Safeweb principally offers web browsing anonymity. Our source for the RIAA meeting allegations used a hotmail address which resolved to a Safeweb IP address. However, I don't see on Safeweb's site an anonymizing mail service. Is there such a service by Safeweb or does it sell an anonymizing e-mail program? The source last wrote that "multiple" Safeweb protection was used to cloak the messages. Is there a way to chain Hotmail to Safeweb, or some other way to "multiple" Safeway protection as preamble to Hotmail? It would be intriguing to learn that the source is connected to Safeweb itself, or Safeweb's backers.
John Young wrote:
Safeweb principally offers web browsing anonymity. Our source for the RIAA meeting allegations used a hotmail address which resolved to a Safeweb IP address. However, I don't see on Safeweb's site an anonymizing mail service. Is there such a service by Safeweb or does it sell an anonymizing e-mail program?
The source last wrote that "multiple" Safeweb protection was used to cloak the messages. Is there a way to chain Hotmail to Safeweb, or some other way to "multiple" Safeway protection as preamble to Hotmail?
It would be intriguing to learn that the source is connected to Safeweb itself, or Safeweb's backers.
Likely just somebody using the Hotmail web interface via Safeweb, possibly in turn through a Triangle Boy proxy. You're last paragraph's supposition is interesting, but the whole RIAA thing looks more like an rtmark action, maybe. Which would be funded from within the ranks of Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben et al. Not DOD/CIA. Sure they could snoop, (but they'd have to be running some kind of heavy duty RC4 cracking engine for SSL targets. How vulnerable is RC4 to MITM attacks? Never mind, I'll go do my homework.) and they could certainly do traffic analysis, but odds are the cache is on a DOD network primarily so that they know with more confidence that nobody else has breached security. Analysis could reveal asset locations, etc. I'n guessing this is what they bought with their investment. Anyway, I'm going to set up a tboy server and play with it. You want to some see devious shit, check out rtmark. This is the cointelpro arm of the bait-and-switch artists who give us RATM and the Matrix on the one hand, and DMCA et al. on the other. Not that the RIAA wouldn't hold this kind of secret meeting, but they're all on the same wavelength and don't need to. . jbdigriz -- "rip off this book" :-)
At 12:08 PM 10/13/01 -0400, somebody with the password to jbdigriz@dragonsweb.org wrote:
You're last paragraph's supposition is interesting, but the whole RIAA thing looks more like an rtmark action, maybe. Which would be funded from within the ranks of Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben et al. Not DOD/CIA.
[...]
You want to some see devious shit, check out rtmark. This is the cointelpro arm of the bait-and-switch artists who give us RATM and the Matrix on the one hand, and DMCA et al. on the other.
Exactly how, pray tell, do you figure that rtmark (and i presume you mean the rtmark.com people) has any relationship to Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben-et-al other then one of near-violent opposition?
Last time I checked, rtmark made some of the most clever anti-corporate propaganda I've ever seen. I'm extremely skeptical of any claims that they are part of what they seem to so diligently oppose. -- Luthor //Remembering is copying and copying is THEFT
Luthor Blisset wrote:
At 12:08 PM 10/13/01 -0400, somebody with the password to jbdigriz@dragonsweb.org wrote:
You're last paragraph's supposition is interesting, but the whole RIAA thing looks more like an rtmark action, maybe. Which would be funded from within the ranks of Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben et al. Not DOD/CIA.
[...]
You want to some see devious shit, check out rtmark. This is the cointelpro arm of the bait-and-switch artists who give us RATM and the Matrix on the one hand, and DMCA et al. on the other.
Exactly how, pray tell, do you figure that rtmark (and i presume you mean the rtmark.com people) has any relationship to Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben-et-al other then one of near-violent opposition?
Last time I checked, rtmark made some of the most clever anti-corporate propaganda I've ever seen. I'm extremely skeptical of any claims that they are part of what they seem to so diligently oppose.
-- Luthor //Remembering is copying and copying is THEFT
I'm digging around for the copy of the "Deconstructing Beck" spam that I archived somewhere, which clearly lists a Geffen publicist encouraging, and I quote, "ripping off" the aforesaid artist, whose ROI was apparently slipping at the time. '97, I think. Maybe that was a hoax, too, but that's the kind of thing that can get you hoist by your own petard. jbdigriz
At 07:30 PM 10/13/01 -0400, jbdigriz@dragonsweb.org wrote:
I'm digging around for the copy of the "Deconstructing Beck" spam that I archived somewhere, which clearly lists a Geffen publicist encouraging, and I quote, "ripping off" the aforesaid artist, whose ROI was apparently slipping at the time. '97, I think.
Maybe that was a hoax, too, but that's the kind of thing that can get you hoist by your own petard.
Hoax? Clever argument in support of fair use in the face of copyright, more like. Try http://www.rtmark.com/deconstructingbeck.html
-- Luthor //Remembering is copying and copying is THEFT
James B. DiGriz wrote:
Luthor Blisset wrote:
At 12:08 PM 10/13/01 -0400, somebody with the password to jbdigriz@dragonsweb.org wrote:
You're last paragraph's supposition is interesting, but the whole RIAA thing looks more like an rtmark action, maybe. Which would be funded from within the ranks of Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben et al. Not DOD/CIA.
