Are you getting messages directly from spirit?
Are you getting messages directly from spirit?
Hello everybody,
Are you getting messages directly from spirit?
Check out 1111forum to post your story as well as read what other people are experiencing.
Some of this stuff will blow your mind. I kept seeing 1111 a lot and thought it was a coincidence, but not anymore...
1111forum.com
See you there!
Steve
Are you getting messages directly from spirit?
Check out 1111forum to post your story as well as read what other people are experiencing.
Some of this stuff will blow your mind. I kept seeing 1111 a lot and thought it was a coincidence, but not anymore...
1111forum.com
See you there!
Steve
Strange. Is it common amongst spammers to introduce yourself in the Introduction thread, before spamming the Life thread with a message best suited to the Websites thread?
Evidently you're here 'doing a job', as your Intro thread said.. Promoting a new forum.. But there's better ways of doing it than posting a blatant advert.
A tip - if you do want to advertise your forum on this forum, in an attempt to get people to participate on yours, how about you try participating on here a little first? People will take more kindly to a polite request to take a look at your forum, especially after making yourself known as a member with something to contribute, as opposed to simply spamming an advert..
Just something to think about
Elem
Evidently you're here 'doing a job', as your Intro thread said.. Promoting a new forum.. But there's better ways of doing it than posting a blatant advert.
A tip - if you do want to advertise your forum on this forum, in an attempt to get people to participate on yours, how about you try participating on here a little first? People will take more kindly to a polite request to take a look at your forum, especially after making yourself known as a member with something to contribute, as opposed to simply spamming an advert..
Just something to think about
Elem
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:40 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: catterick garrison, North yorks, uk
Just a word of caution, sometimes this kind of site promotion is used to
get people to navigate to a site which exploits a security weakness in
their browser or one of the plugins their browser uses. This can lead to
what's commonly referred to as 'execution of arbitrary code'.
The consequences for the common computer user (in the worst case) is
that their machine can become remotely controllable from the outside.
Programs and services can be installed without their knowledge.
Any data (mail, documents, pictures, anything really) available to them
on that machine is also available to the attacker.
In most cases the person will never be aware of the intrusion, virus
scanners can help but may fail to detect newly devised malicious
software.
An external firewall will be of no help at all in this situation.
A personal firewall (one running on the browsing computer) may inform
you if an unknown program attempts to connect to the outside world
but many of the most popular programs in this category can be easily
fooled. The personal firewalls which come with Windows XP and MacOSX
do not even have this capability.
So, I would suggest that when faced with this kind of bait on a hook that
you don't even bother to navigate to the site; even out of curiosity.
Steve, I'm not saying this is the case with your site, but the approach you
used put up a few red flags. Welcome to the forum, I hope you enjoy
your stay here.
T. Guy.
get people to navigate to a site which exploits a security weakness in
their browser or one of the plugins their browser uses. This can lead to
what's commonly referred to as 'execution of arbitrary code'.
The consequences for the common computer user (in the worst case) is
that their machine can become remotely controllable from the outside.
Programs and services can be installed without their knowledge.
Any data (mail, documents, pictures, anything really) available to them
on that machine is also available to the attacker.
In most cases the person will never be aware of the intrusion, virus
scanners can help but may fail to detect newly devised malicious
software.
An external firewall will be of no help at all in this situation.
A personal firewall (one running on the browsing computer) may inform
you if an unknown program attempts to connect to the outside world
but many of the most popular programs in this category can be easily
fooled. The personal firewalls which come with Windows XP and MacOSX
do not even have this capability.
So, I would suggest that when faced with this kind of bait on a hook that
you don't even bother to navigate to the site; even out of curiosity.
Steve, I'm not saying this is the case with your site, but the approach you
used put up a few red flags. Welcome to the forum, I hope you enjoy
your stay here.
T. Guy.
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:40 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: catterick garrison, North yorks, uk
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:40 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: catterick garrison, North yorks, uk
Really nice guys, thanks.
You're right, people who are savy such as yourselves never get hacked.
And the internet isn't already filled with thousands of zombie hosts.
Ignore whatever I have to say, fine, but I don't think I was asking for
a sarcastic backhanded insult.
Here's a link to one of the many organizations which are also trying
to 'convince' you that computers are dangerous:
http://www.us-cert.gov/current/
You're right, people who are savy such as yourselves never get hacked.
And the internet isn't already filled with thousands of zombie hosts.
Ignore whatever I have to say, fine, but I don't think I was asking for
a sarcastic backhanded insult.
Here's a link to one of the many organizations which are also trying
to 'convince' you that computers are dangerous:
http://www.us-cert.gov/current/
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:40 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: catterick garrison, North yorks, uk
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:40 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: catterick garrison, North yorks, uk
Hey,
Really sorry if you thought my comment was being sarcastic! It was meant to be taken in humour - I genuinely do have a large scar on the back of my hand from a CD tray.
