Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #291661
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) |
| Date | 2015-04-26 22:09 +0000 |
| Organization | ok by me, so long as it doesn't get out of hand |
| Message-ID | <nvbhcr94.gjif9r@rooftop.invalid> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <7d4e03c8-0145-49a1-880e-602579bc3813@googlegroups.com> <9e3c361e-cfa9-4a48-b53c-df8f8ed66966@googlegroups.com> <3660c025-c74d-469a-beb2-ddf1ec305a41@googlegroups.com> <bbnvyc83.kajg@rooftop.invalid> <D162A973.4ACF1%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 4/26/15, 2:22 PM, in article bbnvyc83.kajg@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 2:33:04 PM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote: >> >>> (snip) >> >>> I just tested it in the browser, I highlighted this... >> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA512 >> >>> This is a signing test. >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >>> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org >> >>> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJVPUcAAAoJEKLThH5e1B4r/8oH/2NuIb5h5PqoDhwXeGdQz9/D >>> c6zpKqaLTdPXowVekEmS5CEbQKUBY8hokmaYGOEMaa3DMefIHN38YqWn5vRZ/AFC >>> 4cYPmjgNepDCRn1t1L7gYFxBAuuSvcKiMpbVj3AZ6EFt4XLHsWFF13ojof6PyyBG >>> F9OAlx/jI80PzctWEhMqk2U24OGPMTgkED487ZGtkp2IHHPTLnwG2iwWewecFRUG >>> 9VKO/Fo/nRy5+CsLXDC+Svma/TOhuz7P9utDLiKO+bVTegoSJhPUc5MtvzKHsORi >>> +8RMcXtrqkMZ8NxOpY2Ble9Q3SvCoCBGeUKJEpe8ubkAGAT6AaxLuUKVMgLF/Jg= >>> =WB15 >>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >>> ... and I was able to 'verify' it was from me so it seems to be working (in >>> other words, Google isn't munging it). So if this is working correctly... do >>> I have the idea here with this: >> >>> * I create a key pair and share the public half of it >> >>> * I write a message and 'sign' it (like I just quoted) >> >>> * The end user grabs my public key (one time) and stores it in his GPG >>> keychain >> >>> * When the end user sees a signed message by me he simply highlights it and >>> can verify it instantly with a mouse click (or however it's done in their >>> system). >> >>> I emailed myself a signed message and my mail app came back saying it was >>> secure and from me. Seems like that's it, eh? Thanks, dude! I probably never >>> would have gotten around to doing this if not for you, this is definitely a >>> useful thing for a number of reasons. If you know, how secure is this? What's >>> the "the trust level" bit? Is it based on me verifying it in the real world >>> (like a phone call or something)? >> >> The trust level, you get other people who trust your key to sign your >> key. If you get someone's pubkey and a lot of people you know have >> signed it, then you can give it more trust. >> >> I signed your pubkey. Below is the signed version. Anybody >> importing that one will see that I have signed it, sort of like >> vouching for this key. >> >> owl@thinkpad:~$ gpg --edit-key fretwizzer >> gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.10; Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. >> There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. >> >> >> pub 2048R/5ED41E2B created: 2015-03-23 expires: 2019-03-23 usage: SC >> trust: full validity: full >> sub 2048R/93129FA2 created: 2015-03-23 expires: 2019-03-23 usage: E >> [ full ] (1). Steve Carroll (GPG signing) <fretwizzer@gmail.com> >> [ full ] (2) Steve Carroll (Do you hear me now?) <fretwizzer@gmail.com> >> >> Command> check >> uid Steve Carroll (GPG signing) <fretwizzer@gmail.com> >> sig!3 5ED41E2B 2015-03-23 [self-signature] >> sig! D83A7ECF 2015-04-26 owl (usenet) <owl@rooftop.invalid> >> uid Steve Carroll (Do you hear me now?) <fretwizzer@gmail.com> >> sig!3 5ED41E2B 2015-03-23 [self-signature] >> sig! D83A7ECF 2015-04-26 owl (usenet) <owl@rooftop.invalid> >> >> Command> quit >> owl@thinkpad:~$ >> >> Your pubkey with my signature, showing that I vouch for the key: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) >> >> mQENBFUQLckBCADQ5m8yvsb7TKlV3fNJtg6neTu8cpzIgffWR6LqlRhBbAdTGh4n >> Tu2mDEa4LPH+r0BICQtEbMEXsHBgd9c4R8QkQz0Ugjc1R7zpfDDGZZ51Ke2ol+bY >> QA1ssenYBdsMxFMY9CD28xhIx4D/QzRgKv8Xtfozyt0kvcjuOI6ruFtFchsidiz3 >> bQAYBkzcIxN5bsUtRnUagrMB2+VMgwfPgIXSUMtDLpkQTF0MjzsLKaxuh1SBpXAS >> nJwuQndgrY6jiv78CBJNfWKK8Ouj6l3O3iita7bV+cmgdSxqAEUAWgZj926aJtH0 >> jjyesS7aersDse182FYLzUFowajG8+tRy0ELABEBAAG0MlN0ZXZlIENhcnJvbGwg >> KEdQRyBzaWduaW5nKSA8ZnJldHdpenplckBnbWFpbC5jb20+iQFABBMBCgAqAhsD >> BQkHhh+ABQsJCAcDBRUKCQgLBRYCAwEAAh4BAheABQJVEDLnAhkBAAoJEKLThH5e >> 1B4rXpsH/jtQ+MpPdbq/qUR+ahlbI1UIqrhGnoudIWL6OBqRn2+fti+xxemhNb9I >> 1HxzgZJ4ZMHNU9gkLWVg7OsIsNb09qJpULHECJ2VLTx93wOMAV57koH3E2wnO7tD >> rmLoCfx5LbuIHg6QFhsYV+XcLH8OlcVPZwkrwUNKd8nL7oHPWyTTO1vFdRT+GNRX >> sBNwFRc9dM928q7Vr1DYGPmlekSCSXMN6pdvWeQ7lqbq0KU+rlZPkA0o1BKEdT7A >> n0TTRBBKMte8bzDWqxIMbMiqXJT8CrH+W27oKq1UxRt6CwyttY62Oca2UzAkz4K0 >> cCE/qaqQ09C0UFu3i+7zzHGjz7VtP1SJARwEEAECAAYFAlU9URgACgkQAkoOHNg6 >> fs+ttAgAnmFuLqbCsNQryshj07LmTut/tqZjpeyBkFdZ/YHM1zBijGBz3OnmDaLR >> kfHwDIi+VLYVAiHNbYivRNa1vgvqtIJiR7/Z9+4jD98M24JRZHU1gaqs/AzLOtJH >> 5vG6+ns/DEMCE6JigEbR122ulkxpc+5Ej64AnuBkxtfSzdLFi1ntzmRWBB7gofWp >> la97odN72aHj7e1t+0ihRJt8iu1vEiFYGaLeJsdGRsV4UWLvKZRz3V3KzNdCX+bS >> 97FUViaINrtWCDiTVZIZHC2eN15fn7JnJ4cuT2BLxT06tH8liZddoxiasFLR7OJG >> OxquVU0djs/8kKIlhab+EAe0V9vDFbQ6U3RldmUgQ2Fycm9sbCAoRG8geW91IGhl >> YXIgbWUgbm93PykgPGZyZXR3aXp6ZXJAZ21haWwuY29tPokBPQQTAQoAJwIbAwUJ >> B4YfgAULCQgHAwUVCgkICwUWAgMBAAIeAQIXgAUCVRAy5wAKCRCi04R+XtQeK1xa >> B/9x8dAkaZArxsf+NGOO9VuoHJJIX1eQaZQK6DMxORQHU3zsF8mgboGNNvljFUo2 >> B10RlZD/2mgj7wVd7CB79UFraQcB+iTGgQGjHa0HYGrjLaNiA0W+Ifm1B0Me/aMR >> 8JEF1qkdMFnuglETFxRhgpLZXwuVjvoOPuOCCtXWVvd0uFKAws3/fzpw+TIwowgF >> EWcVmhAjmDLvVCPcV5G14K8JAFvrKcuvm1DNcSsu6o3uPhmgTI+ZghO/+tw0svGi >> 8r96SmAbuSsyKFuDD6Z7MdoGaxLP1VkOK0XmUga/m+l6wnRmZtcsVsUA8nSP1O88 >> tWab6dIMOfKaKR9vOE5clvP6iQEcBBABAgAGBQJVPVEYAAoJEAJKDhzYOn7PneUH >> /icCck+ToL0m0PYnkpvU8syCT2JanzeqJlQpDuYu/IBnwjisuJBcpplAOERiegat >> fKlqEdLE0SDGdqa86nLD5FrTbEcsWqkSW0e3k0ixh+TnVsOacaJVKd4q5J2gjxE1 >> 0R3tA/9ZJdoNJDbWcA73TXpGmZQs6MhGv4MNBe8xfLEAXSDXp0vSpjvblpodSf9K >> JzkQqyhINioeZiLu0EeVy14kD86+qt/RR8YV7BmAeExe09UTTcBTeQ8x0reEqlKd >> 7fb7QgfoH2Wd4AkAnBF1Yw7nA8SS3/fVCF6p37cJzTG7qKJnxwLEkJqBDsl2Fkyg >> 4XNnWCQzRIONZFoyVHhJLGu5AQ0EVRAtyQEIAMmCXdaZT0xabB41R1R3klH8/q70 >> UcupsnnVHoPD+26bKrQnvSF59wkxtlR7GkGE/zW6ekEG2rqX5A2DS5Ua9B7XBLbC >> 09VhNNndamtBv3OVRkn8gxfxkNJ23agfgcqWBwIWzVvSKMuKo/Jn1A0ZycWkjyZq >> apPWT05lZPQMtsTWpjqtsVyknUEPZ6C4yUm1ZSDFmeU43AMnAW48HsynNdjoqZC7 >> 0NvVHNvkknH1th28M7BJA//vgvpXlswuGr261CS1+YDD85gEAujyAdmD3YVfEmLa >> qo3C30aqQzFPOSFh6/S2NQOPisMNms18gVyu6hIuiSArl2FN0TTRKmcLnUEAEQEA >> AYkBJQQYAQoADwUCVRAtyQIbDAUJB4YfgAAKCRCi04R+XtQeK6rLCACEz/5KHqLQ >> 1Dy7UI2sqf4O5OSMozkdR8d/jfqvO8IJl1mfxgZoWAC1rPcYoatFUFBS23s+0yQ5 >> gQRvUEiMIWoO4iEFuDHtSwjkP/iFacQZPE4MbUDUSqk4hmUXiDd52oEj8PtXTIHB >> NXxG8RDbM23Gi0lgjmL4EpERsJ3cQQ1JnxIyg+AqTa6BfiiidQZ+Ssnk1iI8jxgf >> iUFG2xtVOyXlPWE5oOFX+25B/f3o9SBmk8zNozGvwJ2Ezry++RBFM4v9AuTmfNwq >> 4whw41O2Q4Oen85ZlViwwfvfMNcqTP/ACUBtgbE9BsPLwwDTxPIvsBwy6lCROYR7 >> X3XBJ7x68hqF >> =VKJW >> -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- >> >> > Funny to see Carroll begging to get help so he can be trusted. :) > In all seriousness, if he actually is willing to do this it would be great. > It would end his nonsense about saying his past posts were "hacked"... if > they were the key would fail. Then again, given how hacking his past posts > is not possible anyway, it is not like he could not just say someone hacked > the key, too. > But it would make his claims even *more* unbelievable. Only people such as > cc and DFS and anyone else he has sucking up to him could claim to believe > him then. > What it will also do, though, is give Carroll a way to even more easily deny > what he calls his "aliases" - his other names and accounts (socks and > secondary accounts). He *mostly* denies these already, though, so not a big > deal. > And, anyway, with the added overhead of doing this it might make him troll > less - so let me go on record as saying that as long as Carroll is going to > continue to post I am 100% for him doing this. Absolutely. It can't prevent denial of an unsigned message. But the sender of the unsigned message can be challenged to resend it as a signed message.
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 11:40 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 11:46 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-23 15:12 -0400
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-23 12:23 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 12:59 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-23 15:49 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-23 20:41 -0400
