4. Analysis of spam for the benefit of the group.
You have made a logical leap that I do not follow. How does it
benefit the group?
Some people have issues reading the signs, particularly the Received:
lines. I only did this after you requested additional analysis,
6. Scooping wired.com by a whole 3 days.
Again, big difference between sending an uncorroborated email with no
analysis and no investigation, and Wired's story. At least Wired
tired to investigate.
In a distributed incident of this nature, someone has to be the first
to post a "strange traffic on port x" message. In this case, the
research cited by Wired served to independently corroborate the
initial observation. Obviously, if I hadn't posted my message, they
would have nothing to corroborate with.
Crimes happen all the time.
You're right, so screw it. Let's elect a spammer as Prez, why not, I
suppose it's better than the current twit.
I have no intention of doing any further research. That is a job for
the police and the appropriate federal electoral authorities.
So, I again ask, why mail full-disclosure if it's a job for the
police? What job did you think that full-disclosure would perform?
FD is monitored by every major LEA in the world. Posting here is a
good way to notify all of them at once.
Please drop this now. Posting the fulltext of an incident is a
legitimate use of this list. The fact that it was spam is
irrelevant. The usefulness of the post was underscored by Wired.
stuart at () cyberdelix dot net - http://www.cyberdelix.net/
* Origin: lsi: revolution through evolution (192:168/0.2)
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/