nobody in particular (10/19/89)
I will be very surprised to see this article traced.
packer@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (Michael A Packer,Knapp Hall,,2928607) (10/19/89)
From article <10909@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>, by nobody in particular:
> I will be very surprised to see this article traced.
How does somone go about changing their names in the head files.
If responding please email. Atleast we know where this person comes
from phoenix.princeton.edu ;)
mike
USMAIL: 318 Knapp Hall, WVU, Morgantown, WV 26506
PHONE: 304 293-3607
INTERNET : packer@a.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu
USENET: {allegra,bellcore,ihpn4!cadre,decvax!idis,psuvax1}!pitt!wvucsa!packerrichard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (10/19/89)
In article <506@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu> packer@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (Michael A Packer,Knapp Hall,,2928607) writes: >From article <10909@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>, by nobody in particular: >> I will be very surprised to see this article traced. > > How does somone go about changing their names in the head files. > > If responding please email. Atleast we know where this person comes >from phoenix.princeton.edu ;) That is not a valid conclusion. -- Help wipe out BBQ lighter fluid in your lifetime richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
dkrause@orion.oac.uci.edu (Doug Krause) (10/19/89)
In article <10909@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> nobody in particular writes:
#I will be very surprised to see this article traced.
Just a guess, are you Larry Rogers?barnett@crdgw1.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) (10/19/89)
By encouraging this thread we are demonstrating the best way to forge news articles. (or how NOT to forge articles). A perfect topic for news.newusers.questions! I suppose the next topic is how to forge mail messages, break into a machine using the sendmail debug option, and other security holes in vendor's releases like SunOS and Ultrix. I suggest you either take the detective work off-line or ignore these childish antics. -- Bruce G. Barnett <barnett@crd.ge.com> uunet!crdgw1!barnett
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (10/20/89)
In article <3355@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> barnett@crdgw1.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) writes: > >By encouraging this thread we are demonstrating the best way to forge >news articles. (or how NOT to forge articles). Oh nonsense. The messaage here is not ``here's how you forge postings'', the message is ``things may not always be as they seem''. -- @(peter@ficc.uu.net).signature++ richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
barnett@crdgw1.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) (10/20/89)
In article <21101@gryphon.COM>, richard@gryphon (Richard Sexton) writes: >Oh nonsense. The messaage here is not ``here's how you forge postings'', >the message is ``things may not always be as they seem''. Fine. So there was one forgery attempt by Dennis Griffin presented as a dare. Well, he was caught. Aren't we proud of ourselves. But now we get this: From: nobody in particular Subject: The Ease of Forgery Message-ID: <10909@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Date: 18 Oct 89 21:19:37 GMT Sender: news@phoenix.Princeton.EDU Lines: 1 I will be very surprised to see this article traced. And now we will get a slew of messages with people making good and bad guesses on who it is and how it happened. If this person get's caught, ANOTHER person will try. In ANY CASE, people will discuss WHO did the forgery, HOW it was done, HOW it can be detected, and HOW it CAN'T. Why do we need this discussed in the new users newsgroup? What's the point of a second forgery. Or a third? Or even the first? Why can't someone just SAY that fogeries are possible? I will. ANNOUNCEMENT! News can be forged! So can mail! Forgery encourages more forgeries! I do not consider this "nonsense"! -- Bruce G. Barnett <barnett@crd.ge.com> uunet!crdgw1!barnett
john@hp-ptp.HP.COM (John_Fereira) (10/21/89)
I will be very surprised to see this article traced. ---------- Thomas, is that you? -- John
kitty@excal.UUCP (Katherine Pryde) (10/23/89)
Will you guys *please* stop all this about forging articles?
--the net.cat.who.walks.through.walls
--
"... and we're cute, too!" | Katherine Pryde
-- my first Fourth Wall comment | (...e616!excal!kitty)
(Do *you* know where it's from?) |----------------------------wsdwgk@eutrc3.urc.tue.nl (g.v.rooij) (10/24/89)
In article <10909@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> nobody in particular writes: >I will be very surprised to see this article traced. Ok I give up. How do you do something like this ? I cannot imagine how this is done. Do you have to be root somewhere ?? Oh yeah, where do I post a request for penpals, i'm looking for some nice american girls who want to correspond with me via usenet mail. Greetings guido
berryh@udel.edu (John Berryhill) (10/24/89)
In article <1218@eutrc3.urc.tue.nl> wsdwgk@eutrc3.urc.tue.nl (g.v.rooij) writes: > i'm looking for some >nice american girls .... Yeah, you and 100 million other guys... -- John Berryhill "Tasty Snacks in Cellophane Packs" 143 King William, Newark DE 19711
meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley) (10/24/89)
In article <2724@excal> kitty@excal.UUCP (Katherine Pryde) writes: >Will you guys *please* stop all this about forging articles? I expect that if someone was to post a "definitive" article on how to forge an article, then this would all be cleared up once and for all (or at least until someone else comes along and asks the same question - but then again, this *IS* news.newusers.questions !) So ... is someone out there going to post such an article ? Ant in Chicago uunet!motcid!marble!meadley ps. And please, keep the flames to e-mail ...
