~ HACKING INDEX ~
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Sat, Jul 15, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net This Group: PHIRE Just want to get this off the troll thread P-H-I-R-E wrote: "I know ulTRAX created A.D.W.H., but the Idea of him having his finger on the ban trigger kinda scares me." FIrst of all I have never joined any private hacking forums or clubs. I have prefered them to be open, with sensitive matarial discussed via mail. I have never liked the Club idea but finally broke down and formed one for Progressive Politics and my thought's on banning are there. To date, I have banned no one. But I know the time will come. I have debated starting a hacking Club but have resisted the temptation. In the case of Politics, there's just one main a.d.politics NG and three proposals were voted down. I felt I had no choice. But there's no reason yet to make a 20th Tricks, Secrets & Hacking NG/Club "I'll put it this way, it would be a very small group. I don't even know people bother to post the charter of this group, to me it seems like a waste of time, especially when it says something like "hacking shall not be discussed." Crypto wrote the Charter during the Krakle bullshit a year ago. For the most part the name also kept the morons at away. Read between the lines. Hacking by any other respectable name is still hacking.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Sun, Jul 16, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: This Group: PHIRE When I said hacking by any respectable name is still hacking it's only because I don't find the concept of hacking to automatically be disreputable. It is, after all, just exploration with the intent to get systems to perform in ways the designers did not intend. Whether that knowledge is then abused to destroy the system or harm others is another matter. As for your other comment, I admit I have run out of patience with malicious morons. But I could have said the same back in March 98. None the less, I may have a poison pen, but when it comes to doing something to protect myself or prevent others from getting fucked, I stay in channels. I don't get down in the gutter. I think my MO shows a tad more emotional stability and maturity than a Draac ever could. I also don't mind debating people who disagree with me. In fact I love it... it's just most of the disagreements in a.d.w.h are with preteens who don't have all their neurons connected yet or adults who may never grow up. Given how hacking can attract the wrong element, I'm sure If I formed a club I'd ban a number of people right from the start because I'm familiar with their antics and attitudes. But then my idea of a Club would be for ethical, non-destructive, hacking. What percentage of "hackers" out there do you think enjoy the intellectual challenge for it's own sake and don't want to abuse the info they find? I think it's probably in the 20% range.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Sun, Jul 16, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: This Group: PHIRE P-H-I-R-E wrote: "And let us not forget about the ones with a massive unyielding superiority complex. I find those to be very annoying." Seems you had some other motive in your original post than just discussing a Club option. Maybe I should not have bothered to respond. But now that I have and your motives are more clear, I'm forced to respond further. I have no superiority complex for the simple fact that I know I'm not the best in anything as I have repeatedly stated in this and other NGs. That you can insinuate that despite the lack of evidence is more a reflection on you than me. On the other hand I am proud of the principles I stand for and I remain a forceful advocate for them. I'll adjust them if necessary but I'm not one to pass up a good debate. Think it's easy trying to walk a tightrope between the intellectual challenge of hacking, promoting open discussion, yet knowing many out there are malicious and too immature handle the knowledge? In the past two and a half years I have every possible dirty trick done to me 20 times over. I have had my site deleted twice, been lied about repeatedly, had forged guestbooks entries made in my name, been signed up for countless lists, been mailto: bombed, had my private info stolen, had my account deleted 8 times, .. shall I go on? How about forged accounts? Posts made from fake mail2news mailers? Being referrer bombed. Having my SSID and account #'s posted. Being viciously accused of stealing ISP data by the very person who was actually doing it. Shall I on? Simple fact is the world is full of malicious and immature people who are dying to abuse the tools we find. But just because that's true does it mean we stop exploring? We can't turn back the clock. But unfortunately, because these people are out there sometimes they have to be deprived of their toys because they just won't stop on their own. So, PHIRE... what's YOUR solution? What tightrope do YOU walk? What principles do YOU stand up for? And are YOUR willing to stand up for them despite 30 months of probably being WTV's most harassed user? Inquiring minds want to know what stuff YOU'RE made of. Two years ago I almost deleted this user name because it was too much trouble. But I chose to stick it out despite the abuse to prove to the malicious morons they can not win with what they do. So, superiority complex my ass. Call me a masochistic idiot and you'd be more on track.