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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.apps > #28888 > unrolled thread

newsreaders again

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.apps

Contents

  newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-16 21:54 +0000
    Re: newsreaders again gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2015-04-16 15:12 -0700
      Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
        Re: newsreaders again georg.schwarz@freenet.de (Georg Schwarz) - 2015-04-18 10:41 +0200
    Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-16 22:14 +0000
      Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
        Re: newsreaders again gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2015-04-17 18:37 -0700
          Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-18 01:54 +0000
      Re: newsreaders again erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2015-04-19 19:25 -0500
    Re: newsreaders again AV3 <arvimide@earthlink.net> - 2015-04-16 18:15 -0400
      Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
    Re: newsreaders again David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-04-16 18:58 -0500
      Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
        Re: newsreaders again erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2015-04-19 19:28 -0500
          Re: newsreaders again David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-04-19 21:29 -0500
      Re: newsreaders again John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-04-18 14:58 -0700
        Re: newsreaders again David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-04-18 18:58 -0500
          Re: newsreaders again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-18 17:30 -0700
          Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-19 02:28 +0000
          Re: newsreaders again John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-04-19 08:22 -0700
            Re: newsreaders again David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-04-19 11:12 -0500
              Re: newsreaders again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-19 09:20 -0700
                Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-19 16:31 +0000
                  Re: newsreaders again Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 12:41 -0400
                    Re: newsreaders again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-19 09:46 -0700
                      Re: newsreaders again Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 15:16 -0400
                        Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-19 20:14 +0000
                      Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-19 19:38 +0000
                    Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-19 19:34 +0000
                Re: newsreaders again Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-19 18:17 +0100
                  Re: newsreaders again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-19 10:30 -0700
                    Re: newsreaders again jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-04-20 05:56 +1200
                    Re: newsreaders again David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-04-19 17:44 -0500
                      Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-20 00:08 +0000
                      Re: newsreaders again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-19 17:05 -0700
                        Re: newsreaders again David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-04-19 20:02 -0500
                          Re: newsreaders again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-19 18:43 -0700
                  Re: newsreaders again Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-04-19 11:17 -0700
              Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-19 16:28 +0000
            Re: newsreaders again Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-19 12:32 -0400
              Re: newsreaders again John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-04-19 11:19 -0700
    Re: newsreaders again befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2015-04-17 09:02 +0200
      Re: newsreaders again jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-04-17 21:11 +1200
        Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
          Re: newsreaders again dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-04-18 13:50 +1200
    Re: newsreaders again Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-04-17 12:31 -0400
      Re: newsreaders again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-04-17 17:49 +0000
        Re: newsreaders again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-04-17 19:26 +0000
          Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
      Re: newsreaders again Erilar <drache@notchibardun.net> - 2015-04-17 21:48 +0000
        Re: newsreaders again tmo1138 <tmo1138@tmo1138.com> - 2015-04-18 14:29 +0000
    Re: newsreaders again David Fritzinger <email@domain.com> - 2015-04-18 14:12 -0400

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#28949

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Sunday, 19 April 2015 08:22 -0700, 
 in article <mh0h5o$ett$1@dont-email.me>, 
 John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 4/18/15   PDT 4:58 PM, David Ritz wrote:

>> On Saturday, 18 April 2015 14:58 -0700,
>>   in article <mguk0b$r8u$1@dont-email.me>,
>>   John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:

>>>> - --

>>> Could you please insert another -- space, CR just above your name?

>> I'm sorry, John, but what you're asking isn't particularly clear.
>> There was a space, following the double dash of the .sig delimiter,
>> even though Thunderbird appears to have stripped it, when you replied.

> That was me. Every time.

>> Take a look at the raw message, where you will see that space.

>>    <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=142940115100>

> - -- David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>

> But the double dash, space, CR needs to start and be on one line.

You didn't look at the source, did you?  What you've quoted is, to the 
best of my knowledge, strictly a Thunderbird-ism.

>> Why would adding a ' <CR><LF>' before my name have any bearing on
>> anything?

> Because that strips the sig. in Thunderbird, and is standard OP.

I do fully understand that a .sig delimiter is defined as:

    <CR><LF>-- <CR><LF>

I also understand that PGP has always escaped leading dashes.  I've 
been trying to remember to using the 'not dash escaped' option 
available in GnuPG, when posting to comp.sys.mac.*.  While it renders 
the cryptographic signature less compatible -- PGP and OpenPGP will 
both puke -- its less likely to cause quite so much whining.  In the 
particular post, to which you initially replied, I forgot to select 
the GnuPG compatible only signing.

> It worked fine in this post of yours. I thought you could perhaps 
> configure to do it automatically, or scrub the PGP altogether.

Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
most compatible format.