peed@cell.mot.COM (Andrew Peed) (10/25/89)
In article <290@zircon.UUCP>, meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley) writes: > In article <2724@excal> kitty@excal.UUCP (Katherine Pryde) writes: > >Will you guys *please* stop all this about forging articles? > I expect that if someone was to post a "definitive" article on how > to forge an article, then this would all be cleared up once and for > all (or at least until someone else comes along and asks the same > question - but then again, this *IS* news.newusers.questions !) > > So ... is someone out there going to post such an article ? > > Ant in Chicago And THEN we'll see a whole bunch of usenet neophytes rushing right out to try this really neato thing that they read about forging articles. Some of them will be "I wanted to see if this really works." The great majority will NOT. I've seen people forge articles for the sole purpose of convincing the entire net that someone they don't like is a real jerk. I say PLEASE DON'T POST ANY SUCH ARTICLE. E-mail if you HAVE to, but let's encourage as few jerks as necessary. Andy -- Life without bears would be unbearable. Motorola, Inc. Andrew B. Peed Cellular Infrastructure Division ..!uunet!motcid!peed
geoff@pmafire.UUCP (Geoff Allen) (10/25/89)
In article <2416@nigel.udel.EDU> berryh@udel.edu (John Berryhill) writes: >In article <1218@eutrc3.urc.tue.nl> wsdwgk@eutrc3.urc.tue.nl (g.v.rooij) writes: > >> i'm looking for some >>nice american girls .... > >Yeah, you and 100 million other guys... Nope, 99,999,999. I got mine and am happily married. :-) -- Geoff Allen {uunet|bigtex}!pmafire!geoff ucdavis!egg-id!pmafire!geoff
meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley) (10/26/89)
In article <306@grape1.UUCP> peed@cell.mot.COM (Andrew Peed) writes: +In article <290@zircon.UUCP>, meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley) writes: +> In article <2724@excal> kitty@excal.UUCP (Katherine Pryde) writes: +> >Will you guys *please* stop all this about forging articles? +> I expect that if someone was to post a "definitive" article on how +> to forge an article, then this would all be cleared up once and for +> all (or at least until someone else comes along and asks the same +> question - but then again, this *IS* news.newusers.questions !) +> +> So ... is someone out there going to post such an article ? + + And THEN we'll see a whole bunch of usenet neophytes rushing right +out to try this really neato thing that they read about forging articles. +Some of them will be "I wanted to see if this really works." The great majority +will NOT. I've seen people forge articles for the sole purpose of convincing +the entire net that someone they don't like is a real jerk. Unless I misunderstand the situation, we already do "see a whole bunch of usenet neophytes [your words] rushing right out ....". I thought that *that* was at least half of the problem. And what exactly do "the great majority" end up doing ? I'm sure that there are not that many people of evil intent on the UseNet (or am I being naive?). Ant in Chicago uunet!motcid!meadley
peed@cell.mot.COM (Andrew Peed) (10/26/89)
In article <313@zircon.UUCP>, meadley@cell.mot.COM (A. Meadley) writes: > Unless I misunderstand the situation, we already do "see a whole bunch of usenet > neophytes [your words] rushing right out ....". I thought that *that* was at > least half of the problem. > > And what exactly do "the great majority" end up doing ? I'm sure that there > are not that many people of evil intent on the UseNet (or am I being naive?). > > > Ant in Chicago Welll, yes and no. Here at Motorola we only get technical groups, so you're not likely to see any of the real JERKS who hold forth in the some of the rec.*, talk.* and alt.* hierarchies. (If any of you out there take offense at the term JERK, please do not waste bandwith by posting your flames. Why prove yourself worthy of the title that you object to? If you must flame, flame by E-mail. I assure you any flames recieved will be utterly ignored.) In any case, if you have the time, patience, and a modem at home (and a few bucks - I don't remember what fees average), you might want to look into some of the public access UNIX boards around Chicago that carry nearly every newsgroup that's ever been thought of. You'll see quite a lot of infantile screaming - in alt.flame (where it's expected, I suppose), in talk.bizarre (where some attempt to call it "wit"); also, to a lesser extent in soc.singles (where it's called "intercourse".) and soc.women or wherever MES, bless her poor little persecuted hide (insert snort of derision here), presides. Some of these screaming fests get so blown out of proportion that people's mailboxes get inundated with garbage, people forge inflammatory attacks on other people, people actually track down other people's phone numbers and make obscene phone calls, and so on, and so forth. In all fairness, I have to admit that there are not many people abuse Usenet in this manner... but the ones who do are SO tenaciously vapid that it sours one very quickly. (I used to work at AT&T where they got the full news feed. I pretty much limited myself to rec.arts.startrek and and rec.humor.funny, and looked in on alt.flame and talk.bizarre periodically, but I had to prove my identity and the reality of my last name on at least two occasions. -- Hi to Matthew Wiener, if you're looking in - drop me a line!) I dunno. I don't think posting a "HOW TO FORGE ARTICLES IN THREE EASY STEPS!" would be a good idea. We may be having a minor rash now, but I could almost guarantee you that it would become a conflagration if this sort of article became available. Call me cynical... (I've got a list of public-access Unix boards at home if you're interested.) Cheers - and all that rot... Andy -- I wouldn't know how to act if I weren't in trouble. Motorola, Inc. Andrew B. Peed Cellular Infrastructure Division ..!uunet!motcid!peed
eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (10/27/89)
In article <314@grape1.UUCP> peed@cell.mot.COM (Andrew Peed) writes: > I dunno. I don't think posting a "HOW TO FORGE ARTICLES IN THREE EASY >STEPS!" would be a good idea. We may be having a minor rash now, but I could >almost guarantee you that it would become a conflagration if this sort of >article became available. Call me cynical... Sounds like a great beginning... maybe next week we could tackle "how to write an unstoppable computer virus" ... Call me late for dinner. Hit 'n' now. Thank you.
