Re: Re: RSA HAVE CRACKED PHISHING, NO SERIOUSLY

[n3td3v <n3td3v () gmail com>]

Sorry php0t, we can see you're a nice a guy now.... you are now off my
suspect list of being malicious and you are now off the secret service's
list of being a suspect. Take our great warmth in knowing we feel really
sorry for accusing you for hacking a domain. We know you have never broken
the law before, and for us to suggest you had was completely out of order. I
hope you can accept this as a good-will-jesture. We hope now php0t can
finally join us in calling for the American Government to leave Iraq within
the next 48 hours, because more American lives depend on it, and I know how
much I love the American troops.

On 4/1/06, php0t <very () unprivate com> wrote:
>   Dear technically challenged netdev,
>
> 1) 'Is that the same as...' - ummm... you probably IMAGINED a different
> email to which you replied to
> 2) The address is legit, it isn't 'hacked'. It has a story why I use it
> here, but it's not like anybody cares.
> 3) http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0821.txt - the world is bigger than gmail
> believe it or not.
> 4) If I sent the email from gmail, it would show in the headers.
> 5) If it was a spoofed email only used for subscription, the FD posts
> sent to it would not get back to me
> 6) The email in question wasn't even an FD comment, it went straight to
> your inbox to avoid bugging others who still don't have you filtered (like
> me, until this very email). What did you do? Post it right back to the list.
> Nice.
>
>   Sure, everybody can filter, so can I. The thing is, i never NEEDED to,
> because there hasn't been anybody dropping such ignorance in my mailbox so
> often. I was hoping that you would either turn normal or keep your word
> and leave the list.
>  Since the trolling just goes on, it's grep -v for you, especially after
> this stupid bullcrap you made up and decided to share with the probably
> not-so-interested list members. I responded this time because 1) it was a
> personal attack based on nothing, and 2) because it's my last email that has
> the word netdev in it. (sent or received ;]) - and i can keep my word,
> unlike 'some people'.
>
> php0t
>
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> *From:* n3td3v [mailto:n3td3v () gmail com]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 31, 2006 11:12 PM
> *To:* php0t; full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: RSA HAVE CRACKED PHISHING, NO
> SERIOUSLY
>
>  Is that the same as hacking someones "domain", accepting the Gmail
> confirmation to say you're allowed to send from a Gmail account with that
> hacked domain, then delete all forensic logs from the hacked domain and then
> go back to your Gmail account, where you can continue to send your inflamed
> FD comments from as very () hackeddomain com. Figures.
>
> On 3/31/06, php0t <very () unprivate com> wrote:
> >  If you kept your word (and didn't post my emails back to the list),
> > it'd be better. :)
> >
> >  -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* n3td3v [mailto: n3td3v () gmail com]
> > *Sent:* Friday, March 31, 2006 10:47 PM
> > *To:* php0t; full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: RSA HAVE CRACKED PHISHING, NO
> > SERIOUSLY
> >
> > Why don't you just "filter" me like "the experts" have told you to do?
> > Or haven't you worked out the technical background architecture of Outlook
> > and Thunderbird yet? Figures.
> >
> > On 3/31/06, php0t <very () unprivate com> wrote:
> > >  For real, please keep your word.
> > >
> > >
> > >  -----Original Message-----
> > > *From:* full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk [mailto:full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk
> > > ] *On Behalf Of *n3td3v
> > > *Sent:* Friday, March 31, 2006 9:55 PM
> > > *To:* full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > > *Subject:* [Full-disclosure] Re: RSA HAVE CRACKED PHISHING, NO
> > > SERIOUSLY
> > >
> > > This is funny as well, 
> > > http://news.com.com/5208-1029-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=15591&messageID=131539&start=-1&reply=true
> > >  I almost choked on my big mac after reading this one, the guy thinks
> > > if you take down a site, the phisher's script doesn't deploy another premade
> > > site straight away on another host. lol, maybe the RSA have miscalculated
> > > the pre plainning and programming of a phishing attack backend before its
> > > carried out. I guess they just thought phishing was down to "dumb
> > > criminals".
> > >
> > > On 3/31/06, n3td3v <n3td3v () gmail com> wrote:
> > > >  Check out this article, and I really did spill my hard earned
> > > > Starbucks right down my front when I looked at this article:
> > > > http://news.com.com/5208-1029-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=15591&messageID=131433&start=-1
> > _______________________________________________
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/