Re: Will the real ASAAR please stand up?

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:59:05 -0700, SMS wrote:

It looks to me like ASAAR has done this whole forger act by himself just for the
attention he would get from it. How much do you want to bet that if you ignore
his cries about forgery, sock-puppets, and trolls that he'll bring it all up
again and again to make sure all eyes are on him. He's the ultimate troll.

Perhaps someone has gained access to his account unbeknownst to him.

It's difficult to forge headers so completely, so the forgeries may
actually coming from his account.

The e-mail address and user ID are easy to fake, but not the whole path.
You need a lot of knowledge about how NNTP works to forge the whole path
like that.

See "http://www.xo.com/legal/abuse/newsgroupheader.html";

"There are only three lines in Usenet headers that are very difficult to
forge; Path, Date, and NNTP-Posting-Host...This line [path] is very
difficult to forge, because it is placed into the header by all the
machines that received this email."

Overly convenient, don't you think? You've certainly had more
than your share of friendly correspondence with the sock puppets
(and don't tell me you don't know who they are). You also had one
of your own join you in your attacks. How strange that since I
discredited his last one several days ago he's been so silent, other
than to briefly return to say that sure, you can add that hopelessly
inaccurate battery PDF file to your battery website. It wasn't his
to share, but that wasn't the point, was it? Whether you use it or
not, GIGO prevails, and it won't do anything to improve your
website. It also didn't even attempt to say what Delaney claimed
that it did. Absolutely *nothing* about how slightly using an
alkaline battery will greatly decrease its shelf life. All it said
was that some unspecified type of manganese dioxide battery should
have a shelf life of at least three years. That's a lie worthy of
yourself. :)

You're also deviously deceptive. Of course it's difficult to
forge the Path: and Date: headers. But that hasn't necessarily been
done by the forgers. The Path: headers in my own replies vary from
message to message, almost randomly, because they show the routing
used. The only part that needs to be consistent is the one at the
end, and mine (supernews.com) is widely used and doesn't have to be
forged. Anyone can get an account for a couple of dollars/month
that will allow unlimited posting, where the Path: used by a message
forger will be unable to be distinguished from any of mine based on
the Path: header. You profess to know so much about this yet you
once again lie to further your smear campaign. Others are well
aware of your tactics, as one just called you a serial liar. You're
certainly proving it.

Next, forging the Date: header. This hasn't been done by the
forgers. They haven't been trying to completely duplicate my
messages in every detail, including the time sent. This should be
obvious even to you. They post messages that appear to have been
sent by me, but the time posted in of no importance. If I send a
reply at 2:00pm and the forger sends one at 9:00pm, the forger's
Date header in his reply will show 9:00pm, as it should. It would
look mighty odd for a message to suddenly appear in the newsgroup at
9:00pm with a header that said that it had been posted 7 hours
earlier. That would be a good method of highlighting, not masking
forgeries. You should know this, but would rather lie about it in
order to accuse me of creating pseudo forgeries of my own messages.
It's more likely that your Delaney buddy is none other than
yourself.

Last, the NNTP-Posting-Host: header. No need to forge this header
either. If one has a cheap supernews.com account already (remember,
to be able to create a believable Path: header), the
NNTP-Posting-Host: header will be generated automatically by the
NNTP server, and forging isn't necessary. Can you afford the $2 or
$3 per month to be able to do this? Yep. Would you be devious
enough to actually do it? It would hardly surprise me. You've
been in a real tizzy recently, with your smears and attacks. Once
again showing that exposing your true nature is really getting to
you. I don't know why, though. You've claimed for so long that
you've filtered my messages. Maybe that has been another lie? :)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ping Prong was [Ping MickUK]
    ... Alright, you fucking retard. ... Look at its header very carefully. ... than the forgeries to this group. ... idiots up in the alt.usenet.kooks group do to Usenet. ...
    (rec.gambling.lottery)
  • Re: A message from Paulie
    ... Compare the forgeries of my posts to the above. ... It doesn't take an FBI profiler to see a significant characteristic which the forgeries and the above share. ... I thought the header on: ... shared the same header --- The header on a forge is of less value as I don't expect a 'match' ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Re: Hijacked email address.
    ... header. ... These things help detect forgeries after the fact, ... watermarking in MailScanner, and there is also something called EMEW in ... it depends on the proportion of mail servers ...
    (RedHat)
  • Re: How to contact Robert Morein
    ... >> let him know how much you enjoy his forgeries ... > with this header is his: ... And be sure to complain about his obscene self-portraits, ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: JSH: Math people are dumb
    ... > there's a fundamental flaw in the Internet/e-mail protocol. ... It's easy to forge "From:" headers, but it's a bit harder to forge the ... reason it's easy to forge the "From:" header is that simplicity was ... people from mangling the emails leaving their own machines. ...
    (sci.math)