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Mon, Jul 17, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: This Group: PHIRE Wanted to post this this morning but was hit with the posting bug. P-H-I-R-E wrote: "Well, there is no "one" solution. It varies on each attack or flame, in other words it will always depend on the situation." I wasn't referring to the group problem, but that of misuse of knowledge. "Too many to name, but I do know Net Narcing isn't one of them....can you say the same? And, please don't answer that, I'll end up with another 250 word essay on "Why you don't think you net narc." Too late, I already wrote it. Your namecalling approach reeks of a 3ed grade "tattle tale" mentality. Calling someone a nasty name just gives you an excuse to pretend victims have no rights. "Everyone from the moment they post in any group takes the risk of just flamed to being signed up to every Gayporn E-mail subscription out there or something of that sort. These are not, "Malicious crimes" they're just annoying pranks, that you can't do anything to completely stop." You just don't get it, do you. You're selectively choosing to pretend there's NOTHING but harmless pranks when you know that's an absolute lie. The simple fact is there are irrational and malicious people out there who will use ANY and EVERY tool they have to harm innocent people. I eagerly await your vain attempts to disprove this. Think when BlueBlade kept writing lies to Tripod and got my site deleted, it was just a harmless "prank"? Think when someone posts flooders and 30 people repeatedly are deprived of mail service that's a harmless prank? Think when the flood virus hit the 100+ NGs, and caused the premature deletion of thousands of posts and deprived users of the forum they PAY for, that's "harmless"? When someone is stealing private account info with hopes of hacking accounts, is that "harmless"? When someone steals our mail and diverts it to their accounts, is that "harmless"? As for stopping them, that's another matter. I have gotten numerous sites to tighten security on forged subscriptions. I had the referrer bomb killed. I alerted WNI to prevented accounts from being hacked. In all cases I acted to prevent further abuse. "Sure, you can report someone, maybe have the tos'ed, but what good does that do......It doesn't stop the next person who will do it. So why even bother? Its a never ending cycle, accept it and move on. " I can not even believe anyone with half a brain would go on record with such nonsense. First, I have to ask why are you supporting those who harm others? You seem to discount the possibility that anyone who has been harmed has any rights to either protection or to expect those who are doing the harm will pay a price. Second, as for why I bother, first of all because on some level I HAVE BEEN ATTACKED AND I HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTECT MYSELF. It's a slow process but it gets rid of the morons one by one. Combine that with taking away some of their toys, and getting abuse to be more active, and ya... if it doesn't send a message, at least there's less tools to abuse. Of course it helps. Given your approach is to excuse these malicious jerks and to do absolutely nothing, ANY thing is better than that. YOUR course only encourages more such crap. So that's YOUR grand plan? That these morons will clean up their act when there's no penalty for running amok? Duh PHIRE. "It's better than cluttering up this NewsGroup, Wouldn't you Agree?" I prefer there be written record in a forum designed to discuss such issues.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Tue, Jul 18, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: This Group: PHIRE P-H-I-R-E wrote: "We could let this thread go on forever but in the end there would only be one truth." Have no idea what you're talking about. But since it's clear you can not defend your ridiculous position nor disprove or counter any of my arguments, I'm assuming that "one truth" you speak of is not yours. Some people believe being freed from wrong-headed ideas contributes to their overall intelligence. You one of them?
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Mon, Jul 17, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: NETCOP Bullshit I'm tired of this Netcop bullshit. The simple fact is that I paid for my box and I pay for my WTV service. I have a right to protect myself when some sociopath messes with MY property and MY service. When some of these kiddies actually own something someday, and someone messes with THEIR stuff, we'll see how their tune changes. If someone smashes my windshield I call the cops. I don't sit back and delude myself into thinking the malicious perp had some unalienable right to do so and is really pretty cool for smashing windshields. They are malicious, violated MY rights, and need to be stopped and held accountable. Case closed. Some people here better get their heads screwed on straight. They start and end their "analysis" of a the issue with some simplistic, 3ed grade level name-calling argument... that once they can pin the name "net cop" on someone else first, that person is just assumed to be the bad guy while the real jerk who's messing with OUR accounts, who's forcing crackdowns by WNI and hypermart, who's giving us all a bad name, is now Jesus with a halo. My defense of MY rights to protect MYSELF against some action THEY should NEVER have done is the ONLY correct position. If THEY don't like being turned in, then THEY should stop their bullshit. Anyone over 14 with an IQ over 89 should understand that. To those of you who defend these morons, get your heads out of your butt. To any of my friends who do this stuff, this applies to you too. What kind of example are YOU setting? Weren't we supposed to be above this infantile crap?
