Text 29971, 84 rader
Skriven 2012-06-21 13:59:56 av mark lewis (1:3634/12)
  Kommentar till text 29964 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Zone 2 nodelist segment
===============================
"Michiel van der Vlist -> mark lewis" <2:280/5555> wrote in
news:81407$fido.fidonews@JamNNTPd:

 MvdV>>> And so it is a "his word against her's" situation.

 ml>> until the other corroborating evidence shows up...

 MvdV> So far I have save seen nothing that qualifies as evidence. Just
 MvdV> assumptions, wild accusations and inuendo.

so you have not seen bobS' posting of the logs when that Z2 segment came in
to his system and was then sent to janis' two minutes or so later? 146? the
one with that 1000 entry in it?

 MvdV>>> I am pointing out that tampering with the segment could just as
 MvdV>>> easiley have been done by the receiver as by the sender. Her
 MvdV>>> word against his...

 ml>> piss poor argument...

 MvdV> Are you contesting that it is just as easy for the receiver as it is for
 MvdV> the sender to tamper with a zone segment?

why would i? but it is still a piss poor argument... even though it may
possibly be true... why would anyone be setting janis up? or ward, for that
matter? why would you do such a thing?

 ml>> someone is trying to set someone up

 MvdV> That is what it looks like. Things are not always what they look.

sounds like you know more than you are telling...

 ml>> and this reeks of a setup... the question is who is trying to set
 MvdV>   who ml> up?

 MvdV> If it is indeed a setup, someone is using the oportunity to drag nme
 MvdV> into it and make me look bad. And it isn't Ward...

 MvdV>>> By Janis own words: Logs can easily be faked.

 ml>> not just janis' but yours too... you threw that line at me years
 MvdV>   and ml> years ago...

 MvdV> True, and I was not the first to do that either.

no doubt...

 MvdV> However in THIS incident, Janis was the first to raise an accusation of
 MvdV> forged logs...

she was?

 ml>> but no matter, many people have said it... some have been proven
 MvdV>   wrong ml> about the logs in question at that time... others weren't so
 MvdV>   lucky...

 MvdV> The point is that - as they can easily be faked - posting log snippets
 MvdV> in itself proves little or nothing.

so what do you think it would take, then?

 MvdV>>> Besides; the logs do not show if the received segment is
 MvdV>   tampered MvdV>> with or not, just that /a/ segment was received.

 ml>> so the filesize doesn't matter? or the date of the file?

 MvdV> Only if you have an unsuspected copy to compare it with.

you know that ward has already removed it... or will be soon if not yet ;)

 MvdV> Other than that: file size of a nodelist segment can be tweaked by
 MvdV> adding or deleting comment lines.

and blowing the CRC values and checks...

 MvdV> For playing with date/time stamps we have touch.

and it marks all timestamps associated with all files?? really, now?

-- 
)\/(ark - remove .my.foot to email me, capiche?

 * Origin: news://news.wpusa.dynip.com | acct req'd to post (1:3634/12)