I understand exactly how dangerous the Internet can be. I've been using and building computers almost all my life, and have experienced some rather nasty attacks through the Internet / use of trojans & malicious code.
Once again, apologies if you thought I was being sarcastic! I, as always, respect your comments and only wish to thank you for drawing attention to this important matter.
Elem
Really sorry if you thought my comment was being sarcastic! It was meant to be taken in humour - I genuinely do have a large scar on the back of my hand from a CD tray.
I understand exactly how dangerous the Internet can be. I've been using and building computers almost all my life, and have experienced some rather nasty attacks through the Internet / use of trojans & malicious code.
Once again, apologies if you thought I was being sarcastic! I, as always, respect your comments and only wish to thank you for drawing attention to this important matter.
Elem
No worries Elem, it's clearly my own blunder, but I appreciate your
reassurance. I came onto the forum really frustrated because the
proliferation of zombie hosts is getting to be a real problem.
In the past these hosts were mainly used by crackers or script-kiddies to
perform distributed denial of service attacks mainly for pranks
or revenge. Now it's started to become a sort of pseudo-business
where these owned hosts are being programmed to generate income
by generating false site-visits and click-throughs. It's now financially
feasible to set up a domain, web-hosting and false content solely for
the purpose of acquiring new hosts via a new exploit and people are
doing this.
Many people in the IT industry think themselves invulnerable to this
kind of threat merely because they deploy hardened firewalls and a
NIDS (network intrusion detection system). Crackers are now tailoring
their exploits (mainly buffer overflows) to avoid matching signatures
in the NIDS' ruleset by obfuscating nop-slides and subsequent code
etc. Most of the new exploits pass right through the NIDS without
generating a single event.
Now, you try and convince some of these people that they need to start
taking extra precautions and about half of them respond with sarcasm
indicating 'well, only *stupid* net-admins would ever be unaware that
one of their hosts was compromised' and that a call to action is just
spreading paranoia. At about this point all the crackers and script kiddies
chime in to eagerly support this viewpoint and help all the 'experts' feel
smarter with obsequious pats on the back. This generally drives me
into a rage. I should be more mature at my age.
If some of the things which are going on on the internet right now
were happening 'in real life' people would be up in arms. It's hard to
think of a good analogy but it would be like streets filled with litter and
strangers are using your car to pick up groceries when you're not
watching.
That being said, it's hard to address this sort of thing without causing
undo worry. The internet really isn't filled with hidden dangers around
every corner. I think 'common sense' just hasn't adapted itself
to the modern age of the internet to the point where it's automatic.
Software vendors aren't taking enough responsibility either, but
the cost of providing safer software is prohibitive and would immediately
make a development house non-competitive.
It's sad really, given the kind of atmosphere with which the internet
started out. What a rant, and not very original
reassurance. I came onto the forum really frustrated because the
proliferation of zombie hosts is getting to be a real problem.
In the past these hosts were mainly used by crackers or script-kiddies to
perform distributed denial of service attacks mainly for pranks
or revenge. Now it's started to become a sort of pseudo-business
where these owned hosts are being programmed to generate income
by generating false site-visits and click-throughs. It's now financially
feasible to set up a domain, web-hosting and false content solely for
the purpose of acquiring new hosts via a new exploit and people are
doing this.
Many people in the IT industry think themselves invulnerable to this
kind of threat merely because they deploy hardened firewalls and a
NIDS (network intrusion detection system). Crackers are now tailoring
their exploits (mainly buffer overflows) to avoid matching signatures
in the NIDS' ruleset by obfuscating nop-slides and subsequent code
etc. Most of the new exploits pass right through the NIDS without
generating a single event.
Now, you try and convince some of these people that they need to start
taking extra precautions and about half of them respond with sarcasm
indicating 'well, only *stupid* net-admins would ever be unaware that
one of their hosts was compromised' and that a call to action is just
spreading paranoia. At about this point all the crackers and script kiddies
chime in to eagerly support this viewpoint and help all the 'experts' feel
smarter with obsequious pats on the back. This generally drives me
into a rage. I should be more mature at my age.
If some of the things which are going on on the internet right now
were happening 'in real life' people would be up in arms. It's hard to
think of a good analogy but it would be like streets filled with litter and
strangers are using your car to pick up groceries when you're not
watching.
That being said, it's hard to address this sort of thing without causing
undo worry. The internet really isn't filled with hidden dangers around
every corner. I think 'common sense' just hasn't adapted itself
to the modern age of the internet to the point where it's automatic.
Software vendors aren't taking enough responsibility either, but
the cost of providing safer software is prohibitive and would immediately
make a development house non-competitive.
It's sad really, given the kind of atmosphere with which the internet
started out. What a rant, and not very original
. . . . . . . . .
Be aware.
. . . . . . . . .
Be aware.
. . . . . . . . .