-- 
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
 Be kind to animals; kiss a shark.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlUz1AQACgkQUrwpmRoS3uu0NwCfR1X9sP/dW9gm3wr6k03pUSY6
xz4AoLY3bUKgoBEfDZuFX4dnnA1/ghxo
=UVW8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

#28950

In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
> most compatible format.

You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.

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

#28952

On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
>> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
>> most compatible format.
>
> You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
> no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.

He's only screwing things up for everyone else for his own amusement.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#28954

In article <cpi3jsFrsprU3@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> > Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
> >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
> >> most compatible format.
> >
> > You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
> > no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
> 
> He's only screwing things up for everyone else for his own amusement.

I don't see how it's "screwing things up for everyone else." Your Mac 
groups aren't speshul. There are lots of groups where lots of people 
sign their messages. If your newsreader can't handle it, tough shit.
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

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

#28955

In article <5533dabc$0$34479$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com>, Warren
Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:

> In article <cpi3jsFrsprU3@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > > In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> > > Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
> > >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
> > >> most compatible format.
> > >
> > > You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
> > > no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
> > 
> > He's only screwing things up for everyone else for his own amusement.
> 
> I don't see how it's "screwing things up for everyone else." Your Mac 
> groups aren't speshul. There are lots of groups where lots of people 
> sign their messages. If your newsreader can't handle it, tough shit.

Oh, my newsreader can handle it; I just don't see the need for it.  I'm
sure that if you wanted to, you could configure your setup to sign
messages only in those newsgroups where other people also sign theirs.

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

#28964

In article <190420150946333824%michelle@michelle.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <5533dabc$0$34479$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com>, Warren
> Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > In article <cpi3jsFrsprU3@mid.individual.net>,
> >  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > > > In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> > > > Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
> > > >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
> > > >> most compatible format.
> > > >
> > > > You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
> > > > no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
> > > 
> > > He's only screwing things up for everyone else for his own amusement.
> > 
> > I don't see how it's "screwing things up for everyone else." Your Mac 
> > groups aren't speshul. There are lots of groups where lots of people 
> > sign their messages. If your newsreader can't handle it, tough shit.
> 
> Oh, my newsreader can handle it; I just don't see the need for it.  I'm
> sure that if you wanted to, you could configure your setup to sign
> messages only in those newsgroups where other people also sign theirs.

That's not what the point of it is.
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

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

#28967

On 2015-04-19, Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <190420150946333824%michelle@michelle.org>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <5533dabc$0$34479$c3e8da3$dbd57e7@news.astraweb.com>, Warren
>> Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > In article <cpi3jsFrsprU3@mid.individual.net>,
>> >  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > > On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>> > > > In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
>> > > > Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
>> > > >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
>> > > >> most compatible format.
>> > > >
>> > > > You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
>> > > > no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
>> > > 
>> > > He's only screwing things up for everyone else for his own amusement.
>> > 
>> > I don't see how it's "screwing things up for everyone else." Your Mac 
>> > groups aren't speshul. There are lots of groups where lots of people 
>> > sign their messages. If your newsreader can't handle it, tough shit.
>> 
>> Oh, my newsreader can handle it; I just don't see the need for it.  I'm
>> sure that if you wanted to, you could configure your setup to sign
>> messages only in those newsgroups where other people also sign theirs.
>
> That's not what the point of it is.

The point is it's useless for everyone whose name is not David Ritz.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#28966

On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
> Oh, my newsreader can handle it; I just don't see the need for it.

There is no need or use for it for virtually everyone on the planet
except David Ritz.

> I'm sure that if you wanted to, you could configure your setup to sign
> messages only in those newsgroups where other people also sign theirs.

Better to just annoy everyone on the planet who is not David Ritz.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#28965

On 2015-04-19, Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <cpi3jsFrsprU3@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-04-19, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>> > In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
>> > Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
>> >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
>> >> most compatible format.
>> >
>> > You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
>> > no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
>> 
>> He's only screwing things up for everyone else for his own amusement.
>
> I don't see how it's "screwing things up for everyone else."

It just makes reading his posts harder than need be, with zero added
benefit to the reader. It's not a horrible problem, but some dislike it
more than others, because it detracts from what otherwise would be a
good user experience with regard to reading posts. That's all.

> If your newsreader can't handle it, tough shit.

News client has absolutely nothing to do with it, and mine *does* handle
it just fine.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#28956

In article <190420150920088732%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

>In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
>Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
>> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
>> most compatible format.
>
>You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
>no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.

I wonder what he means by "forged"? Well, I'll never know anyway as I
just KF-ed the fathead.

-- 
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English
is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion,
English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious 
and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."            -- James Nicoll, rasfw

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

#28957

In article <190420151817042257%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> In article <190420150920088732%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> >In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> >Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue 
> >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the 
> >> most compatible format.
> >
> >You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
> >no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
> 
> I wonder what he means by "forged"? Well, I'll never know anyway as I
> just KF-ed the fathead.

