[Gllug] Bomb the ISP's

[Formi]

On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Formi wrote:

 I missed including any person who enjoys privacy, who believes s-he has
 something remotely similar to human rights, or a computer by the way.

 Is it not pointless to speak about ending this problem, or a huge range
 of them by technological means such as guns and computer or
 communications limitations ...

 when the problem is of ideologies or just plain abuse ??

                                           Anyway it's rainning.


>
>  Sorry I couldn't resist it,
>
>  Let's bomb everybody who says/does anything against the US, or
>  capitalism in general, myself included. It would be easier, and of
>  course cheaper. If innocent people are hit, that is no problem.
>
>   MASS PARANOIA, or backwards, A I ON ARAP, SSAM.
>
>   Could this have a meaning ?
>
>   Change the P for a B, SSAM, maybe Uncle Sam.
>
>   By the way, this has nothing to do with politics.
>
> 			                      Formi.
>
>
>
>
> On 17 Sep 2001, Xander D Harkness wrote:
>
> > In many respects I think that more people should have set up smtp
> > encryption.  Most SMTP servers are capable of it.
> >
> > We would then get the whole process encrypted including header and
> > sender.
> >
> > email has replaced snail mail in many respects - I do not see the SIS or
> > CIA demanding that the post office provide them with data or the means
> > to observe who sends mail and to where.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Xander
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2001-09-17 at 16:31, John Edwards wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Alain Williams wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 02:43:08PM +0100, Gordon Joly wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Didn't the BBC report that the Taliban had shutdown Afghanistan's links to
> > > >>> the Internet a few months ago, citing the usual reason of immorallity, etc?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> That would have made it is little hard for any terrorists in Afghanistan to
> > > >>> coordinate attacks via the Internet.
> > > >>
> > > >> Unless they use satellite links?
> > > >
> > > > No, the Taliban would never use satellite (think of the other immoral uses of
> > > > satellite). This seems like an excellent use of RFC 1149 (IP Datagrams on
> > > > Avian Carriers) - which I have only just realised was updated in 1999 by
> > > > RFC 2549.
> > >
> > > Hang on a minute wasn't Alan Cox involved in a top secret implementation
> > > of RFC 1149 in Norway about a year ago ? I don't think it involved any
> > > encryption in the protocal, but that still allows the use of encryption in
> > > the application layer. Maybe.... <SANITY CUTOUT>
> > >
> > > Anyway it's probable that few people knew how these terrorists communicated
> > > otherwise any receipents of a message would have been under suspicion. Even
> > > when the contents of an email are encrypted it's sender, receipent and date
> > > are not, that's still more information than a secret group would want to
> > > have released. The only advantage that an email would have over a courier
> > > is that of speed and according to reports these attacks were planed over a
> > > long time.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > #----------------------------------------------------------------#
> > > |    John Edwards, Email: John.Edwards at cornerstonelinux.co.uk    |
> > > #----------------------------------------------------------------#
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
> > > http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

-- 
 God doesn't exist, if he ever had, he'd have had committed suicide.


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug