Eavesdropping on mugu email

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 22

What about sending an ASEM to mugus that offered free email forwarding? When I got a response, I would set up two forwarders, one to the requested address and one to my own address. Then, if it turned out my service was being used by a mugu, I could change the forwarding to go to an interested baiter such as yourself. And you could take it from there.

You would see everything that was being sent to the mugu, and if the replies quoted the original message, you would see some of what they were saying. Presumably no personal messages would be intercepted, only mugu business. And if you did get some personal information, you could warn the victim in some way not to send any more, or you could play with the mugu's mind by sending your own emails.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 1:23 pm

That is illegal, therefore, it is not condoned here on Eater.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 1:44 pm

Agreed with YW. Interception of electronic communications is a federal crime here in the U.S.

Interesting that you're the same person who didn't want to lie to the lads. Maybe you need to re-assess exactly what part you want to play in baiting.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:07 pm

Did you not just offer to forward baiters emails as well. Seeing this last post, just what are you up to?

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:08 pm

@4ehgfrsmul You didn't read the stickies did you, you bad lad. Rolling Eyes

I don't know what we're going to do with you Wink

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:14 pm

If the service was explicit in stating that all mail would be scrutinised and forwarded to several appropriate receivers.

I wouldn't see a problem no matter what law it was held under.

I doubt many would be quick on the uptake of the service. However then again.

"I see dumb people" 'disclaimer' ( misquote from some movie)

And the loop continues

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:17 pm

wanamaker wrote:

Did you not just offer to forward baiters emails as well. Seeing this last post, just what are you up to?

I think 4ehgfrsmul meant "it is possible to to divert a lad away from an already aquired victim to a baiter mid-scam".

It's also not illegal to intercept emails if you explicitly state on the site that "every email procesed using this service will be CC'd to a private account for inspection"... I *really* doubt a Lad'll read the fine print, and he'll just click "I accept" and be done with it. Microsoft have used this principle for years ;P

That aside, I don't see much use for the idea other than voyeurism and potentially saving the odd Vic some grief. I doubt the effort involved in managing it would be worth it though.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:27 pm

^So, if a lad sends out a mass mail you'll have the systems to cope with it?
If you do keep a copy of each mail it'll take some reading.

Not quite a Newb Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 22

Actually, I don't have the systems to cope with much... (shared server, 4GB disk space, 40GB of bandwidth a month). I was hoping to quickly forward the address to a baiter, once I had seen an email or two, to keep my disk space from being filled up, deleting and ignoring the first wave of responses.

As others have said, I don't think this counts as intercepting someone's email. Especially if I add the fine print suggested. Intercepting presumably means hacking into somebody else's server or somebody else's email account. It requires more technical expertise than I have.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 11:31 pm

You have a problem with tellling lies yet you're willing to Dupe mugus into using a forwarding service so you can steal their emails to spy on what they're doing... Peculiar. Rolling Eyes

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 2:18 am

It isn't really lying. He is forwarding the email just as he says and providing a service just as he says. More of a lie by omission which is not really lying at all. It all depends on how you look at it, from a different point of view. Kind of like when Obi-wan didn't tell Luke, Vadar was his father. It wasn't really lying. Nicht var?

Not quite a Newb Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 22

As they say, we all have to make our own ethical decisions. Right now, I'm interested in legal decisions. Does anybody know if my suggestion would get me arrested in the US? If not, does anybody want me to forward my scammer email to them? So far I've collected about six mugu bank accounts, mostly with autoresponders.

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 4:20 am

DrWho wrote:

Kind of like when Obi-wan didn't tell Luke, Vadar was his father. It wasn't really lying. Nicht var?

OOOOOOhhhh....I just love the part when he does find out. What a great use of NOOOOOOOO.....

I bet that must come across the minds of the mugus when they realize they can't collect their $5,000 no matter what they do .... NOOOOOOOOOOOOO....

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 4:38 am

@DrWho: Telling lies is deceit, witholding information is deceit. Both are morally questionable. So why does 4ehgfrsmul have a problem with one and not the other? That's what I'm getting at. Deceit is deceit no matter which way you dress it up.

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 4:55 am

I did not have sexual relations with that woman.. Cool

Forever n00b Joined: 11 Jan 2006 Posts: 432

/\ Have a cigar. Wink

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 5:32 am

You mean a Jedi Knight would be deceitful? Was Luke wise to trust Obi-wan? Did Obi-wan manipulate the truth to his own advantage? Was he baiting Luke to get back at Vadar for forsaking his training?

If so then is there a point where lying for the general good is permissible? If a killer asked if anyone was home and I lied and said 'no', would I be wrong and be considered deceitful and unethical?

I would have to say that I like how 4ehgfrsmul's ethical line varies as the situation changes. Kind of like the Enron employees. And the justifications to provide the peace of mind are nice.

If you want to read the specific US code for this
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_119.html
Penalty is a maximum of 5 years in prison and/or $10000 per day per offense.

Forever n00b Joined: 11 Jan 2006 Posts: 432

Don't listen to this /\ n00b 4ehgfrsmul. Give it a go. You won't get into any trouble. Trust me. I wouldn't lie. I am a highly ethical person.

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 7:29 am

Stop picking on me Doc or I'm telling my mum Crying or Very sad

Not quite a Newb Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 22

Summarizing the relevant US law from
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_119.html :
.
It's not okay for a provider of electronic communications to monitor it to do "service observing or service quality control checks." It's okay for a provider to monitor communications if "one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception," unless you're doing that to commit a crime.

"A person or entity providing electronic communication service to the public may divulge the contents of any such communication... with the lawful consent of the originator or any addressee or intended recipient of such communication; "

Master of Master Baiters Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 713

Oh ffs 4ehgfrsmul. NO.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.

If you want to do something morally questionable, how about you do it someplace else without the involvement of the rest of us at eater who would quite like to make it through the rest of our lives without the feds knocking at the door?

In fact before you have any further dumbass ideas, how about you read the blasted stickies and do what they say eh, kidster?

Not quite a Newb Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 41

And on that note, I reckon I'll lock it.

I did enjoy the Jedi allusions, though. Laughing

For those of you keeping count, please note that this is my first lock of the day. Feel free to discuss it.

Eavesdropping on mugu email	View next topic View previous topic