Catfish's Criticising Voice - Catfish's Homepage

Quick Links: About Catfish C.C.V. Computers Downloads Frieda Comics Funny Bits Index Links Linux Music Page Me Photos The PdC Text Pages (U/C) Do you have a similar "Criticising Voice" page? Send me your URL and I will add the links down the side. Or, if there's something that ticks you off, send an Email and it might tick me off too. This could get me churned up enough to have a CCV about it.

This page is where I have a <CCV> at something. When I get ticked off, I get ticked off! The current CCV is at:
"IRC channel operators" - Related files: pom1msg.txt, hueymsg.txt, fuggsmsg.txt.

Oh boy, this is going to be one looooooooooooooooooooong CCV! Although most of the lusers use the AOL type language such as "u" "r" "plz" etc. there are ones that are even more d*ckhead-ish. Read on...

I'm on DALnet IRC, and running "stupidly"* as root in IRC. (see asterisk) I decide to join channel #australia for reasons which are irrelevant to the CCV. Seeings as I'm IRC'ing "stupidly" as root, and the #australia channel is a rather hefty one, I decide to check for UNIX users, as this denotes some knowledge in computing. (Although I've had some REALLY dumbassed Linux users)

To save a HELL of alot of clicking/typing, I did a /ctcp #australia version which I might add, is a FREELY AVAILABLE FUNCTION to ALL USERS. This means, no one can stop you doing it, and anyone CAN do it. THe moment the replies from the channel version came, I was BANNED. Not kicked, BANNED.

I msg the operator who banned me so quickly... (there is more I have in a text file I've gotten the bits to tell the story)Here's some: (not out of context though)
<pom1> and why did u just version me????? <TheOMega> just checing everyones version <TheOMega> running as root and all <pom1> and why may i ask? <TheOMega> eh? *** #australia :Sorry, cannot join channel. <TheOMega> and can i ask why you unrightfully have banned my ip? <pom1> just incase ur trying to hack ppl

Note! "just incase" and yet the ban for doing one command lasted around an hour!
<pom1> now ifu go around versioning ppl pple will asume u are a hacker <TheOMega> um, so it is against irc policies to version people? <pom1> it is when u mass version yes <TheOMega> then why is the function available? <pom1> well it wasnt made for hacking <TheOMega> exactly, so why did you ban me? <TheOMega> its not used ofr hacking, therefore i havent broken rules <pom1> cause u put imenidate suspcion on your self for doing it

Note his "extensive and knowledgable" use in these "cyber words" u, r, ppl etc. Geez, people can't even talk to each other properly nowadays. So apparently, if you do channel versions, you are suspect of hacking, not hacking. And so you get banned for 1 hour for being "suspect" of breaking the rules. What if I put up 3 posts in a row? Is that "suspect" of "flooding"? So I would be banned for 1 hour for that too?

According to him, doing a channel (or "mass") version is "against IRC policies". Read it and weep if you like, but I went into #dalnethelp and asked "Is it against DALnet's rules" (DALnet is the IRC network of servers we were on) "to do channel versions?" the reply I got was "No."

Also note, when talking to Railgun (who is not an op) he told me that BitchX users (ie, the people who use BitchX http://www.bitchx.org/ as their preferred IRC client) are immediately labelled as "suspicious" since they use a UNIX or UNIX clone. However... BitchX is also available for Win32 so why are people labelling or "suspecting" people simply on their choice of software?

Moving on... I got #australia channel rules off Huey, who is an op in #australia, but not a d*ckhead like pom1. Here they are:

<Huey> hey dude sup? <TheOMega> can you get me the channel rules for #australia <Huey> Channel Rules: No Bots, No Clones, Speak English only, No Flooding, No Begging For Ops, using all CAPS is considered rude. No Swearing, No sex channels, No Advertising of Channels, and this is not a Pick Up channel. And most important, please don't be rude or obnoxious to your fellow chatters.

Hmmmmmmmmm, I DONT SEE ANYTHING ABOUT NO CHANNEL CTCP's! or, ANYTHING about HACKING either. SO OBVIOUSLY this d*ckhead had no case in banning me.

Anyway, I got onto the channel founder by now, Fuggs:

(I told him my story, which is the TRUTH) see Fuggs msg for details <Fuggs> now lets see...1) you versioned an entire chan...now thats plain dumb.....and your story dosnt wash with me... <TheOMega> why is versioning a channel dumb? <Fuggs> 2)you told pom1 she was a hacker.. <TheOMega> no i didnt <Fuggs> because u and i both know why you do it and your story is dumb <TheOMega> how is that? <TheOMega> if i *were* a hacker, do you think i would get caught out? <TheOMega> hackers arent dickheadly dumb <TheOMega> and i quote <TheOMega> <Fuggs> now lets see...1) you versioned an entire chan...now thats plain dumb.. <Fuggs> and you versioning an entire chan to look for hackers.....oohh please.... <TheOMega> i didnt say that either <TheOMega> i said "looking for unix users" <TheOMega> should i quote? <TheOMega> and please tell me why doing this irc fuction is "dumb" as you put it? <Fuggs> and why are you looking for unix users? <TheOMega> read above... <TheOMega> I AM IRCing as the root user on my computer <TheOMega> which is hackable <Fuggs> well versioning an entire chan is a way lame and old so called hackers trick...its just plain stupid <Fuggs> well make your computer safe and secure <TheOMega> please explain how this is lame? <TheOMega> (versioning a channel) <TheOMega> i cant see the lameness in it <TheOMega> when i have reason that my computer would be accessable

This guy seems to have some reading defficiency. Firstly straight out "your story doesn't wash with me" which I take as "you are lying" which I don't take to kindly. "Call me a liar and I'll rip your nuts off" is one of my mottos. Secondly he's saying I said things which I didn't. And I have all of the logs to prove it. So he puts thing into my mouth then calls me a liar, which I would say means he's lying to himself.

Despite all my asking him, he never did give a reason as to why versioning a whole channel is "dumb" or "lame". Obviously it's not, because it's available to everyone, because the people who made IRC put it there, so are the people who made IRC "dumb" or "lame"?

When I said I was "IRCing as root user on my box, which is hackable" I suppose better terminology would be "While IRCing as root on my box, people can backdoor into my computer". Backdooring and blatantly hacking into a unsecure box sounds quite different to me, as "backdoor" suggests it is a lot more harder to get in.

The saga continues:

<TheOMega> so how long shall i remain banned fomr the channel for doing an open irc function? <Fuggs> versioning an entire chan is not the norm. <Fuggs> and anyone that runs an unsecure box on IRC is silly <TheOMega> oh so now theres the "norm."? where can i get a copy of the norm? <TheOMega> oh so everyone in #australia is silly? <TheOMega> and if theyre not, then they should have no probs with me versioning the channel <TheOMega> well? <TheOMega> are the people in #australia running on secure boxes? <Fuggs> nope...but everyon on that chan dosnt version the entire chan....as its not the norm and is a way old hackers trick... <TheOMega> so "way old" hey? <TheOMega> then why would a hacker be doing it nowadays? <Fuggs> here it is .....a sop banned you...take it up with her.......its dumb running an unsecured box and its not bright versioning an entire channel <TheOMega> well, tell your chanops before they go banning people for doing versions, they should read more on unix, hacking etc. as they would realize normal users like me arent a threat. <Fuggs> and a unix user should have a secure box <TheOMega> why?

And I shall remain asking that question, "Why?". Millions, possibly billions of lusers can arse around the WWW without secure boxes, and bitch like hell when someone does a ctcp version on them, or send some packets to a port, so why can't a UNIX user? I know the answer, and it's because UNIX users are past the dickheadedness of these other lusers.

And also, "not the norm" like hell I'm going along with the "norm" where possible, I go against the "norm", mainly to: 1.) cause confusion and 2.) make people realize not all people "go with the norm".

The moral to the story
Here's what I get out of this experience:

Some people will label you something dependant on what software you use. - Now that's lame.
Some people will put words into your mouth, and then call you a liar. - They must have some mental problems.
Other people are just plain dickheads. - Speaks for itself.

Hmm, now to setup some DNS software so I can get back into that channel and give them shit.

Asterisks explained * "stupidly" - IRC'ing as root user is considered "stupid" in the Linux community. This is because there are some users that are smart enough to use this as a backdoor into your system. I have never seen the term "insecure" or "unsecure" used in relation to IRCing as root user. Check out #linux on DALnet network, logon as root@somewhere and join #linux, the BigSister bot will send a /msg to you saying it is "suggested that you do not irc as root. Some irc clients (notably epic) have security holes that could allow people to break into your system."

Previous CCV's
NoBO

This, has to be the most lamely used program in the entire WORLD! Some computer lusers who may or may not have been harmed by Back Orifice run this thinking they are going to save the world from BO. What idiots. (In pitying voice) They most likely don't even know what this program is doing. Here's what NoBO does:

Opens port 31337 and listens for data packets.
Logs any data coming in on the port, and saves the IP from where it came.

That's it. nothing more. It is listening on a port. This same effect can easily be achieved with programs like NetCat, or any daemon software will happily do it for you. Here's why I get pissed off at it.

