Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
Poll
Can adequacy.org get any better than it already is?
No, its so damn controversial it's difficult to see how it could possibly get any better. 9%
Yes, there are a few trivial changes which would make it fractionally better than it already is 15%
Why are you asking me ? adequacy.org is not a democracy. (clue: this is the correct answer) 75%

Votes: 32

 Adequacy. Can we make it even better ?

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Apr 05, 2002
 Comments:
I have been reading some of the responses to articles here at the most controversial site on the Internet and I am struck by the sheer venom with which some of our readers attack us. It's almost as if they hate us.

diaries

More diaries by dmg
I just love those crazy Brits.
My life is one long vacation
Where to drink in London ?
A law that is ignored is not a good law.
So what are you saying, my Art is not good enough ?
The Politics of Envy
Modern Literary Masterpiece
Rock and Roll !
What do you think of adequacy ?
Liberalist morons strike again.
I miss Linux Zealot (tm)
The don't make 'em like they used to.
Is this the kind of leader the USA supports ?
What makes Australian women so hot?
Worried about all the trolls on K5 ?
PsychoKinesis - Spooky or what ?
The Litigious States of America.
The Wankometer
Attention! Slashdot retards and K5 wankers read this now!
British lack of self-control. Why are they so arrogant ?
What will the lunix apologists make of this ?
Citizen Corps and TIPS - do they go far enough ?
America's public image
Where are they now ?
Which firearm are you ?
Surprising obscure facts.
Trolling - A thing of the past ?
The War on Terror - is it winnable ?
Interesting people.
How can we take Blair seriously ?
I am now a 31337 h4x0r !!!
I've also noticed that whenever we do a piece on how hacking is antisocial and criminal, we get DDOSed and NMAPed and all kinds of other nasty shit.

Are our readers really are a bunch of slobbering fourteen year old morons with the IQ of a mollusc (like the eponymous hero of the classic 80s movie 'Basket Case') ?

I realise that my 'know it all' attitude occasionally rubs people up the wrong way, but hey, I call things as I see them. Our readers need to display a bit more maturity in their reactions. After all, adequacy is all about controversy. Calling me a dumbass or stating that I "don't know shit about computers" is not debate. It is sophomoric bullshit.

This is not directed at our many intelligent readers (you know who you are), but at the small number of uneducated, ill-informed, juvenile morons who persist in trying to be 'clever'.

So think please, before you post, and if you have any (sensible) suggestions as to how we can improve your adequacy.org experience, feel free to post them here.

thank you

dmg

       
Tweet

Hmm (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Yoshi on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 02:45:45 AM PST
I understand what you mean in regards to the uneducated 'few' here at Adequacy.org. I have been virused and hacked several times in the past couple of months by the hackingscum lurking in the shadows of Adequacy.org. Even almost killed once by one of those nuclear emails, but my Windows XP Firewall stopped it.

I really have to congratulate you on a superb site. I feel it's the only place in which I can express the honest, brutal truth about what I know without the fear of being down-moderated unfairly. Sometimes, an intelligent debate even ensues, which is far more than you'll ever see at the former sites, but a lot of the time, Adequacy.org seems to attract their fair amount of trolls and crapflooders. Such is the consequence of running The Most Controversial Site on the Internet.


I would ask you kindly... (3.00 / 2) (#2)
by budlite on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 02:55:37 AM PST
...not to defame me so.


 
Slander.. (1.25 / 4) (#4)
by DG on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 08:12:02 AM PST
I never troll, i point out misinformation for those who have no time to actually go look up correct information on subject.
2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

 
The number one thing we need... (4.00 / 1) (#3)
by elenchos on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 03:10:35 AM PST
...is to be able to report that we were instrumental in getting a hacker arrested. Well, all of the hackers that hang out here, in fact. I can see the headlines: "Grateful Police Commissioner Thanks Adequacy.org for Catching Hackers". "Adequacy.org Sends Another Hacker Up the River"! "Hacker Syncicate Smashed by Tip from Adequacy.org".

We know who these scum are. We just need to get the goods to nail them.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


There is a lot... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Fon2d2 on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 11:08:36 AM PST
that the maintainers of this fine site can do to prevent hacks and stop hackers. Check out Steve Gibson's Attacks on GRC webpage to see the techniques he used to fight a ddos attack: everything from contacting his ISP to notifying the FBI. He was even able to determine the home town and online boss of the hacker although I don't think it resulted in an arrest. Of course, best of luck to everyone at adequacy in fighting this menace.


Steve Gibson sucks (1.00 / 1) (#9)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 11:58:50 AM PST
See here.

I got caught too. However, later I learned something about TCP/IP and found Gibson is a marketing person trying to talk his way into the world of computer security. The link (see above) I ran into later just confirmed my suspicion.

The grc.com's ShieldsUP is a good thing, though. However, a friend skilled with nmap is much much better.


Uh, I suppose.. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Yoshi on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:13:05 PM PST
However, a friend skilled with nmap is much much better.

Well, of course. It's better to get the hacker mafia on your side than have them against you. I hope he won't rat on you when the FBI catches on to his illegal nmap intrusion.


Actually... (none / 0) (#13)
by budlite on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:31:28 PM PST
nmap does exactly the same job as ShieldsUp.

Regarding Steve Gibson, he does appear to know what he's talking about, but I still take his writing with a pinch of salt - he's just too much of a scaremongerer for me to do otherwise.


No (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Yoshi on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:36:50 PM PST
nmap force-downloads the port versioning information from the host computer. ShieldsUp just tells you if you have a firewall using deflector SCK packets.


Nope (none / 0) (#19)
by budlite on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 01:48:03 PM PST
ShieldsUP tries to connect to some of the more commonly used ports on a computer, and if the connection is refused or the port and computer don't even appear to exist (ShieldsUP reports it is in Stealth mode), then it determines you have a firewall if all the ports are like this.

nmap does exactly the same. It's just that it doesn't restrict itself to the commonly used ports unless you specify a port list or range.


 
Yep. (1.00 / 1) (#16)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:53:41 PM PST
Regarding Steve Gibson, he does appear to know what he's talking about, but I still take his writing with a pinch of salt - he's just too much of a scaremongerer for me to do otherwise.

Definitely.

I'd have some reserves against the "know what he is talking about" part; however, he doesn't look like a total amateur. His marketing background is stronger than his technical background, though.

I'd bet he wears a tie.


Ties (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by walwyn on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 02:43:51 PM PST
I'd bet he wears a tie.

Two days before I started my present job I hadn't owned a tie since three years before I left school, nor had I ever owned a suit. Nowadays I wear both a suit and tie to work, because no one else does.

I recall someone who took to wearing a suit and tie after he was tasked by his Anarchist group with improving their image.


 
Indeed. (none / 0) (#14)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:34:40 PM PST
Well, of course. It's better to get the hacker mafia on your side than have them against you.

There is no "hacker mafia". There is a disorganized mess of individuals and various cliques. But it's usually good to have at least some of them on your side.

I hope he won't rat on you when the FBI catches on to his illegal nmap intrusion.

Nmap? Illegal? If nmap is illegal, I should be neck-deep in jail now. Bah. If I am going to entrust a third party with my data, brief security scan for at least the most glaring holes is my routine. Or when giving money to your bank you don't look around for guards and cameras, and be suspicious in their absence?

Filthy Bunch of Idiots is unable to get to my more sensitive data anyway. The machine is physically disconnected from the network (red/black zone concept), and the keys are in an experimental tamper-resistant hardware. Built to withstand all documented ways police squads operate when acquiring the evidence, and some more. With all the ways even innocent data can be interpreted in these days, it's better to be safe than sorry. As an added benefit, when I'll finish the design, maybe I could make some bucks from selling the devices...

And anyway, if you are securing your system, is your first priority to be legal, or to be safe?


Correction. (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by derek3000 on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 01:52:56 PM PST
Nmap? Illegal? If nmap is illegal, I should be neck-deep in jail now. Bah.

If you were in jail, you'd be neck-deep in a rolled-up mattress, ready to recieve the demon-seed.


----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

Correction of a correction (none / 0) (#23)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 06:36:23 PM PST
If you were in jail, you'd be neck-deep in a rolled-up mattress, ready to recieve the demon-seed.

If you don't get to a maximum security facility, which for nonviolent crimes isn't really likely, the reality isn't as dark as you describe. Check here for experiences from the trenches and a handful of good advices.

Besides, if you aren't out of your mind, you make money from "legit" jobs (if you aren't caught in the desires like a showoff car, you don't need much anyway, and if you are better class, the pay tends to be good), and you don't play with high stakes, so the notoriously overworked and understaffed net.cops won't have resources for you. So you can end at most with DMCA conviction. Even that only if you are not careful.

