A
Alias
Guest
Re: Vista may spy on you for the gov't
Lang Murphy wrote:
> "The poster formerly known as Nina DiBoy" <none@none.not> wrote in
> message news:f83cab$lor$1@aioe.org...
>> http://www.whitedust.net/news/3984/...ine_Watchdogs?_Part_of_the_war_on_terror?.../
>>
>>
>> (Go to the site to see the screenshots and visuals, article quoted
>> here w/out pics)
>>
>> United States Government Online Watchdogs? Part of the war on terror?
>> (92270)
>> Abandonia Forums at Jul 23rd, 2007 at 22:46:55
>>
>> Richard Compton Writes (on the Abandonia Forums),
>>
>> "It has been a month since my upgrade to Vista. I like to keep up
>> with tech trends and though reluctant to throw out XP, I forced myself
>> to just 'swallow the pill'. After all - change is inevitable, and
>> resistance to change shows only our inability to adapt to new
>> scenarios and obstacles. I refuse to be left in the dust of an
>> evolutionary sandstorm. I have thus relinquished my pride and dipped
>> into the improvements Vista has to offer. Improvements such as
>> increased performance with audio hardware and DAW(Digital Audio
>> Workstation) software. We're talking about a Microsoft upgrade that
>> almost rivals the audio development quality seen on Mac DAW's for
>> years - but with none of the proprietary hardware BS that is forged
>> into the Mac world.
>>
>>
>> "Wait!"
>>
>>
>> You exclaim,
>>
>> "What does this have to do with the title of this post?"
>>
>> I'm getting to that.
>>
>> After installing all of my usual apps on Vista I was impressed to
>> see most everything was 100% backward compatible. I expected much of
>> my software to be rendered incompatible. Out of everything I've tried
>> to run on it - 99% produce excellent results in both loading time and
>> performance as compared with those same apps running under XP.
>> Improved support against malware, spyware, and trojans - complete with
>> a user rights management system that a seasoned Linux user could
>> appreciate. All these positive aspects and more, and then.....
>>
>> ALERT!
>>
>> After running Vista for only a few days - with a complete love for
>> the new platform the first sign of trouble erupted. I began noticing
>> latency on my home network connection - so I booted my port sniffing
>> software and networking tools to see what was happening. What I found
>> was foundation shaking. The two images below show graphical depictions
>> of what has and IS trying to connect to my computer even in an idle
>> state;
>>
>> NOTE;
>>
>>
>> DoD Network Information Center(Department of Defense)
>>
>>
>> United Nations Development Program(Seems to correlate to the
>> parent branch of the U.N.
>> InformaticsDivision)
>>
>>
>> Halliburton Company(We all know these guys)
>>
>> There have been many other unwarranted connections that I thought
>> too redundant to post
>> images for. To list a couple;
>>
>> *Ministry of Defense Data Return Agent
>>
>> *DOHS-Recon(traceroutes for this address provided nothing,
>> suspected blocks on traceroute. Many of us who are monitoring this
>> situation have suspected the acronym stands for the Department of
>> Homeland Security*Reconnaissance?*. This is merely a guess, but an
>> educated one at that.)
>>
>>
>> I ran traceroutes on the IP's, and sure enough they came back
>> legit and government owned. I thought this might be exclusive to my
>> system, so I ran over to a friend of mine who upgraded to Vista when
>> it first became available(MICROSOFT FAN BOY! ;P ). After installing
>> monitoring software on his system, the hits it caught on his network
>> were immediate and almost identical in source. Attempts on both TCP
>> and UDP by suspicious government owned addresses. Again, even when
>> idle and running only a bare minimum of system processes. I've written
>> a college report on the same phenomenon, which has gained considerable
>> attention by even my instructor. I've posted similar articles on a few
>> tech sites and the like that I frequent more often than this bored,
>> and there are a number of Vista users who have replied with similar
>> claims.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
>> http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html
>>
>> "Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with
>> legality."
>> - Linus Torvalds
>
>
> And you don't think there's -any- chance that any of these IP's are
> spoofed?
>
> Even if they're not... at some point one must choose to either let the
> government attempt to prevent future in-country attacks or take one's
> chances. I am, by all accounts, fairly liberal in my thinking. That
> said, I would prefer the former choice and having to give up my on-line
> privacy ( -I- have nothing to hide, at least as it relates to terrorist
> activities) if it helped prevent the detonation of a dirty bomb in Times
> Square. I don't think the feds are concerned with other aspects of one's
> private life. (Unless one is a drug dealer of major proportion or some
> other high-level criminal.)
>
> I used to live in Yonkers, NY. I could sit in my driveway and see the
> World Trade Center towers. When I lived on LI, on a clear day, one could
> see the tops of the towers from forty miles away. No more. The
> approximate three thousand people that died on 9/11/01 will pale in
> comparison if the bad guys manage to get a dirty bomb into NYC and
> detonate it. Read my email, please!
>
> And all that said... if one accepts (or, in many folks cases, submits
> to) government agencies sucking up local bandwidth to monitor for
> terrorist traffic, then one must accept that such activities are going
> to have a negative effect on performance. It's a fact of life. Sure, the
> negative effect on performance sucks big time... the alternative, i.e.,
> letting everyone post in total anonymity, well.. personally, as the
> previous statements in this email suggest, is a freedom I'm willing to
> sacrifice -these days-. But, again, that may be because I lived up in
> the NYC area, lived in Manhattan for 12 years, in fact. And I believe
> that NYC will remain the main target. But I'm getting off track, now...
> sorry. Yes, having big brother suck up your local bandwidth sucks! I'm
> willing to deal with it.
>
> Lang
Considering that it's likely that Bush and Cheney had a lot to do with
9/11, this spying is even more scary.
Alias
Lang Murphy wrote:
> "The poster formerly known as Nina DiBoy" <none@none.not> wrote in
> message news:f83cab$lor$1@aioe.org...
>> http://www.whitedust.net/news/3984/...ine_Watchdogs?_Part_of_the_war_on_terror?.../
>>
>>
>> (Go to the site to see the screenshots and visuals, article quoted
>> here w/out pics)
>>
>> United States Government Online Watchdogs? Part of the war on terror?
>> (92270)
>> Abandonia Forums at Jul 23rd, 2007 at 22:46:55
>>
>> Richard Compton Writes (on the Abandonia Forums),
>>
>> "It has been a month since my upgrade to Vista. I like to keep up
>> with tech trends and though reluctant to throw out XP, I forced myself
>> to just 'swallow the pill'. After all - change is inevitable, and
>> resistance to change shows only our inability to adapt to new
>> scenarios and obstacles. I refuse to be left in the dust of an
>> evolutionary sandstorm. I have thus relinquished my pride and dipped
>> into the improvements Vista has to offer. Improvements such as
>> increased performance with audio hardware and DAW(Digital Audio
>> Workstation) software. We're talking about a Microsoft upgrade that
>> almost rivals the audio development quality seen on Mac DAW's for
>> years - but with none of the proprietary hardware BS that is forged
>> into the Mac world.
>>
>>
>> "Wait!"
>>
>>
>> You exclaim,
>>
>> "What does this have to do with the title of this post?"
>>
>> I'm getting to that.
>>
>> After installing all of my usual apps on Vista I was impressed to
>> see most everything was 100% backward compatible. I expected much of
>> my software to be rendered incompatible. Out of everything I've tried
>> to run on it - 99% produce excellent results in both loading time and
>> performance as compared with those same apps running under XP.
>> Improved support against malware, spyware, and trojans - complete with
>> a user rights management system that a seasoned Linux user could
>> appreciate. All these positive aspects and more, and then.....
>>
>> ALERT!
>>
>> After running Vista for only a few days - with a complete love for
>> the new platform the first sign of trouble erupted. I began noticing
>> latency on my home network connection - so I booted my port sniffing
>> software and networking tools to see what was happening. What I found
>> was foundation shaking. The two images below show graphical depictions
>> of what has and IS trying to connect to my computer even in an idle
>> state;
>>
>> NOTE;
>>
>>
>> DoD Network Information Center(Department of Defense)
>>
>>
>> United Nations Development Program(Seems to correlate to the
>> parent branch of the U.N.
>> InformaticsDivision)
>>
>>
>> Halliburton Company(We all know these guys)
>>
>> There have been many other unwarranted connections that I thought
>> too redundant to post
>> images for. To list a couple;
>>
>> *Ministry of Defense Data Return Agent
>>
>> *DOHS-Recon(traceroutes for this address provided nothing,
>> suspected blocks on traceroute. Many of us who are monitoring this
>> situation have suspected the acronym stands for the Department of
>> Homeland Security*Reconnaissance?*. This is merely a guess, but an
>> educated one at that.)
>>
>>
>> I ran traceroutes on the IP's, and sure enough they came back
>> legit and government owned. I thought this might be exclusive to my
>> system, so I ran over to a friend of mine who upgraded to Vista when
>> it first became available(MICROSOFT FAN BOY! ;P ). After installing
>> monitoring software on his system, the hits it caught on his network
>> were immediate and almost identical in source. Attempts on both TCP
>> and UDP by suspicious government owned addresses. Again, even when
>> idle and running only a bare minimum of system processes. I've written
>> a college report on the same phenomenon, which has gained considerable
>> attention by even my instructor. I've posted similar articles on a few
>> tech sites and the like that I frequent more often than this bored,
>> and there are a number of Vista users who have replied with similar
>> claims.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
>> http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html
>>
>> "Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with
>> legality."
>> - Linus Torvalds
>
>
> And you don't think there's -any- chance that any of these IP's are
> spoofed?
>
> Even if they're not... at some point one must choose to either let the
> government attempt to prevent future in-country attacks or take one's
> chances. I am, by all accounts, fairly liberal in my thinking. That
> said, I would prefer the former choice and having to give up my on-line
> privacy ( -I- have nothing to hide, at least as it relates to terrorist
> activities) if it helped prevent the detonation of a dirty bomb in Times
> Square. I don't think the feds are concerned with other aspects of one's
> private life. (Unless one is a drug dealer of major proportion or some
> other high-level criminal.)
>
> I used to live in Yonkers, NY. I could sit in my driveway and see the
> World Trade Center towers. When I lived on LI, on a clear day, one could
> see the tops of the towers from forty miles away. No more. The
> approximate three thousand people that died on 9/11/01 will pale in
> comparison if the bad guys manage to get a dirty bomb into NYC and
> detonate it. Read my email, please!
>
> And all that said... if one accepts (or, in many folks cases, submits
> to) government agencies sucking up local bandwidth to monitor for
> terrorist traffic, then one must accept that such activities are going
> to have a negative effect on performance. It's a fact of life. Sure, the
> negative effect on performance sucks big time... the alternative, i.e.,
> letting everyone post in total anonymity, well.. personally, as the
> previous statements in this email suggest, is a freedom I'm willing to
> sacrifice -these days-. But, again, that may be because I lived up in
> the NYC area, lived in Manhattan for 12 years, in fact. And I believe
> that NYC will remain the main target. But I'm getting off track, now...
> sorry. Yes, having big brother suck up your local bandwidth sucks! I'm
> willing to deal with it.
>
> Lang
Considering that it's likely that Bush and Cheney had a lot to do with
9/11, this spying is even more scary.
Alias
062D938-7BC1-4FE0-B599-69E693E2A352@microsoft.com...