Date: Fri Nov 25 16:25:14 2005
From: xploitable at gmail.com (n3td3v)
Subject: Return of the Phrack High Council

On 11/25/05, James Eaton-Lee <james.mailing@...il.com> wrote:
> I don't really want to feed the trolls any more than we as a list
> already have, but for your benefit, n3td3v, and in the hope that either
> the list will have some of their concerns allayed or you'll realise
> where you're going wrong...

You're misinformed advice

> Talking about inflaming the situation in one breath and telling someone
> you have more right to be here than they do in another doesn't help
> either - you should realise this.

It was a broadly deserved remark


> Last first, making threats doesn't help either - again, you say two
> things in one breath - you proclaim yourself as a fantastic, righteous
> member of the community and also make veiled threats about other peoples
> computer systems.

There was no threat. I asked if their web site was very secure. No
remark on anyone compromising any computer systems related to the
person.

> I think the majority of people on this list who have an unfavourable
> reaction to you have it for the following reasons:

I don't care why they unfavour... infact I forget about haters within seconds

>
> * You've never provided any concrete indication that you have any
> technical knowhow (I've never read a post of yours on a technical topic)

I wasn't aware I had to prove myself

>
> * You (unlike most people who work in "corporate" security) are falling
> for the trao of hiding behind an alias rather than using your real name.

Theres common sense reasons for using an alias, it doesnt mean youre malicious.


> * Your spelling, punctuation, and grammar (for someone who claims to
> work in "corporate" security and have years of experience) is terrible.

I better go back to grammar school

>
> * Your understanding of how "corporate security" actually works and how
> the security community structured are both fundamentally flawed.

I don't believe I have posted any information to allow you to come to
that conclusion.

> * You have a website hosted on geocities which has content which is, at
> best, utterly laughable.

Using corporate services allows you to detect bugs when they occur.
How else can you detect bugs if you don't regulary use any of a
vendor's products?

> The overwhelming impression that I get from you, coming from someone who
> has seen both sides of the security world, and as someone who does work,
> professionally, in information security with large organisations, is
> that you're pretentious, fake, and contrived. Frankly, based on your
> posts and your website, I get the distinct impression that you're about
> 15.

I have never worked professionally. I'm also 10 years older than your age guess.

>
> I'm not trying to attack you in any way, but as someone who I feel is at
> least reasonably representative of a substantial proportion of the list,
> I think this is probably a fairly un-unique perspective. If you
> genuinely want to be taken seriously and really do want to participate,
> I'd suggest that you either amend your ways, answer some of our
> questions, or stop biting the trollfood.

Amend your opinion first

>
> Chances are that if you are 'just some kid' someday, you may want to
> work in IT. It'd probably be in your interest in this case to distance
> yourself from 'n3td3v', find an alias (completely disassociated) to use
> (or, if you're brave enough, start using your real name), and heed some
> of the advice you've been (with varying degrees of kindness) given.

We're all kids at heart. This alias is only used to post on public
sites. I have a multitude of usernames for intelligence building.
You'll never see n3td3v anywhere else. I'm actually heavily involved
in your BSRF, but you wouldn't know that, since youre too busy making
judgements on people you are misinformed about. Go ask some of your
IRC channel operators, many of them are great friends of mine. I'm
everywhere and you didn't even know it. Youre commenting on someone
you're most likely friends with and you might be making yourself look
stupid. I could make you look more stupid in public by reveiling my
nickname on your IRC channel and your direct involvement with me by
yourself and your channel operators and users of BSRF.

>
> Even if you don't have the inclination (or ability) to reply sensible,
> you might want to at least try and take some of this in! You're welcome
> to message me offlist if you're so inclined and have questions.

An on list comment must be met by an on list reply.

>
>  - James.

Youre James, that makes you ammune from being a n3td3v and wipes any
criminality from the minds of many, or thats what you real name people
wish people to believe.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists