Please rip apart a Noob's pathetic attempts...

I have been reading webpages about crypto and passwords
until my head swims. I think I have a scheme; I would
really like to see any comments about whether I am being
an idiot.

My purpose is to have hard-to-guess and unique passwords on
all of the different systems in life that ask for passwords.

Here is my plan: I propose going to these webpages to get
somewhat randomish data:

https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/secure_generate.html
https://www.random.org/integers/
https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm

and put together a couple of thousand characters worth
of what I think are hard-to-guess character strings
with different sets of characters (because some systems
limit the kinds of characters you can use).

My sets of data would be:

Set NUM: 0-9 (10 possible characters.)
Set LET: a-z (26 possible characters.)
Set LETNUM: a-z+0-9 (36 possible characters.)
Set UCLCNUM: a-z+A-Z+0-9 (62 possible characters.)
Set PRNASC: Printable ASCII Characters from Character 33
("!") to Character 126 ("~") (93 possible characters.)

I think I can creat some of the above from others by, for
example, getting a new big a-z+0-9 set and throwing away
everything that isn't a number.

I plan to store the randomish data in a text file encrypted
with Axecrypt. Whenever I need a password. I will cut some
characters out of the data, always using as many characters
as the site or program will allow, and always using the
maximum length password that the site or program will allow.

I will then store the list of which passwords go with which
sites or programs in another file, again encrypted with
axecrypt, and back it up to 5 different places once a week
or so.

Am I right in thinking that this is the most secure way of
dealing with multiple passwords?

BTW. is there a formula that lets me plug in the length and
the number of possible characters and tells me how big a brute
force search would be?

invalid@example.com wrote:
> I have been reading webpages about crypto and passwords
> until my head swims. I think I have a scheme; I would
> really like to see any comments about whether I am being
> an idiot.

No need to rip apart, the fact you are thinking about it puts you ahead
of 99.99% of users.

There are a couple of documents I saw that seem to have good advice:
http://www.wepin.com/pgp/passfraz.html
And I can't find the other one, it was kind of... theoretical. That
should be a useful link anyway.

As to your other questions, others here know more than I do about that.

Andy

<invalid@example.com> wrote:
>My purpose is to have hard-to-guess and unique passwords on
>all of the different systems in life that ask for passwords.

For each site, choose a random password (your system has a random number
generator, use it). Save these in an encrypted file. Done.

>Here is my plan: I propose going to these webpages to get
>somewhat randomish data:

This "randomish data" is more predictable for an attacker than the output
of your system's random number generator.

>BTW. is there a formula that lets me plug in the length and
>the number of possible characters and tells me how big a brute
>force search would be?

n^k.

--
Kristian Gjøsteen

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 23:00:15 +0000, invalid@example.com wrote:

> Axecrypt.

I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
--
An Explanation Of The Need To Be "Anonymous"
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

invalid@example.com skrev:
> I have been reading webpages about crypto and passwords
> until my head swims. I think I have a scheme; I would
> really like to see any comments about whether I am being
> an idiot.

Your not an idiot to think about security.

Have a look at this page
http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html

> https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/secure_generate.html
> https://www.random.org/integers/
> https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm

> Am I right in thinking that this is the most secure way of
> dealing with multiple passwords?
>
> BTW. is there a formula that lets me plug in the length and
> the number of possible characters and tells me how big a brute
> force search would be?

I don't know if you know how to program or not, but its quite simple to do
alot of these things yourself if you want to be that much more secure.

The two problems with what you are doing.

Firstly, grc.com or the other sites know what they have given out. Some of
these sites only dish out a few thousand strings per day. If someone gets
their IV's and base counters, and they know you have a password from them,
they will only need to try a few thousand/million keys and they will have
you.

Personally I implemented the grc.com/password things myself with my own
program. I can give you a copy if you want. It uses AES cipher to generate
random numbers based on a base key and initialisation vector and start
counter value. This is the exact same cipher setup as the grc.com one.

The other much bigger problem is the program you use to encode your password
file. If at any point the unencoded file is written to a disk, you are
completely brocken. AFAIK axecrypt just encodes and decodes file, this is
very bad. You don't want an unencoded password file to exist at anytime on
magnetic media. Just because you encode a file doesn't mean its was
overwritten. Especially when files are fragmented the operating system and
disk can move a file even when its size does not change. Meaning when its
wrote back, an old copy exists on the magnetic media.

You need a program that reads encrypted files, displays them unencrypted on
screen in memory only and allows you to edit/update and writes back
encrypted data. Again I ended up writing my own because I couldn't find that
one that allowed the editing I wanted. You can download the source code of
common text editors and put encryption on the load and save file parts.

Ari wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 23:00:15 +0000, invalid@example.com wrote:
>
> > Axecrypt.
>
> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol

Just one more thing you're clueless about.

> Have a look at this page
> http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html


They recommend a key from 6^5^5=2.8*10^19 possibilities. The key will be an
average of 21 characters long consisting of 5 words. Firstly such a low
possibility is suitable for 65 bit encryption at maximum. If you pick just
10 random keyboard characters you get more combinations. So i guess it comes
down to what is easier to remember 10 random keys or 5 random words.

invalid@example.com wrote in news:G7mdnbnMG_oSSSXaRVn_vwA@giganews.com:

[snip]

> I plan to store the randomish data in a text file encrypted
> with Axecrypt. Whenever I need a password. I will cut some
> characters out of the data, always using as many characters
> as the site or program will allow, and always using the
> maximum length password that the site or program will allow.
>
> I will then store the list of which passwords go with which
> sites or programs in another file, again encrypted with
> axecrypt, and back it up to 5 different places once a week
> or so.
>
> Am I right in thinking that this is the most secure way of
> dealing with multiple passwords?
>
> BTW. is there a formula that lets me plug in the length and
> the number of possible characters and tells me how big a brute
> force search would be?

I have a few comments.

1) Using a "password safe" seems a much easier way to achieve what you
want. There's either "password safe" or "keypass". You can use a very
secure passphrase to secure that master database of passwords.

2) If you're not happy with the random password generation feature of
those softs there are other open source varieties around.

3) Always choosing the largest possible password is -I **think**- a
flaw. That reduces the space of passwords an attacker will have to
search to find your password.

4) Number of passwords available is given by:

Total number of characters possible ^ length of passwords.

EG: a password of 8 characters picked from either uppercare alpha (26
chars) or lowercase alpha (another 26 chars) = 52^8.

That's a big number, but you can see how it's much bigger if you include
52^7 and 52^6 as well.

I often get this stuff wrong, so please check my answers before
implementing them.

"MisterE" <MisterE@nimga.com> wrote in
news:47b95473$0$17825$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u:

>> Have a look at this page
>> http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html
>
>
> They recommend a key from 6^5^5=2.8*10^19 possibilities.

Please can you explain, in layman's terms, how this formula is derived?
Thanks.

Why wouldn't a 5 word diceware phrase be 7776^5?

> The key will
> be an average of 21 characters long consisting of 5 words. Firstly
> such a low possibility is suitable for 65 bit encryption at maximum.

"Decide how many words you want in your passphrase. A five word
passphrase provides a level of security much higher than the simple
passwords most people use. We recommend a minimum of six words for use
with Hushmail, wireless security and file encryption programs. A seven
word pass phrase is thought to make attacks on your passphrase infeasible
through 2033. For more information, see the Diceware FAQ."

> If you pick just 10 random keyboard characters you get more
> combinations. So i guess it comes down to what is easier to remember
> 10 random keys or 5 random words.

10 random characters isn't a "simple password" that "most people use", so
to compare that to the 5 word phrase is perhaps not fair.

Don't forget that most people would be lousy at picking randomly from the
keyboard, especially shift-keying.

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 04:25:55 -0500 (EST), Anonymous wrote:

> Ari wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 23:00:15 +0000, invalid@example.com wrote:
>>
>>> Axecrypt.
>>
>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
>
> Just one more thing you're clueless about.

I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol
--
An Explanation Of The Need To Be "Anonymous"
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit


(Two posts answered in one reply post)

Kristian Gjøsteen wrote:
>
> <invalid@example.com> wrote:
>
>>My purpose is to have hard-to-guess and unique passwords on
>>all of the different systems in life that ask for passwords.
>
>For each site, choose a random password (your system has a random
>number generator, use it). Save these in an encrypted file. Done.
>
>>Here is my plan: I propose going to these webpages to get
>>somewhat randomish data:
>
>> https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/secure_generate.html
>> https://www.random.org/integers/
>> https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm
>
>This "randomish data" is more predictable for an attacker than
>the output of your system's random number generator.

I am really unskilled at computers. Is this somethng that I could
hire a service tech from the Geek Squad to do for me? I run WinXP
and I don't see anything resembling a "random number generator"
on the menu.

If there is a program that I can download I can usually figure
out how to run it by reading the manual, but I am a bit paranoid
and only download well-known commercial programs or Open Source
programs that I get from a link on Source Forge.


MisterE wrote:

> <invalid@example.com> wrote:

>> https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/secure_generate.html
>> https://www.random.org/integers/
>> https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm
>
>> Am I right in thinking that this is the most secure way of
>> dealing with multiple passwords?

>I don't know if you know how to program or not, but its quite
>simple to do alot of these things yourself if you want to be
>that much more secure.

WAY beyond my ability. I envy you folks who can do that, but
I am just a clueless noob. You might as well ask me to fly.

>The two problems with what you are doing.
>
>Firstly, grc.com or the other sites know what they have given out. Some of
>these sites only dish out a few thousand strings per day. If someone gets
>their IV's and base counters, and they know you have a password from them,
>they will only need to try a few thousand/million keys and they will have
>you.

That makes sense. How about if I make up my randomish data by getting
characters 1,4,7,10... from one site, 2,5,8,11... from another, and
3,5,8,12... from the third? I can do that with a column mode text
editor. It's not like I am hiding from the FBI or CIA; I just want
to make it so that some hacker going after a website will have a hard
time guessing my password, and I want to make it so that if he does get
it some other way, it will tell him nothing about the passwords I use
on other web sites. And, of course, I don't plan on telling anyone
who I am, so an attacker would have to guess that I did the above.

I am not trying to be difficult; I am just trying to follow your
advice within the limitations of my skills.

>Personally I implemented the grc.com/password things myself with my own
>program. I can give you a copy if you want. It uses AES cipher to generate
>random numbers based on a base key and initialisation vector and start
>counter value. This is the exact same cipher setup as the grc.com one.

Please don't be insulted by this, and I appreciate the offer, but I
only download well-known commercial programs or Open Source programs
that I get from a link on Source Forge. I have had a couple of
computer wizards tell me that programs that come in emails, are
posted to newsgroups, or are on websites I never heard of can really
hurt Windows XP bad.

>The other much bigger problem is the program you use to encode your password
>file. If at any point the unencoded file is written to a disk, you are
>completely brocken. AFAIK axecrypt just encodes and decodes file, this is
>very bad. You don't want an unencoded password file to exist at anytime on
>magnetic media. Just because you encode a file doesn't mean its was
>overwritten. Especially when files are fragmented the operating system and
>disk can move a file even when its size does not change. Meaning when its
>wrote back, an old copy exists on the magnetic media.
>
>You need a program that reads encrypted files, displays them unencrypted on
>screen in memory only and allows you to edit/update and writes back
>encrypted data. Again I ended up writing my own because I couldn't find that
>one that allowed the editing I wanted. You can download the source code of
>common text editors and put encryption on the load and save file parts.

Axecrypt ( sourceforge.net/projects/axcrypt/
& http://www.axantum.com/AxCrypt/ ) claims to open and display
encrypted documents with "Secure memory handling - no keys or
data in the paging file" and "Shredding of all temporary and
encrypted plaintext files" (don't know exactly what all that
means, but it sounds cool) and also says this:

Do you have many PIN's for your credit and ATM cards to
remember? Dozens of web-sites with different passwords?

There are many special purpose password managers out there,
some really good, but why bother? Use a regular text file
with notepad. Encrypt the file with AxCrypt.

You can then store your passwords conveniently and safely.

Notepad does not create any temporary files and AxCrypt
will properly wipe its traces, so this is every bit as
secure as most password managers. Some managers will
attempt to lock memory, or encrypt the data in memory,
to keep it out of the paging file, which is even better
of course. If this is a concern or not depends on your
level of paranoia.

From my perspective, my problem is that there are many, many
programs that claim to be able to hide my password text file,
and I am more likely to be Obama's VP than I am to figure out
who is teling the truth. So I tried the ten most promising
and then picked Axecrypt because it is really easy to use.

BTW, I really appreciate you folks taking time to give me
advice. Thanks!

bealoid <signup@bealoid.co.uk> wrote:
>3) Always choosing the largest possible password is -I **think**- a
>flaw. That reduces the space of passwords an attacker will have to
>search to find your password.

Not by much. Compute the number of k-letter passwords vs the number of
at-most-k-letter passwords.

--
Kristian Gjøsteen

<invalid@example.com> wrote:
>If there is a program that I can download I can usually figure
>out how to run it by reading the manual, but I am a bit paranoid
>and only download well-known commercial programs or Open Source
>programs that I get from a link on Source Forge.

Bruce Schneier had a program called "Password safe". I don't think
he maintains it, but someone still does. Type it into Google and
make up your mind.

--
Kristian Gjøsteen

Ari wrote:
>
>Anonymous wrote:
>
>> Ari wrote:
>>
>>> invalid@example.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> Axecrypt.
>>>
>>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
>>
>> Just one more thing you're clueless about.
>
>I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol

If you are implying that I am someone you know, I am not.
I never read or posted to this group until I saw a crosspost
to the shareware group, and I have only used two handles here,
invalid@example.com and me@privacy.net, chosen to make it hard
to do an effective Google search that finds my posts and no
others.

Please keep me out of whatever ongoing battle you are having.

invalid@example.com wrote:
> Ari wrote:
>> Anonymous wrote:
>>
>>> Ari wrote:
>>>
>>>> invalid@example.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Axecrypt.
>>>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
>>> Just one more thing you're clueless about.
>> I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol
>
> If you are implying that I am someone you know, I am not.
> I never read or posted to this group until I saw a crosspost
> to the shareware group, and I have only used two handles here,
> invalid@example.com and me@privacy.net, chosen to make it hard
> to do an effective Google search that finds my posts and no
> others.
>
> Please keep me out of whatever ongoing battle you are having.
>

Don't let him get to you.
He's one of our Village Idiots.

--No One

invalid@example.com wrote:

> I am really unskilled at computers. Is this somethng that I could
> hire a service tech from the Geek Squad to do for me? I run WinXP
> and I don't see anything resembling a "random number generator"
> on the menu.

One way would be to install open pgp in a mail client that can use it,
and mail the password file to yourself. You could also select portions
of the encrypted messages as your passwords. Then you'd have your pgp
passphrase as your master password to open the password file.

Andy

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:13:29 +0100, Kristian Gjøsteen
<kristiag+news@math.ntnu.no> wrote:

> <invalid@example.com> wrote:
>>If there is a program that I can download I can usually figure
>>out how to run it by reading the manual, but I am a bit paranoid
>>and only download well-known commercial programs or Open Source
>>programs that I get from a link on Source Forge.
>
>Bruce Schneier had a program called "Password safe". I don't think
>he maintains it, but someone still does. Type it into Google and
>make up your mind.
See:

http://www.schneier.com/passsafe.html

and

http://passwordsafe.sourceforge.net/

I use it myself. It does what it says on the tin.

rossum

invalid@example.com wrote:

>
>
>
> Ari wrote:
> >
> >Anonymous wrote:
> >
> >> Ari wrote:
> >>
> >>> invalid@example.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Axecrypt.
> >>>
> >>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
> >>
> >> Just one more thing you're clueless about.
> >
> >I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol
>
> If you are implying that I am someone you know, I am not.

The only thing Ari is implying, is that he's an idiot. When he showed up
here his introduction was a horrible embarrassment over some sort of
lame brain bar code encryption scheme he apparently dreamed up one
night after a few too many plastic cups of panther piss. His "remedy",
if you care to call it that, to making a total and utter fool of
himself before he ever really got off the starting block, was to invent
some sort of Captain Crunch decoder ring fantasy job where he sold his
bar code encryption to his employer for some "undisclosed sum". In the
course of propping up that obvious lie he also invented a 40 acre
nuclear test facility that this unnamed employer sent him to for some
unnamed purpose. If you know anything about square footage and nuclear
tests at all, even just from watching the movies, you realize just how
ridiculous that whole story is.

In other words, Ari is a nut. And like all nuts he's obsessed with
exacting some sort of "revenge" on the group his deranged mind believes
is responsible for his initial embarrassment. And, like all nuts, his
"revenge" simply leaves him looking like an ever loonier nutcase.


Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it

bealoid <signup@bealoid.co.uk> writes:
> "MisterE" <MisterE@nimga.com> wrote in
> news:47b95473$0$17825$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u:
>
> >> Have a look at this page
> >> http://world.std.com/~reinhold/diceware.html
> >
> >
> > They recommend a key from 6^5^5=2.8*10^19 possibilities.
>
> Please can you explain, in layman's terms, how this formula is derived?
> Thanks.
>
> Why wouldn't a 5 word diceware phrase be 7776^5?

It would. 6^5^5 = 7776^5.

Phil

--
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all.
-- Microsoft voice recognition live demonstration

>
> Total number of characters possible ^ length of passwords.
>
> EG: a password of 8 characters picked from either uppercare alpha (26
> chars) or lowercase alpha (another 26 chars) = 52^8.
>
> That's a big number, but you can see how it's much bigger if you include
> 52^7 and 52^6 as well.

It would all depend on if or not the software hashes the keys to large
values. If the software hases 8 byte keys upto 16byte (128bit) then this is
true. If however the key is 8 bytes so that only passwords lower than 8
bytes are hashed, then those that are hashed will actually have an
equivalent password from the 8 byte password space.

However, only a pretty crappy peice of software would restrict the maximum
password length to below the actual size of the key used for encryption, so
it doesn't make it easier if this is the case, as there are only 52^8
combinations, the 52^7 and 52^6 have already been accounted for as they are
hashed to match random 52^8 values.

So if you use a password of lower length, chances are there is another
password that could decode your information. So lower length passwords would
be easier to break (from the point of view of trying every possible input
type from 52^1 to 52^8).

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:21:16 +0000, invalid@example.com wrote:

> Ari wrote:
>>
>>Anonymous wrote:
>>
>>> Ari wrote:
>>>
>>>> invalid@example.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Axecrypt.
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
>>>
>>> Just one more thing you're clueless about.
>>
>>I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol
>
> If you are implying that I am someone you know, I am not.

How the fuck do you know what I know, Mrs. Anon?
--
An Explanation Of The Need To Be "Anonymous"
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:21:23 +0100 (CET), George Orwell wrote:

>>>> Ari wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> invalid@example.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Axecrypt.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
>>>>
>>>> Just one more thing you're clueless about.
>>>
>>>I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol
>>
>> If you are implying that I am someone you know, I am not.
>
> The only thing Ari is implying, is that he's an idiot. When he showed up
> here his introduction was a horrible embarrassment over some sort of
> lame brain bar code encryption scheme he apparently dreamed up one
> night after a few too many plastic cups of panther piss. His "remedy",
> if you care to call it that, to making a total and utter fool of
> himself before he ever really got off the starting block, was to invent
> some sort of Captain Crunch decoder ring fantasy job where he sold his
> bar code encryption to his employer for some "undisclosed sum". In the
> course of propping up that obvious lie he also invented a 40 acre
> nuclear test facility that this unnamed employer sent him to for some
> unnamed purpose. If you know anything about square footage and nuclear
> tests at all, even just from watching the movies, you realize just how
> ridiculous that whole story is.

