|
Home > Archive > Xbox forum > March 2005 > OT: Hack Xenon/NextBox's posting machine
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
OT: Hack Xenon/NextBox's posting machine
|
|
| Kendrick Kerwin Chua 2005-03-02, 6:42 pm |
|
It would be illegal of me to suggest unauthorized access of anybody's
computer. With that caveat, let's speak in theoretical terms here... A
user who alternately calls himself Xenon, Nextbox or any number of brand-
specific handles frequently posts news items from third-party sources and
then posts responses from different user names. He also responds to
criticism with hostility and non sequiter arguments. If you accept that
to respond to those actions by hacking is illegal, what would one do in
order to create and to sustain a denial-of-service or other attack on his
news posting hosts?
Verbose header printout of this person's posts show that he's using a
Comcast client (67.163.24.226) to initiate his threads, and presumably
from this same host transmits the responses. Given the long DHCP lease of
Comcast broadband services, this is likely to have be his address for the
foreseeable future. A simple DNS lookup gives this IP address the name
c-67-163-24-226.client.comcast.net which is both meaningful and
persistent.
Of course, to initiate any kind of attack on this address would be
absolutely illegal and unwarranted. Better simply to add that specific
string to the kill file; given that Comcast wisely includes the host IP in
every Usenet post, doing so would reliably exclude all his posts from
viewing or download even if the changing of e-mail alias or posting handle
continues to occur.
Any thoughts to share?
-KKC, who doesn't like to pull the trigger, but isn't above drawing a
bullseye or anything. 
--
--S.S.B. is the code name for America's daring, highly | kendrick @io .com
trained special mission force. Its purpose: to |
defend human freedom against al-Qaeda, a ruthless | Please don't use
terrorist organization determined to rule the world! | eBay. Ask me why.
| |
| Doug Jacobs 2005-03-15, 10:18 pm |
| In microsoft.public.xbox Kendrick Kerwin Chua <kendrick@fnord.io.com> wrote:
quote:
> It would be illegal of me to suggest unauthorized access of anybody's
> computer. With that caveat, let's speak in theoretical terms here... A
> user who alternately calls himself Xenon, Nextbox or any number of brand-
> specific handles frequently posts news items from third-party sources and
> then posts responses from different user names. He also responds to
> criticism with hostility and non sequiter arguments. If you accept that
> to respond to those actions by hacking is illegal, what would one do in
> order to create and to sustain a denial-of-service or other attack on his
> news posting hosts?
I'm not convinced that xenon and scoopx are the same person. Their
headers indicate they're in different countries on opposite sides of the
atlantic.
At lease Xenon/Nextbox's posts are on topic here, though he tends to
cross-post to all video game groups which isn't really appreciated...
There's also the issue about "fair use" - which his posts are not -
they're complete copy&paste jobs from various websites, even though he
does cite where the article is from and credits the author. Still, a
no-no.
Your best bet for dealing with anyone you consider a bozo on usenet is to
just use your reader's killfile/bozo-bin feature, and forget about them.
It's that simple.
Complaining to comcast about their use will do no good. Comcast is
responsible for most of the spam and viruses that are delivered to your
mailbox every day due to their user base being hacked so horribly.
Comcast publically admitted to this, but stated that it would be too
expensive for them to do anything about this problem at this time. BTW,
*intentionally* distributing a virus is a crime in most nations (including
the US) around the world. If Comcast isn't willing to do deal with this
problem, what makes you think they're going to deal with some bozo who's
posting to a few usenet groups? They don't even take care of the cases of
bona-fide spamming that occur from their network right now.
quote:
> Verbose header printout of this person's posts show that he's using a
> Comcast client (67.163.24.226) to initiate his threads, and presumably
> from this same host transmits the responses. Given the long DHCP lease of
> Comcast broadband services, this is likely to have be his address for the
> foreseeable future. A simple DNS lookup gives this IP address the name
> c-67-163-24-226.client.comcast.net which is both meaningful and
> persistent.
You're heading down a dangerous path, dude... I know how tempting it can
be to give into the darkside, but don't do it. First, what you're
thinking of doing is unquestionably illegal. Second, it won't have any
affect on your target. Third, you could lose your own internet access.
It's not worth it. Just plonk the guy and go on with life.
| |
| Andrew Ryan Chang 2005-03-16, 4:28 am |
| Doug Jacobs <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote:
quote:
>In microsoft.public.xbox Kendrick Kerwin Chua <kendrick@fnord.io.com> wrote:
>
>I'm not convinced that xenon and scoopx are the same person. Their
>headers indicate they're in different countries on opposite sides of the
>atlantic.
>
>At lease Xenon/Nextbox's posts are on topic here, though he tends to
Where's "here"? His posts are never on-topic for rgv.sega.
--
Wiggum: No. We need to find out who it belonged to. We want a DNA test.
DNA guy: Ooh, ooh, ee, ooh, ooh, that takes, uh, eight to ten weeks.
Wiggum: [sighs, hands him a carton of cigarettes]
DNA guy: Did I say weeks? 'Cause I meant seconds.
|
| |
|
|