Even better is if you are outside the Evil Empire, in some part of the world that is still free and without so much of silly corporate-friendly laws.

Just now, I am recruiting a tiger to assess my LAN from the outside, and scanning an IP address from which I just received one of the famous Nigeria bank account spam mails. I usually play nice; however, by sending me a spam or sniffing around my machines you are agreeing to volunteer as a practice target.


Hypocrisy (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Yoshi on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 07:04:55 PM PST
I usually play nice; however, by sending me a spam or sniffing around my machines you are agreeing to volunteer as a practice target.

Is that the same thing as one of those click-through EULAs that you libs want to outlaw? Figures. Common sense laws in the economics world are only useful when they apply to you liberals. It's no wonder most of the major economists on Wall Street (read: not Berkeley or MIT) are not liberalists like yourself.


Not at all. (none / 0) (#25)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 07:23:25 PM PST
I usually play nice; however, by sending me a spam or sniffing around my machines you are agreeing to volunteer as a practice target.
Is that the same thing as one of those click-through EULAs that you libs want to outlaw?


Nope. It is what makes the difference between an attack and a legitimate defense.

Besides, I hadn't heard yet about anybody who takes the clickwraps seriously; good luck enforcing them.

Waiting for the tiger. Eager to see the attack from the victim's perspective. As far I got only boring and silly known-vulnerability scan attempts, nothing that would cause more than my yawn. Pondering to set up a honeypot on a port or two; I have a spare machine that could sit in my DMZ...


can i get ur IP (1.00 / 1) (#26)
by Narcissus on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 08:21:54 PM PST
I just want to mess w/ ur honey pot I promise not to do anything harmful ... I'll even e-mail u my address so if I do do anything wrong u can come for me
hehe j/k im now learning the inner-workings of tcp/ip but noone will let me even portscan w/o thinkin i want to break in and delete all their files




--------------------------------
Ok, who picked the flower???

Pondering. (none / 0) (#27)
by The Mad Scientist on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 08:37:11 PM PST
Maybe so, depending on how the current assessment ends. Preferably by a private email, though.

The honeypot isn't installed yet, at this moment it is in stage of just-a-thought. But a live firewall with some ports open is in place. A VPN to ensure more secure communication with other servers (both in my care and of my friends) is being developed now.

FreeS/WAN looks like a good thing for this task. With the governments getting more nosey each day, and the ISPs getting more obliged to any Law Enforcement's request, it gives quite good sense to preemptively encrypt as much as you can. If only in order to make artificial fog and make the adversary's job a bit more futile.


This is so cute! (5.00 / 5) (#28)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 09:10:54 PM PST
They're flirting!


no doubt (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by nathan on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 11:08:49 AM PST
They'll soon be talking about Christian existentialism.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

How come you never return my calls anymore? (none / 0) (#37)
by hauntedattics on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 07:27:23 PM PST
*whine*



 
Aha! (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:29:50 PM PST
I got caught too.

So you admit you're nothing but a petty criminal. Remind me to chuckle softly the next time I read your discursive explanations that pretend hackers are the legitimate vanguard of the techno-babbling-intelligentsia.

*snort* Scientist indeed. If you DOS just one more site, there'll be no cartoon channel for you, young man. Oops, got your nose.


DoS (none / 0) (#31)
by The Mad Scientist on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 08:30:34 PM PST
Remind me to chuckle softly the next time I read your discursive explanations that pretend hackers are the legitimate vanguard of the techno-babbling-intelligentsia.

Remind me to chuckle softly the next time you will use results of hackers' work - from a personal computer to TCP/IP. And when your droolproof "operating system" bluescreens on you.

If you DOS just one more site, there'll be no cartoon channel for you, young man.

DoS is a legitimate way how to take a machine that went berserk down from the LAN or Net until it is possible to give her adequate service. When two machines lock against each other and form ie. an "email laser", eating both the bandwidth and the disk space, and you can't log to either of them to stop it, the only way to stop them is to shot one of them down by any means until you can get on-site and service it properly. Been there, done that.

And until I'll convince myself to climb onto the roof and set up the dish, there will be no cartoon channel for me anyway. Not that I miss it.

Oops, got your nose.

I don't understand this reference?


 
I may have a small solution to idiots (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by Narcissus on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 09:38:30 AM PST
possibly make it so all the ARs can see the mission statement ... maybe then they will see the point behind this site instead of making their own retarded misperseptions about it.

and maybe get rid of shoeboy if possible cuz he really pissed me off by banning me from #adequacy just for asking a question, isn't this site about informing the knowledge hungry?