lol Just stick your hand out and take the paycheck from *employers like
me*.
--
An Explanation Of The Need To Be "Anonymous"
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

Ummm, 40 acres is probably to much actually

http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/19/t...r-your-garage/

Additionally if a ships nuclear reactor needed 40 acres... woooo

But honestly to the OP, that is so damned super omfg level effective,
except one thing.

You said max length. Ooops! Of course that only saves you from sloppy
downards level work, but imo if someone was after you, this would now
give them the correct length to try instead of working their way up.
It is 7 bits larger than the one below (If we assume 128 outcomes, but
your not quite there) however the man now discounts all other size
standards, saving some brute force time. Still you are as close to
maximal security as can be created. Now I ask, why the hell do you
need this much security? lol

Ari wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:21:23 +0100 (CET), George Orwell wrote:
>
>>>>> Ari wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> invalid@example.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Axecrypt.
>>>>>> I have no idea who you are, Mr. Anonymouse. lol
>>>>> Just one more thing you're clueless about.
>>>> I have no idea who you are either, Mrs. Anonymouse. lol
>>> If you are implying that I am someone you know, I am not.
>> The only thing Ari is implying, is that he's an idiot. When he showed up
>> here his introduction was a horrible embarrassment over some sort of
>> lame brain bar code encryption scheme he apparently dreamed up one
>> night after a few too many plastic cups of panther piss. His "remedy",
>> if you care to call it that, to making a total and utter fool of
>> himself before he ever really got off the starting block, was to invent
>> some sort of Captain Crunch decoder ring fantasy job where he sold his
>> bar code encryption to his employer for some "undisclosed sum". In the
>> course of propping up that obvious lie he also invented a 40 acre
>> nuclear test facility that this unnamed employer sent him to for some
>> unnamed purpose. If you know anything about square footage and nuclear
>> tests at all, even just from watching the movies, you realize just how
>> ridiculous that whole story is.
>
> lol Just stick your hand out and take the paycheck from *employers like
> me*.

If you really expect anyone here to believe you, you're going to have to
provide
a *name* and *location* of this "place of employment". Here on the
Internet,
anyone can say anything. So we need verifiable facts. Otherwise, you
have no
credibility whatsoever.

Please, give us some proof that what you say is the truth.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:54:31 -0500, No One wrote:

>>> The only thing Ari is implying, is that he's an idiot. When he showed up
>>> here his introduction was a horrible embarrassment over some sort of
>>> lame brain bar code encryption scheme he apparently dreamed up one
>>> night after a few too many plastic cups of panther piss. His "remedy",
>>> if you care to call it that, to making a total and utter fool of
>>> himself before he ever really got off the starting block, was to invent
>>> some sort of Captain Crunch decoder ring fantasy job where he sold his
>>> bar code encryption to his employer for some "undisclosed sum". In the
>>> course of propping up that obvious lie he also invented a 40 acre
>>> nuclear test facility that this unnamed employer sent him to for some
>>> unnamed purpose. If you know anything about square footage and nuclear
>>> tests at all, even just from watching the movies, you realize just how
>>> ridiculous that whole story is.
>>
>> lol Just stick your hand out and take the paycheck from *employers like
>> me*.
>
> If you really expect anyone here to believe you,

I give a fuck what you think , Ms. Anonymousey??

> you're going to have to provide a *name* and *location* of this "place of employment". Here on the

You're remailers screwing up your post, Coward.

> Internet,
> anyone can say anything. So we need verifiable facts. Otherwise, you
> have no
> credibility whatsoever.
>
> Please, give us some proof that what you say is the truth.