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 21:44 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-24 04:31 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-24 10:30 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-24 20:08 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 10:49 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-25 18:40 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 11:53 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-25 19:18 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 12:25 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 09:54 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 17:30 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 10:43 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 11:29 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 18:49 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 12:23 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 12:48 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 19:55 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 13:25 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 13:33 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 14:00 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 21:22 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 14:32 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 21:50 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 15:01 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 15:05 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 22:35 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 14:35 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 14:40 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 22:09 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 15:21 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 15:21 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 22:40 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 15:47 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 22:51 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 15:49 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 22:56 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 16:00 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 23:32 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 16:46 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 00:00 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 17:02 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 17:08 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 00:47 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 18:14 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 01:41 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 19:04 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 02:32 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 19:38 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 02:46 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 19:59 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 03:21 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 20:38 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 20:45 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 03:58 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 21:04 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 21:06 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 21:12 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 04:20 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 03:55 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 20:57 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 04:02 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 20:59 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-27 04:04 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 19:01 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 19:11 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 19:47 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 17:11 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) tmelmosfire <tmelmosfire@gmail.com> - 2015-04-26 20:06 -0700
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-26 20:47 +0000
Re: OT: IT Pros or anyone with a clue about TOR (not you Snit) Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 12:40 -0700
csiph-web