--------------------------------
Ok, who picked the flower???

I get the feeling (1.00 / 1) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 01:31:02 PM PST
that Shoeboy's gotten too big for his britches.


Please take your homosexual size fantasies (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Adam Rightmann on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 01:36:04 PM PST
to trollaxor.com or geekizoid.com, we don't need them here.


A. Rightmann

 
You are good hearted dmg (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by Adam Rightmann on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 10:06:14 AM PST
but I'm not sure if asking our readers how to run our website is the best idea. Does the Pope poll the laity or even lower echelon priests in how to run the True Church? If he did, just how much longer do you think the Church would last? There is a lesson there in keeping control out of the well meaning but ignorant hoi polloi. While some of our readers are educated and erudite, most of them have trouble stringing four words together without committing grave grammar errors, and they have cloudy thought processes.

All is not lost, dear readers. You should follow the leads of our most recent additions to the staff by submitting grammatically correct, right thinking, controversial articles. If we like the way you right and think, we may consider any little ideas you propose.


A. Rightmann

Congratulations (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by budlite on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 12:28:31 PM PST
Does the Pope poll the laity or even lower echelon priests in how to run the True Church? If he did, just how much longer do you think the Church would last?

You just made the best argument I've ever seen against the continued existence of the Christian church.


 
See poll option #3 n/t (none / 0) (#29)
by dmg on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 10:10:37 AM PST


time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

 
Actually... (none / 0) (#21)
by derek3000 on Fri Apr 5th, 2002 at 02:15:36 PM PST
I consider myself to be an avid Adequacy reader. Maybe you could earmark new replies in the "my comments" section, so those of us who contribute regularly don't have to go back two or three pages so we can formulate our rebuttals.

Please help us in our conquest to embarass the living shit out of these trolls.


----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

 
How about... (5.00 / 4) (#32)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 10:55:26 PM PST
not allowing anyone to post as an "anonymous reader" anymore? These folks always seem to have the most trite and ignorant comments anyway.


Unfortunately, we cannot do this. (none / 0) (#33)
by dmg on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 09:56:04 AM PST
We aim to stay the most controversial site on the Internet, for this reason people must feel free to publish their opinions safe in the knowledge that we will not expose their identities, unless the FBI or CIA or other intelligence/military agencies ask us to.

I have heard of advanced technologies such as 'lameness filters' that other sites use, but they do not appear to work particularly well, since the hacker reprobates consider it a 'challenge'. I'm wondering if there might be some kind of subliminal messaging technology we could use, like an animated gif which occasionally flashes the message 'don't post crap to adequacy' or something like that might work ? Do any of you 'webmasters' out there have any experience with this kind of psychological software ?

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

That is tantamount to terrorism. (5.00 / 2) (#36)
by elenchos on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 06:20:11 PM PST
Merely cooperating with "FBI or CIA or other intelligence/military agencies" is in my mind equivalent to treason. Are you on the Al Qaeda payroll? Why do you hate America?

I thought I knew you, man.

I for one, am more than willing to reveal the identities of our "anonymous" posters (and readers too) to the above agencies, and the DEA, ATF, Customs Service, Secret Service, GAO, and any other Federal Agency that asks. Or that I think might need to ask. Why wait? In attition, the local police have my full support and cooperation. I have already given them the IP addresses of over 350 individuals. They thanked me profusely, and will be getting back to me shortly with their plans for indictment. Further, I am prepared to offer any and all assistance to the State Patrol, the School Board, PTA, Animal Control, Interstate Commerce Commission, The Masons, the Shriners, the AMA and most especially the Association of Computing Machinery.

If there is any other category of law enforcement, offical regulatory agency, or quasi-offical regulatory agency that I have left out, please be assured that I will cooperate fully with any and all requests for informtion that they have, or contemplate having, or that I anticipate that they will contemplate having.

So far this has resulted in 0 indictments, and 0 successufl prosecutions. Accordingly, I have plans to redouble my efforts to assist the autorities in their task of imprisoning hackers wherever they may hide.

Any tips or informtion (including rumors and fabrications, if they are credible) that anyone has on this subject would make a very good topic for a diary here, and I would look upon it favorably.

Thank you.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


 
Hmmm... (none / 0) (#35)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 07:40:16 PM PST
I have to wonder exactly how many people missed the irony in that comment.


 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.