Re: [bitfolk] Tor Obsfucation

Top Page

Reply to this message
Author: Johnathon
Date:  
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] Tor Obsfucation
0120707170729.GU3867@???>
References: <20120707130537.GA11695@???>
    <ECAE67DBAB7C44C2BA99DA232CC6E395@???>
    <E8D012CEB3584285925AD3F1476D118B@???>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160;
    protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="N/O9EBh0K7980Yi6"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E8D012CEB3584285925AD3F1476D118B@???>
OpenPGP: id=BF15490B; url=http://strugglers.net/~andy/pubkey.asc
X-URL: http://strugglers.net/wiki/User:Andy
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on mail.bitfolk.com at Sat,
    07 Jul 2012 17:07:29 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: andy@???
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
    spamd2.lon.bitfolk.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=NO_RELAYS shortcircuit=no
    autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Report: * -0.0 NO_RELAYS Informational: message was not relayed via SMTP
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:51:10 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.bitfolk.com)
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] Proving that you are you
X-BeenThere: users@???
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users of BitFolk hosting <users.lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/options/users>,
    <mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.bitfolk.com/lurker/list/users.html>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users>,
    <mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2012 17:07:29 -0000



--N/O9EBh0K7980Yi6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Aaron,

On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 05:38:13PM +0100, Aaron B. Russell wrote:
> Rationale: you'd have a copy of that image file once I'd sent it to you, =

and chances are a few other people may have access to that image file, so v=
erifying I actually had the real document would be somewhat important (thou=
gh of course depending on the video quality this may not be a great solutio=
n as you might not be able to verify the document is the same one as in the=
image=E2=80=A6)

So are you saying that if

- YOU had disabled the password reset, and
- YOUR service were down, and
- you were communicating with me via email (possibly from a
different email address to the one in our database)

YOU would not want me to reset your account password based on an
image of a utility bill, but would insist upon a government ID that
I recognise?

Also what would be your suggestion regarding government IDs that I
don't recognise (not all customers are from the UK)?

Cheers,
Andy

--=20
http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

--N/O9EBh0K7980Yi6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREDAAYFAk/4bNEACgkQIJm2TL8VSQtbrACg7fKssO8Q5mChTWWMMyH/sm2S
Fj0Anix64UYBv+1K6tah062Fs9aNRaiM
=Ef8M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--N/O9EBh0K7980Yi6--


From aaron@??? Sat Jul 07 17:13:54 2012
Received: from phoenixsupport.org ([2001:ba8:1f1:f1de::f5:c]
    helo=server02.filesanctuary.net)
    by mail.bitfolk.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
    (envelope-from <aaron@???>) id 1SnYZu-0000ss-Ka
    for users@???; Sat, 07 J