The luser who runs it knowingly opens the port for packets. This is the same as me, running my ftpd on my Linux box. I put up an anonymous daemon, onto a specified port so that people can get into my computer. If someone were to hack via my ftpd, who's fault is that? Mine. I didn't secure it properly. Not that NoBO even allows the client into the computer.
The name "NoBO" is crap. Packets of data can be sent with almost any TCP/IP networking program. Even things like ICQ. Set a certain host or IP and port and whoopie! You are sending packets to the host on that port. You don't have to use Back Orifice to send packets to port 31337.
NoBO causes headaches for all. The NoBO lusers think they can get the BO and/or TCP/IP-packet-sending-network-program user into trouble for sweeping subnets or sending packets to their computer on port 31337. What idiots! If NoBO wasn't running, the host would refuse the packets to that port! The luser then goes off to his ISP admin, complains about this guy apparently trying to "hack" his system so causes another piddly annoying job for the ISP guy to squeeze into his day. This only pisses him, (the ISP guy) and the packet-sending person off.
"He's invading my privacy!" What a crap statement. First: "invading". Invade means to attack, or go in without permission. For starters, NoBO doesn't even allow the client in. How can someone invade if they can't get in?!!! "privacy" - Hmm, the luser is allowing the packets in, therefore he is no longer making this port on his computer private. If he wants to use this port for something specific, then he can get daemon software to put a password on it. Retards.

Here's my story on NoBO:

I'm on DALnet IRC network, when a guy from my city on the same ISP as me comes into #robins_room. His nick was "woodhead". He informs me that the channel #X_treme has more people from Mackay in there, so I joined there. Although the people were complete foul mouthed creeps (probably 15 yrs old or less) I decided to install Back Orifice and do a sweep on the 2 good Mackay ISP's. Mr Bean and Orion-Online. I sweep the 2 subnets with BO, and it rings back 3 IP's that have BO servers or this crap NoBO installed. I post the IP's to the channel say that they are infected, and get a "So you think you're l33t?" type of reply from the people in the channel, so I reply: "No. But if that's your IP you might want to get rid of the BO server."

About 5 - 10mins later, I get a private message from a guy called "Fabius" who is apparently an Indian doctor at the Mackay Base Hospital, originally from Europe somewhere. His statement to me was in the ways of: "I have recorded your info..." (which he obtained from 3 /CTCP's in IRC: PING, VERSION & TIME) "and I am going to pursue you on this." Boggled, I check in channel #X_treme for this Fabius guy... not in there. So I /whois him and see he is on Mr Bean too. I msg him back, saying info from a ping, version and time is hardly enough to pursue anyone with. (Still wondering WTF he's on about.)

After a lengthy private message convo with him, in which he stated, "Back Orifice is a deadly and addictive drug" mind you it is a program, not a drug ;-), I was wondering what it was that I did to get him pissed off at me about Back Orifice.

The next day, Doug Bean (my ISP guy) rings and says that a client "has come in this morning saying you were trying to hack his system, and he has logs of everything." Doug was reading a bit of the logs to me, when "NoBO" came up. Weelllllllllllll..... here we have it. It is all clear now. Another NoBO luser is at it.

Here is the moral to the story: If this Fabius guy wasn't using NoBO, the sweep I did would have rung back 2 IP's and not 3. He wouldn't have known the difference, I wouldn't have known the difference. He caused a nice big bastardy-extra-job for Doug to do in his day, which Doug no doubt has no time for. I was not "invading his privacy" since he opened the 31337 port.

I refuse to stop doing subnet sweeps with Back Orifice clients, since there is no harm in doing it. It is practically the same as doing ping www.where-ever.com . Packets getting sent to a computer... that is what it is. My my, what a nice long CCV. :-)

Enjoy your day.

Stan Zamanek

Doesn't this guy tick you off? He's an absolute loonatic who needs a kick in the pants. I heard him on his radio talk thing a while back when they broadcasted it all the way up the coast, and he was more foul mouthed than the people ringing in that he would disconnect off. He got me to the point where I was going to ring in, abuse him, and then nusiance call him for the rest of the night!

He's a "think I'm good but not" kind of bloke. And he seems to know everything about something he's knows nothing about. One guy rung him one night and was whining about the day-light savings. Mr "Think I'm good but not" Zamanek then tells him that he's an idiot because it makes no difference. Mr Zamanek however, forgets that HE works under artificial lighting. The SUN, and what time it is when it comes up has NO bearing on his work! While daylight savings affects him in no way at all, since he gets his 1.2 Million $ a year for getting up when his radio buzzer goes off. A person who works due to the sun however, will always be that bit behind.

And now he gets a frickin TV show to blab his fat face on too! I watch it, cos it's funny to watch him give crap to the ladies on the panel. And sometimes he is actually right with what he says. But really, he needs to shut his filthy face once in a while.

And you can send Email to Fat Boy Zamanek here.