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Thu, Jul 20, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: NETCOP att North J0hnN0rth wrote: "uITRAX is comparing smashing windshield and calling the cops as to narking on some one for messing with there setting lol." You are arguing along the same discredited lines PHIRE did. Get a clue. First we are not talking about harmless little pranks like making one's text colors change. We are talking about depriving users of services they PAY for. We are talking about depriving them of NGs, and mail service. It amounts to a deprivation of service attack which may be illegal. Stealing our e-mail is another matter. That too may be illegal. What of having our accounts deleted? What of having death threats sent to the President from our accounts? What of having 300 hours of work on a site deleted because some puke is determined to hurt another by whatever means possible? What about stealing private info such as SSIDs or ISP PWs? Shall I go on? If it's not clear yet that ANY tool or technique we have that can be abused WILL be abused... then you've got your head up your butt. Then there's the little matter that your argument, like PHIRE's, totally ignore that victims have any rights. That we're just supposed to take whatever crap the cyber-sociopaths throw at us. Guess what John. Your argument is pathetic. "ultrax about a year ago didn't some one enter your site and didn't use your warning label on this could damage your box. and it cost the guy a new webtv because it screwed it up so bad." The only case I know of is when someone played with some valid codes, made it into a brand NEW one, destroyed up their box, then blamed me. " just like your website your all ways complaining about people messing with your setting but you have code's on your website that has caused damage and trouble are you at fault if some one use's your code's on me...... " I'm going to assume you missed this debate in hacking a few months ago. First of all, I try not to have codes at the site that have abuse potential. For example I removed from the TRICKS index page the unregister box code. The real issue for the other codes is not that they are public. Few are really new. Most have been public for years. I believe the issue is whether they are abused. Since no code can be abused without an access method, that is more critical. Anyone doing pranks, bombs, flooders, whatever, may be using state of the art techniques. It's funny we go though so much angst about revealing access methods, yet we excuse those who do pranks, bombs, flooders even though they are giving away to WNI some of the BEST methods. Ultimately the real issue is not net narcing. That is just a red herring arguement that gives cyber-sociopaths an excuse to never admit they are doing anything wrong... and that any attempt by victims to protect themselves amounts to fascist oppression. The real issues has always been how do we deal with "forbidden" knowledge in a world where it's obvious too many people aren't mature enough to have it.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Thu, Jul 20, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: NETCOP att North J0hnN0rth wrote: "are you working on hacking code's your self? would this be illegal" Guess I'm not getting your point here. I have no idea what you're talking about. "i seen in your site HACKING WTV ACCOUNTS (under construction). would accessing wtv tricks site would this be illegal all so "you" have right?." I think this is a case of someone who trespasses and the owner does not press charges. Maybe even the "trespass" charge would not hold. At the time of the Tricks Breakin there were no warnings at the Tricks site. Getting into Testdrive was an accident. As for hacking accounts, I notified WNI as soon as I knew what I was talking about. Time elapsed between my finishing about 4 hours of experiments and contacting WNI (minus sleeptime) probably an hour. Pretty difficult to make a Federal case out of this one John. Anyway, there's a difference between a mere TOS violation and an actual law. All this being said, I think the record is clear that some people who hold dangerous knowledge will act responsibly and other's will not. That was, is, and always will be, an issue all of us have to deal with. It will not go away. "and far as the kid making a new code that has messed up his box are you 100% sure." He confessed in e-mail but then tried to blame my site in NG posts. It led to quite the "debate". But in the end he did it to himself. Even if he incorrectly used codes at my site, that is the person's responsibility. I post warnings. So do highway departments. "YOU do have codes in there that can damage a box right?. btw im am NOT arguing along the same discredited lines PHIRE . your always talking about thing that are illegal but your doing the same stuff your self." I hate to say it but "duh" John, If you can't see the difference between taking a chance on one's OWN box, and some cyber-sociopath trying to harm SOMEONE ELSE.... there's no point in carrying on an intelligent conversation with you since you lack that key quality to make the conversation possible.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Fri, Jul 21, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: NETCOP att North J0hnN0rth wrote: "TOS mean's your in violation and if your in violation that is illegal by webtv." If you don't know the difference between an actual law and a private contract (or TOS agreement) think it's time to take Civics101 again in summer school John. "did i say actual law in any of my post NO." Let's see what you said John:"are you working on hacking code's your self? would this be illegal i seen in your site HACKING WTV ACCOUNTS (under construction). would accessing wtv tricks site would this be illegal all so "you" have right?."A TOS violation may be a violation of an actual law but need not be. For instance there's no law I know of against disruptions of NGs, but it technically is a violation of our agreement as a subscriber to WNI services but would be if someone uses their e-mail to send Clinton a death threat. Now whether WNI enforces its own TOS is up to their discretion. If WNI chose NOT to TOS me for hacking accounts, that is their prerogative. Whether my hacking accounts was an actual violation of the law, who knows. But again how would a legal case have been made? I suspect there's deficiencies in WNI's account logging and what I did was not logged to me. In reality WNI did not TOS me but made me a previewer. So it's pretty obvious WNI was not just unwilling to punish me for a TOS violation but they were rewarding a TOS violation. "and you said: I post warnings. So do highway departments. AND if i posted if you step one foot in my yard i will bash your head in with a baseball bat now see i had a warning but would that give me the right to do it?" Assault and battery? Warnings don't excuse YOU from violations of the law even on your own property. What does my example of posting warnings so someone does not harm THEMSELVES have to do with your ridiculous example of you smashing in someone's head? "you said:If you can't see the difference between taking a chance on one's OWN box, and some cyber-sociopath trying to screw SOMEONE ELSE up.... YAH put some more destructive codes on your site there being used on YOU and who ever so stop bitching." I feel like I'm debating myself when I was muddleheaded 13 year old. First there is an obvious difference between self-experimentation and someone deliberately trying to harm others. If you can not see that difference then there's no point carrying on a discussion with you. Second, I can think of NO code that we discover that a mature person can not handle. The problem is NOT that we discover highly sensitive info, it's that all too many so called "hackers" are malicious and can not handle the info. For example the mail-forwarding code was known since Jan and there were discussions in early April that if it got out, there'd be chaos. The people who originally had that code weren't out to screw anyone over so it was safe to experiment with. But once it was clear the secret was about to break out, someone notified WNI in May or June to kill it. But by then it was too late and there was a rash of mail-theft bombs. Now you may feel causing such chaos and harming others is nirvana, that's not why I hack. The second issue is not just the code but how they are activated. So here were have a case of some codes I refused to post and I also make it a point to NEVER post access methods that can be used as bombs. So I don't see your point John. "your around hacking news groups don't you think some one is going to get there hands on your code's and abuse them. are you that much of a moron. are you dumb or plain stupid. "duh let me make a website on making bombs and hope no one abuse's it DUH.. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR BUTT your looking in the wrong direction." John, for a cyber-sociopath to successfully bomb someone takes THREE things. First is a code to abuse. Codes by themselves are just info. Second, they need intent: they need to be a person who has no respect for others. Third, they need a way to deliver and activate their bomb. So, despite my site's size, I have endeavored NOT to include dangerous codes that have obvious abuse potential nor do I post activation methods. As for that third ingredient, a person's motives, it hopefully is obvious to you that individuals are responsible for their OWN actions. Knowing that all too many who are drawn to hacking are immature and dangerous, I restrict info at my site and do not post dangerous info. I hope this clears things up for you.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Wed, Jul 19, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: ultrafag.. Vv-TheShAd0w-vV wrote "weither you like ultrax or not.tell him that not us. we dont wanna hear it. your boring.." "Boring" is being kind. It's clear ultraFAG is immature, malicious, emotionally unstable, vengeful, disrespectul of our rights to a forum here and would use any tool at their disposal to harm someone. S/he/it is a perfect example of why some knowledge can not be shared.
Group: alt.discuss.webtv.technical Date: Wed, Jul 19, 2000 From: ulTRAX@webtv.net Re: ultrafag.. What's really sad is that despite ultraFAGs being immature, malicious, emotionally unstable, vengeful, disrespectul of our rights to a forum here and would use any tool at their disposal to harm someone.... he thinks his bullshit is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. Scary.