I think he means that there were more than 100,000 usenet forgeries of
his name.  I've been posting to usenet since early 1990, and I doubt
that I've posted anywhere near that number of messages, and the number
of forgeries of my posts have been less than a dozen.

Even if he has been forged that number of times, his PGP signing
doesn't solve anything because hardly anyone else is using PGP, so his
PGP signature is meaningless.

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

#28959

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <190420151817042257%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
> <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> > In article <190420150920088732%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
> > <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> > 
> > >In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> > >Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue
> > >> to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the
> > >> most compatible format.
> > >
> > >You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
> > >no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
> > 
> > I wonder what he means by "forged"? Well, I'll never know anyway as I
> > just KF-ed the fathead.
> 
> I think he means that there were more than 100,000 usenet forgeries of
> his name.  I've been posting to usenet since early 1990, and I doubt
> that I've posted anywhere near that number of messages, and the number
> of forgeries of my posts have been less than a dozen.
> 
> Even if he has been forged that number of times, his PGP signing
> doesn't solve anything because hardly anyone else is using PGP, so his
> PGP signature is meaningless.

But he thinks it does. It's like any talisman - only really of any
imagined value to the wearer.
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

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

#28969

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Sunday, 19 April 2015 10:30 -0700, 
 in article <190420151030030465%michelle@michelle.org>, 
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <190420151817042257%timstreater@greenbee.net>, 
>  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

>> In article <190420150920088732%michelle@michelle.org>, 
>>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

>>> In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, 
>>>  David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

>>>> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll 
>>>> continue to cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default 
>>>> is to use the most compatible format.

>>> You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that 
>>> because no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.

>> I wonder what he means by "forged"? Well, I'll never know anyway as 
>> I just KF-ed the fathead.

> I think he means that there were more than 100,000 usenet forgeries 
> of his name.  I've been posting to usenet since early 1990, and I 
> doubt that I've posted anywhere near that number of messages, and 
> the number of forgeries of my posts have been less than a dozen.

No, Michelle, these weren't impersonations.  My email address was 
_forged_ into the From, X-Cancelled-By and/or Sender headers, in 
various attacks on the network's infrastructure, using NewsAgent 
spamware. These included attacks, which used supersede and replace 
legitimate articles with either spam or gibberish.  There were 
hundreds of such attacks on Usenet, from the late 1990s, through the 
early 2000s.

> Even if he has been forged that number of times, his PGP signing 
> doesn't solve anything because hardly anyone else is using PGP, so 
> his PGP signature is meaningless.

To those who do not use PGP, it may not provide the service it does to 
me.

When replying to your message, I modified quotation notation, line 
wrapping the formatting of the message attributions.  This is hardly 
unusual, but I've never whined about it.  I just do it.

-- 
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
 Be kind to animals; kiss a shark.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlU0L+oACgkQUrwpmRoS3uu5ewCdG3IxPelpZPVloVxArHIOZL69
MHQAoPciQD+rj7OxadfIZ/6Ow0BXQ+3w
=8ve3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

#28971

On 2015-04-19, David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> To those who do not use PGP, it may not provide the service it does to 
> me.

Since virtually nobody uses PGP for Usenet posts, it provides no useful
benefit while making your posts harder to read and reply to for everyone
on Usenet. 

You don't even use it consistently, which makes it even more useless.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#28972

In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191721040.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

> > I think he means that there were more than 100,000 usenet forgeries 
> > of his name.  I've been posting to usenet since early 1990, and I 
> > doubt that I've posted anywhere near that number of messages, and 
> > the number of forgeries of my posts have been less than a dozen.
> 
> No, Michelle, these weren't impersonations.  My email address was 
> _forged_ into the From, X-Cancelled-By and/or Sender headers, in 
> various attacks on the network's infrastructure, using NewsAgent 
> spamware.

That is impersonation.

> These included attacks, which used supersede and replace legitimate
> articles with either spam or gibberish.  There were hundreds of such
> attacks on Usenet, from the late 1990s, through the early 2000s.

Oh, you dropped from 100,000 to hundreds; quite a discrepancy there.

> > Even if he has been forged that number of times, his PGP signing 
> > doesn't solve anything because hardly anyone else is using PGP, so 
> > his PGP signature is meaningless.
> 
> To those who do not use PGP, it may not provide the service it does to 
> me.

It doesn't provide any service to you if those reading the messages
don't use PGP to validate the PGP signature.

> When replying to your message, I modified quotation notation, line 
> wrapping the formatting of the message attributions.  This is hardly 
> unusual, but I've never whined about it.  I just do it

And you wound up with what is essentially the internet standard way of
replying.