Blow me.
--
An Explanation Of The Need To Be "Anonymous"
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

Ari wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:54:31 -0500, No One wrote:
>
>>>> The only thing Ari is implying, is that he's an idiot. When he showed up
>>>> here his introduction was a horrible embarrassment over some sort of
>>>> lame brain bar code encryption scheme he apparently dreamed up one
>>>> night after a few too many plastic cups of panther piss. His "remedy",
>>>> if you care to call it that, to making a total and utter fool of
>>>> himself before he ever really got off the starting block, was to invent
>>>> some sort of Captain Crunch decoder ring fantasy job where he sold his
>>>> bar code encryption to his employer for some "undisclosed sum". In the
>>>> course of propping up that obvious lie he also invented a 40 acre
>>>> nuclear test facility that this unnamed employer sent him to for some
>>>> unnamed purpose. If you know anything about square footage and nuclear
>>>> tests at all, even just from watching the movies, you realize just how
>>>> ridiculous that whole story is.
>>> lol Just stick your hand out and take the paycheck from *employers like
>>> me*.
>> If you really expect anyone here to believe you,
>
> I give a fuck what you think , Ms. Anonymousey??
>
>> you're going to have to provide a *name* and *location* of this "place of employment". Here on the
>
> You're remailers screwing up your post, Coward.
>
>> Internet,
>> anyone can say anything. So we need verifiable facts. Otherwise, you
>> have no
>> credibility whatsoever.
>>
>> Please, give us some proof that what you say is the truth.
>
> Blow me.

Just as I thought. When backed into a corner, you can only try changing
the subject. Your reactions are very rudimentary and unrefined.
Now you have *absolutely* no credibility, with no one to blame but yourself.

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:59:54 -0500, No One wrote:

>>> If you really expect anyone here to believe you,
>>
>> I give a fuck what you think , Ms. Anonymousey??
>>
>>> you're going to have to provide a *name* and *location* of this "place of employment". Here on the
>>
>> You're remailers screwing up your post, Coward.
>>
>>> Internet,
>>> anyone can say anything. So we need verifiable facts. Otherwise, you
>>> have no
>>> credibility whatsoever.
>>>
>>> Please, give us some proof that what you say is the truth.
>>
>> Blow me.
>
> Just as I thought. When backed into a corner, you can only try changing
> the subject. Your reactions are very rudimentary and unrefined.
> Now you have *absolutely* no credibility, with no one to blame but yourself.

OH MY GOD no credibility among a bunch of "anonymous" cretins who either
use remailing as a means to keeping getting fired from employers *like me*
or because they afear their hyoomongus importance in the affairs of the
Internationals?

lol

Blow me.
--
An Explanation Of The Need To Be "Anonymous"
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

Ari wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:59:54 -0500, No One wrote:
>
>>>> If you really expect anyone here to believe you,
>>> I give a fuck what you think , Ms. Anonymousey??
>>>
>>>> you're going to have to provide a *name* and *location* of this "place of employment". Here on the
>>> You're remailers screwing up your post, Coward.
>>>
>>>> Internet,
>>>> anyone can say anything. So we need verifiable facts. Otherwise, you
>>>> have no
>>>> credibility whatsoever.
>>>>
>>>> Please, give us some proof that what you say is the truth.
>>> Blow me.
>> Just as I thought. When backed into a corner, you can only try changing
>> the subject. Your reactions are very rudimentary and unrefined.
>> Now you have *absolutely* no credibility, with no one to blame but yourself.
>
> OH MY GOD no credibility among a bunch of "anonymous" cretins who either
> use remailing as a means to keeping getting fired from employers *like me*
> or because they afear their hyoomongus importance in the affairs of the
> Internationals?
>
> lol
>
> Blow me.

Neither of your assumptions are anywhere near being 'on target'.
But, in your attempt to assuage your animosity, you have expressed signs of
adolescent puerility.

And, you've also shown the typical reaction of someone who's "bluff" has
been called.
Simply give the *name* of the business where you are the employer, and
prove me wrong.
That would be the simplest method of getting rid of all that bitterness
inside of you.






You truly do show

Is the Anonymous fight spreading into here also?

wtf