as another product
they can use to get people to stick to Google sites and services. They
don't particularly care about people who use Usenet outside of
Googlegroups, nor do they care about the long-standing culture of
Usenet. (Said culture is no longer what it was, although remnants remain
in some groups. It's been under attack by various companies and
organizations, notably starting with AOL. Google is probably the worst
abuser currently.)

It's a sad comment on humanity that we see everything as a resource to
be exploited, and only afterward do we realize that we killed it in the
process of our exploitation. To make it even worse, some people don't
care even then. 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux

csiph-web