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

#28980

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Sunday, 19 April 2015 17:05 -0700, 
 in article <190420151705324240%michelle@michelle.org>, 
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191721040.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
> Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

>>> I think he means that there were more than 100,000 usenet 
>>> forgeries of his name.  I've been posting to usenet since early 
>>> 1990, and I doubt that I've posted anywhere near that number of 
>>> messages, and the number of forgeries of my posts have been less 
>>> than a dozen.

>> No, Michelle, these weren't impersonations.  My email address was 
>> _forged_ into the From, X-Cancelled-By and/or Sender headers, in 
>> various attacks on the network's infrastructure, using NewsAgent 
>> spamware.

> That is impersonation.

Email addresses are unique.  Names?  Not so much.

>> These included attacks, which used supersede and replace legitimate 
>> articles with either spam or gibberish.  There were hundreds of 
>> such attacks on Usenet, from the late 1990s, through the early 
>> 2000s.

> Oh, you dropped from 100,000 to hundreds; quite a discrepancy there.

There's no discrepancy whatsoever.

A single attack, sometimes lasting for days, might easily consist of a 
few hundred thousand messages.  There were many such attacks, some 
purely out of malice, others for commercial purposes in the form of 
spam.  There were hundreds of these attacks.  You're fortunate, that 
you remained blithely ignorant of them.

I was one of the forgery victims in better than 100K forged supersede 
messages, posted in a single weekend, through a wide open NNTP server.  
This was but a single incident, using the same malicious software.

I logged 280K+ spam messages, posted using the same spamware, through 
a self compromised Videotron user box (default, wide-open AnalogX 
installation), in a single twenty four hour period.

>> When replying to your message, I modified quotation notation, line 
>> wrapping the formatting of the message attributions.  This is hardly 
>> unusual, but I've never whined about it.  I just do it

> And you wound up with what is essentially the internet standard way 
> of replying.

I trimmed several lines, within the quoted material, which I 
attributed to Thunderbird artifacts.  This post of yours came through 
without most of these, except for the oddly wrapped attribution, 
quoted at the top of this message.

-- 
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
 Be kind to animals; kiss a shark.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlU0UAkACgkQUrwpmRoS3uu59wCg3rZ2d0vbDdI6QMsz4VvJkHeP
qYAAnAjBg0Cd2NveCumeaPFF01M4yFDo
=PnNg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

#28984

In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191922181.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:

> >>> I think he means that there were more than 100,000 usenet 
> >>> forgeries of his name.  I've been posting to usenet since early 
> >>> 1990, and I doubt that I've posted anywhere near that number of 
> >>> messages, and the number of forgeries of my posts have been less 
> >>> than a dozen.
> 
> >> No, Michelle, these weren't impersonations.  My email address was 
> >> _forged_ into the From, X-Cancelled-By and/or Sender headers, in 
> >> various attacks on the network's infrastructure, using NewsAgent 
> >> spamware.
> 
> > That is impersonation.
> 
> Email addresses are unique.  Names?  Not so much.

Regardless, it's still impersonating you.

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

#28961

On 2015-04-19 17:17:04 +0000, Tim Streater said:

> In article <190420150920088732%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
>> In article <alpine.OSX.2.20.1504191046440.57809@mako.ath.cx>, David
>> Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Having been forged in well north of 100K Usenet posts, I'll continue to 
>>> cryptographically sign my public posts.  My default is to use the most 
>>> compatible format.
>> 
>> You do realize that you are not gaining anything by doing that because
>> no one else uses PGP or GPG on these Apple newsgroups.
> 
> I wonder what he means by "forged"? Well, I'll never know anyway as I
> just KF-ed the fathead.

I suspect he means as a blacksmith would "forge" from steel. Implying 
that he is some sort of Usenet craftsman.

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

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

#28951

On 2015-04-19, David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
> I do fully understand that a .sig delimiter is defined as:
>
>     <CR><LF>-- <CR><LF>
>
> I also understand that PGP has always escaped leading dashes.  I've 
> been trying to remember to using the 'not dash escaped' option 
> available in GnuPG, when posting to comp.sys.mac.*.  While it renders 
> the cryptographic signature less compatible -- PGP and OpenPGP will 
> both puke -- its less likely to cause quite so much whining.  In the 
> particular post, to which you initially replied, I forgot to select 
> the GnuPG compatible only signing.

Nobody but you cares about your silly PGP crap. 

*plonk*

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#28953

In article <mh0h5o$ett$1@dont-email.me>,
 John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:

> It worked fine in this post of yours. I thought you could perhaps 
> configure to do it automatically, or scrub the PGP altogether.

While he's at it, maybe he can submit his taste in briefs to us for our 
approval.
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.apps

csiph-web