carl@aoa.UUCP (Carl Witthoft) (10/27/89)
In article <2724@excal> kitty@excal.UUCP (Katherine Pryde) writes: > --the net.cat.who.walks.through.walls >"... and we're cute, too!" | Katherine Pryde > -- my first Fourth Wall comment | (...e616!excal!kitty) But remember what happened to the cat wwtw! (not one of Heinein's best) (okok, sorry, this is way off the newsgroup charter, as is the whole bs about forging) -- Alix' Dad ( Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates) {harvard,ima}!bbn!aoa!carl 54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201 "disclaimer? I'm not a doctor, but I do have a Master's Degree in Science!"
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (10/28/89)
Note to all you news.newusers.quastions readers: while this is not a flame in the strictest sense of the word, I felt obligated to point out a certain hypocrisy here. If you don't care to read it, this would be a good point to bail out. Note that the followup is set to alt.flame. This means if you followup this article it will automatically go to alt.flame, where any further *discussion* on this subject belongs. This article contains no technical information to assist a .newuser and is being presented here purely for entertainment value. You have been warned, and as such, give up your net.given right to complain by reading any further. In article <314@grape1.UUCP> peed@cell.mot.COM (Andrew Peed) writes: > > Welll, yes and no. Here at Motorola we only get technical groups, so >you're not likely to see any of the real JERKS who hold forth in the some of >the rec.*, talk.* and alt.* hierarchies. Instead we seem to have here one of the JERKS who holds forth in some of the news.* groups. And Motorola gets technical groups ? Like *this* one ? Like comp.sys.toymicro ? Just what kind of *technical group* does Andy Peed *read*, anyway ? > In any case, if you have the time, patience, and a modem at home (and a >few bucks - I don't remember what fees average), you might want to look into >some of the public access UNIX boards around Chicago that carry nearly every >newsgroup that's ever been thought of. You'll see quite a lot of infantile >screaming - in alt.flame (where it's expected, I suppose), in talk.bizarre >(where some attempt to call it "wit"); also, to a lesser extent in soc.singles >(where it's called "intercourse".) and soc.women or wherever MES, bless her >poor little persecuted hide (insert snort of derision here), presides. Some of Well, now that you've insulted half the net, the question arises again: what kind of technical group does Andy Peed read, anyway ? >tenaciously vapid that it sours one very quickly. (I used to work at AT&T where >they got the full news feed. I pretty much limited myself to rec.arts.startrek >and and rec.humor Oh! *THOSE* technical groups. Captain! Captain! VROOT!! VROOT!! VROOT!! Captain, asshole approaching at warp speed! VROOT VROOT!! Open a hailing frequency Lt. Uhura, Mr. Spock what is your analysis? Uh, it's just that JERK Andy Peed, captain, I'll bid 3000 quatloos for his fuzzy ass. Whew. I'm tired. All this technical talk has me all tuckered out. >and looked in on alt.flame and talk.bizarre >periodically, but I had to prove my identity and the reality of my last name on >at least two occasions. Oh *I* get it. ``They didn't like me, and made fun of my name so went home. I'm not gonna play with *THOSE* JERKS anymore. >Motorola, Inc. Andrew B. Peed >Cellular Infrastructure Division ..!uunet!motcid!peed Maybe they'll sell one of those things one day. What are you anyway, some sort of Heiby in training ? Say goodnight, Chuqles. -- ``They care more about the name than the content? Amazing.'' - Mark R. Horton richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV