full-disclosure - Re: Why is IRC still around? (n3td3v is a troll)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20041121050027.48376.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
From: steve_r125 at yahoo.co.uk (Steve R)
Subject: Re: Why is IRC still around? (n3td3v is a troll)

 --- n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com> wrote: 
> I wish it was possible, but it just wouldn't work.
> The hackers would
> move onto the next best chat system, whatever that
> may be at the time.
> 
> For it ever to work, you would need to ban all chat
> communications and
> peer 2 peer on the internet, and thats unlikely to
> happen, and would
> be hard to police.
> 
> In the meantime what would you do with the billions
> of legitimate
> users of IRC, IM and P2P?
> 
> Tell them to go away as well? I'm anti-malicious
> hackers, but this
> idea just would never work.
> 
> Thanks,n3td3v

First you say that *you* would even close IRC channels
and then you state that "this idea would never work."
Which side of the troll fence are you muppet? 
The only "thing" that needs a "tighter grip" is your
hands around your cock to stop the blood rushing to
your head. And as for "If I was in gov", fuck no, we
already have enough dickheads in government thank you
very much without you adding to the pile.

>From the archives (QED):
http://lists.netsys.com/pipermail/full-disclosure/2004-November/028931.html

FW: [Full-Disclosure] Shadowcrew Grand Jury Indictment
n3td3v n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com>
Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:53:44 +0000

    * Previous message: FW: [Full-Disclosure]
Shadowcrew Grand Jury Indictment
    * Next message: FW: [Full-Disclosure] Shadowcrew
Grand Jury Indictment
    * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [
subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:41:20 -0600, Todd Towles
<toddtowles@...okshires.com> wrote:
> Well, it is given that posting to FD does give a
site exposure (good and
> bad). But I wouldn't say that FD was the cause of
it..it was the illegal
> activity that was the cause of it. We all know SCC
does some underground
> stuff and they post here each time they move. So...I
wouldn't blame the
> FD list for anything.

I wouldn't use the word blame? I think its a good
thing if
Full-Disclosure is helping to catch online criminals.
I don't know if
you like malicious hackers and other criminals, but
yeah.... I dislike
them. I would do anything in my power to stop online
crime, from
scriptkiddie stuff, to sex stuff,spam,scams, fraud,
terrorism and back
again.

I have no space for anyone thinking they are elite and
all the other
hacker scene crap. Its time to clamp down on the BS
thats on the net.

If I was in gov, I would shut a site down that looks
remotely
hax0rish, even if they've done nothing wrong. All
these crews and
hacker groups, fk them all. The net needs zero
tollerence with online
crime. Govs should have the authority to close
anything done because
they feel like it, without needing to prove shit.

I would even close IRC channels. Hackphreak on
undernet looks
harmless, but fk that. Close it anyway, its time to
get a tighter grip
on things.

Thanks,n3td3v

    * Previous message: FW: [Full-Disclosure]
Shadowcrew Grand Jury Indictment
    * Next message: FW: [Full-Disclosure] Shadowcrew
Grand Jury Indictment
    * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [
subject ] [ author ]

___________________________________________________________ 
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com