[...]
You want to some see devious shit, check out rtmark. This is the cointelpro arm of the bait-and-switch artists who give us RATM and the Matrix on the one hand, and DMCA et al. on the other.
Exactly how, pray tell, do you figure that rtmark (and i presume you mean the rtmark.com people) has any relationship to Disney-Sony-AOL/TimeWarner-IG-Coca-Farben-et-al other then one of near-violent opposition?
Last time I checked, rtmark made some of the most clever anti-corporate propaganda I've ever seen. I'm extremely skeptical of any claims that they are part of what they seem to so diligently oppose.
-- Luthor //Remembering is copying and copying is THEFT
I'm digging around for the copy of the "Deconstructing Beck" spam that I archived somewhere, which clearly lists a Geffen publicist encouraging, and I quote, "ripping off" the aforesaid artist, whose ROI was apparently slipping at the time. '97, I think.
Maybe that was a hoax, too, but that's the kind of thing that can get you hoist by your own petard.
jbdigriz
Ok, I can't find it right now, but there are copies of a slightly different press release you can find with Google. Including the one at http://www.gatt.org/deconstructingbeck.html This one lists the publicist at the bottom only, with a disavowal of connection (yeah, right), whereas the email I got listed him in a letterhead area at the top. The whole thing was obviously bought and paid for by Geffen as a promotion. "Nobody is listening to Beck [no shit] so let's con the rubes into thinking they're "liberating" his work and helping to crush the evuuul corporations. At $5 a copy, of course. How pissed off Geffen, Beck, assorted lawyers are, etc." They are a marketing firm, not activists. http://www.gatt.org/pressdb.html lists all the media outlets advertising was placed in. It's a different world since DMCA, though. Happy Fun Oligarchy, blissfully, self-righeously forgetful of having started the whole damned thing, would no longer be amused at such dangerous and suggestive thoughts. Laxity, laxity, laxity! Time to cool some jets. Would somebody as cheerfully amoral as rtmark perpetrate a helpful hoax to discredit the opposition? You tell me. jbdigriz ps. I think you'll find that gatt.org does not actually belong to the actual WTO, either. That I know of, that is.
On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 03:32:00PM -0700, Luthor Blisset wrote:
Last time I checked, rtmark made some of the most clever anti-corporate propaganda I've ever seen. I'm extremely skeptical of any claims that they are part of what they seem to so diligently oppose.
This jibes with what I know (I've written about and spoken with these blokes a few times, FWIW). -Declan
Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 03:32:00PM -0700, Luthor Blisset wrote:
Last time I checked, rtmark made some of the most clever anti-corporate propaganda I've ever seen. I'm extremely skeptical of any claims that they are part of what they seem to so diligently oppose.
This jibes with what I know (I've written about and spoken with these blokes a few times, FWIW).
-Declan
And I think you've been hornswoggled. I'm gonna just leave it at that and disagree with you. jbdigriz
James B. DiGriz wrote:
Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 03:32:00PM -0700, Luthor Blisset wrote:
Last time I checked, rtmark made some of the most clever anti-corporate propaganda I've ever seen. I'm extremely skeptical of any claims that they are part of what they seem to so diligently oppose.
This jibes with what I know (I've written about and spoken with these blokes a few times, FWIW).
-Declan
And I think you've been hornswoggled. I'm gonna just leave it at that and disagree with you.
jbdigriz
Upon reflection, I have to add that I'm not claiming they indeed hoaxed the meeting. It just struck me as being their style. Fortunately for them, any other ad agency or markteting firm in the country, among other possibilities, is fully capable of a stunt like this. jbdigriz
Thanks for much help in tracing the Safeweb/Hotmail thing. With some covert tools provided by people who I never want to cross online, we're proceeding in a special ops mode, deploying dirty trick tracking devices to find, corner and cut off the head of our source, or if source is proven a noble leaker to hide identity as an unannounced success. Not sure how I got sucked into this ignoble pursuit, but I blame Declan bin Cullagh and the Bush coupers for demanding handover of heros or pay the ultimate price of dying alive in DC.
The source last wrote that "multiple" Safeweb protection was used to cloak the messages. Is there a way to chain Hotmail to Safeweb, or some other way to "multiple" Safeway protection as preamble to Hotmail?
This is probably referring to simply looping back through safeweb again, feeding output to input. Provided the source is unconcerned with the RIAA paling up with the CIA and the notoriously dollar happy American Chinese dissident community for mutally benefitting shenanigans this isn't a bad idea. Julian. -- Julian Assange |If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people |together to collect wood or assign them tasks and proff@iq.org |work, but rather teach them to long for the endless proff@gnu.ai.mit.edu |immensity of the sea. -- Antoine de Saint Exupery
participants (5)
-
Declan McCullagh -
James B. DiGriz -
John Young -
Luthor Blisset -
proff＠iq.org