audit logins.

TheMSsForum.com: The Microsoft Software Forum

The MSS Forum ‹ smallbiz
- Archive
  - Biz
  - MCSE
  - CRM
  - Drivers
  - Framework
  - ADO
  - ASP
  - Compact
  - Forms
  - Dotnet
  - C#
  - VB
  - FontpageGen
  - Excel
  - WorkSheet
  - Exchange
  - Setup
  - Fox
  - Fontpage
  - ASP
  - IIS
  - Entourage
  - Money
  - Messanger
  - PocketPC
  - Powerpoint
  - Project
  - Publisher
  - Excel
  - VB
  - Security
  - Portal
  - Services
  - SQLServerDev
  - SVCS
  - SQLServer
  - VB
  - VC
  - MFC
  - ExcelGen

- Previous
  - 1
    - wat the POP3 and SMTP servers? wat the POP3 and SMTP servers? Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179593
  - 2
    - ATM issue on VPN network connection Since we have setup some ATM there are lots of problem raised that we don't know the real cause of problem. But now we have mention something related to network that also raised some problem to us. We have notice that ATM location which are installed on network where is using lease line, micro wave or fiber optic are runnning well than ATM which are installed on VPN network. The problem is that, ATM goes out of service wothout reason event we can ping to ATM ip address. We have contact to ATM vender related to network speed requirement and they replied the network speed that ATM can work is 64 kbps and there is not because of VPN or other network type. There is true in this case because lots of problem are raised on the same ATM running on VPN network. Hi reader, you may understand well about problem we facing right? If you all have any commend related to this problem could share with us to sold it. Thanks you very much in advance. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179592
  - 3
    - MI5 Persecution: Stasi 21/4/96 (16079) Subject: Chief Constable Alderson Condemns "Stasi" MI5 Newsgroups:uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,soc.culture.british Organization: Toronto Free-Net Summary: Keywords: John Alderson, former Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, had the following to say about the expansion of the Security Service's powers, in a recent magazine article; "It is fatal to let the secret service into the area of ordinary crime. MI5 is not under the same restraints as the police. They infiltrate organisations, people's jobs and lives. They operate almost like a cancer." "At the moment the acorn of a Stasi [the former East German communists' secret service] has been planted. It is there for future governments to build on." The message is clear. Criminal subversion and criminal harassment by an unpoliced minority not subject to the law, "infiltration of people's jobs and lives" is with us today. 16079 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179591
  - 4
    - MI5 Persecution: Leant On 7/4/96 (14565) From: Green <Green@guidion.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing Their Job? Reply-To: Green@guidion.demon.co.uk Date: Sun Apr 7 21:13:30 1996 In article <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@torfree.net> bu765@torfree.net "Mike Corley" writes: > Last Easter (1995) I went into the local police station in London and spoke to > an officer about the harassment against me. But I couldn't provide tangible > evidence; what people said, in many cases years ago, is beyond proof, and > without something to support my statements I cannot expect a police officer to > take the complaint seriously. This in itself dos not suggest that the police have it in for you. The old bill operates on extremely tight spending limits forced on them by that pillock Michael Howard, and without evidence, they often have higher priorities than chasing something that cannot go to court. I doubt that the police are actually being leant on, but they probably realise that if they looked into this, they would be leant on hard. The met always stays away from anything that looks like it has Defence, Security or secret service interest already, because they realise that they are below these government agencies in the general pecking order. This attitude was made clear in a TV show where a left wing comedian heckled some aristocratic Tory candidate in a local election. The police officer gave the comic a ticking off, even though you could see that this young copper sympathised with the comedian, and regarded the Tory as an upper-crust wanker. He said, and I quote "I'm giving you the ticking off and not him because he's a Lord and I'm a Police Constable." If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping on me, they would show me the door without even looking at my evidence, because that bored desk seargant with only five years to go before he retires doesn't want to start fucking about with somebody who has incurred the wrath of Stella Rimington. He would rather deal with the lost dogs and driving licence producers, eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss off home at the end of his shift than have some high ranking spook having a go at his boss and getting him a bollocking. In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. Just remember that saying about the enemy of your enemies. Have a nice day. ******************************************* QUOTE OF THE DAY****************** * You have just read the opinons of : * "Common sense is merely the set * * * of prejudices a person acquires* ========================================================================= Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing Their Job? Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british Followup-To: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british References: <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@torfree.net> Organization: Toronto Free-Net Distribution: >This in itself dos not suggest that the police have it in for you. >The old bill operates on extremely tight spending limits forced on >them by that pillock Michael Howard, and without evidence, they >often have higher priorities than chasing something that cannot go >to court. I think the police know well what's going on. It is up to them to do something about it. They know I've made a complaint at a police station. I could probably do more to try to help myself (I think someone suggested making a written complaint to the chief constable) but even then I nthink they would not take action. > >I doubt that the police are actually being leant on, but they probably >realise that if they looked into this, they would be leant on hard. >The met always stays away from anything that looks like it has Defence, >Security or secret service interest already, because they realise that >they are below these government agencies in the general pecking order. > So we have a situation where the security service breaks the law, everyone knows MI5 breaks the law, and the police won't investigate crimes that would otherwise earn a jail sentence. Oh good, I'm really glad the UK is a democracy. (<sarcasm>, for those of you who didn't catch that) >If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping on me, >they would show me the door without even looking at my evidence, because >that bored desk seargant with only five years to go before he retires >doesn't want to start fucking about with somebody who has incurred the >wrath of Stella Rimington. He would rather deal with the lost dogs and >driving licence producers, eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss >off home at the end of his shift than have some high ranking spook having >a go at his boss and getting him a bollocking. In this case I think it is 'high-ranking' police officers who are aware of the persecution, they know a complaint has been made, and they're doing nothing. What is more, I don't think there is anything I can do that would make them take action, both because they may be being 'leant on' and through the wider view that it could be deleterious to the state to have a persecution by state organs exposed. They're wrong in taking that point of view, because sooner or later this will all out anyway, and they it will be n years of police inaction (n>=6) that will be questioned. > >In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. Just remember >that saying about the enemy of your enemies. > >Have a nice day. 14565 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179590
  - 5
    - MI5 Persecution: Shoot to Kill 4/4/96 (13051) Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british From: jbaker@pobox.com (Jill Baker) Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: How and Why Did it Start? Reply-To: jbaker@pobox.com Date: Thu Apr 4 05:03:01 1996 jbaker@pobox.com (Jill Baker) wrote: >bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wrote: >>Why would >>the security services expend hundreds of thousands of pounds and more than fiv >>years of manpower to try to kill a British citizen? Because ... >So why didn't they just shoot you dead? >It would have been a lot cheaper. Please make the effort to respond to this point Mike. It was a serious question. Jill (my opinions are entirely my own, no-one else's) ================================================================= Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: How and Why Did it Start? Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british Followup-To: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british References: <Dp5IAr.1EB.0.bloor@torfree.net> Organization: Toronto Free-Net Distribution: jbaker@pobox.com (Jill Baker) wrote: >bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wrote: >>Why would >>the security services expend hundreds of thousands of pounds and more than fiv >>years of manpower to try to kill a British citizen? Because ... >So why didn't they just shoot you dead? >It would have been a lot cheaper. I think there are two reasons nobody has taken physical action as opposed to verbal; a) A lot of people "know". Perhaps you the reader might not know, but lots of people in the media etc do. Remember, I was born in the UK and lived there until a couple of years ago. I don't think these people would condone state-sponsored murder of someone who might be seen on a good day as one of their own. b) Rather than doind anything directly, they're going for spying, verbal harassment, media harassment, every form of persecution short of the physical. Because as soon as anything turns physical, the police become involved; and unless it turns physical, the police can shrug and say 'not our problem'. So they persecute you and try to get you to react, either by hitting one of them (in which case I clearly find myself in the wrong as far as the police are concerned), or by trying to harm myself (in which case they can pretend they weren't responsible). It's a pretty unproductive form of harassment actually, because if you don't react then they're wasting they're time. Or perhaps they're just cheap bullies and trying to wreck someone's life, without any ulterior motive? 13051 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179589
  - 6
    - MI5 Persecution: Email Cruelty 11/3/96 (11537) From: D.S.Toube@qmw.ac.uk (David Toube) Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.legal,uk.media,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: Why Censorship Must Not Be Allowed on Uk.* Reply-To: D.S.Toube@qmw.ac.uk Date: Mon Mar 11 11:47:13 1996 A OSHINEYE <TA5330@QMWCC7.qmw.ac.uk> wrote: :D.S.Toube@qmw.ac.uk (David Toube) wrote: :>I would also be very pleased if Mike Corley would not mailbomb me :>via my university account with messages entitled 'This Is What :>You Get For Censorship', thus closing down the entire college :>email system. :> :>Although it does not personally inconvenience me, it is rather :>dull for the college. :When did this happen? BTW you can always use Pegasus Mail to send all :email from Corley's address back to him and see how he likes it. :--Ade : This weekend. The result, Mike Corley will be gratified to hear, was that all users of the college system were prevented from using email. I suspect that there is no stopping Mike Corley. If mail is automatically returned to him, he will return it back to you tenfold. If he is thrown off his account, as he surely will be, he will find another one. I do not care whether Mike Corley has an email account or not. It is a matter of supreme indifference to me whether his fanciful account of persecution is aired or not. If he thinks that he has been persecuted by M15 and Chris Tarrant, then that is a matter for him. But there is a world of difference between repeatedly spamming usenet - which is unacceptable - and setting up a Web Site containing his post, which is entirely acceptable. Then it will be possible to choose whether or not to partake of his fantasy. However although I would not like to see the censorship of posts because they demonstrate evidence of mental illness, I suspect that Mike Corley will inevitably be censored by his ISP following a number of complaints of usenet abuse and mailbombing. ---- David Toube Lecturer in Law QMW, University of London WWW: http://www.qmw.ac.uk/~ugtl027/index.html David Boothroyd's British Elections Home Page WWW: http://www.qmw.ac.uk/~laws/election/home.html 11537 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179588
  - 7
    - MI5 Persecution: Jeff Rooker MP 5/3/96 (10023) From: rael@midnight.org (Rael A. Fenchurch) Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K. Date: Tue Mar 5 04:37:52 1996 Mike, >"go away" replies, and one from a Labour MP saying he was aware of my situation >but wouldn't help me because he regarded me as the "bad guy". Gee thanks, they >do this and then offload the shame they should feel onto you by telling you "oh >but it's your fault". It's a mad world. Do you happen to have a copy of this MPs letter? After all, a scanned copy of it would lend great weight to your case here. At the moment, you've offered us nothing in the way of evidence, which is one of the main reasons we all think you've truly gone fishing. So? Rael... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Rael A. Fenchurch (rael@midnight.org, http://www.midnight.org/rael/) --- --- "I don't think compassion's the language of our time" --- --- "Doubt or Die" --- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================== From: Andy Howard <andy@kiss100.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K. Reply-To: andy@kiss100.demon.co.uk Date: Tue Mar 5 06:06:15 1996 In article: <DnrMsq.239.0.bloor@torfree.net> bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wr I got a few > "go away" replies, and one from a Labour MP saying he was aware of my situatio > but wouldn't help me because he regarded me as the "bad guy". Which Labour MP Mike? > -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Andy Howard EMail andy@kiss100.demon.co.uk | | My opinions, not my employer's (Jolly nice people though they are). | | If my employers shared my opinions... Well, frankly I'd be amazed | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ==================================================================== Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K. Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.br$ Followup-To: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.b$ References: <DnFtLs.E37.0.bloor@torfree.net> <4h45nq$87o_002@leeds.ac.uk> <4h6gkb$ivc$ Organization: Toronto Free-Net Distribution: Mike Corley (bu765@torfree.net) wrote: : >Do you happen to have a copy of this MPs letter? After all, a scanned : >copy of it would lend great weight to your case here. At the moment, : >you've offered us nothing in the way of evidence, which is one of the : >main reasons we all think you've truly gone fishing. So? : The letter was by email, not on paper. (In addition to snail-mailing, I : emailed all the relevant addresses I could find.) I'll see if I can find : it, I keep a record of most of this correspondence so I may still have it. I'm afraid I don't have a copy of the correspondence. In future I will keep useful letters, so with luck there may be a "next time". The MP was Jeff Rooker, Labour MP. Having looked again at the Labour web page I find he doesn't have an address listed, but I have a record of his address as having been jeff.rooker@geo2.poptel.org.uk. I don't know where I got the address from. I'm so disorganised! ==================================================================== Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british From: J.J.Smith@ftel.co.uk (John J Smith) Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K. X-Nntp-Posting-Host: death-on-the-rock.ftel.co.uk Message-ID: <Dnw49L.D1H@ftel.co.uk> Sender: smid@death-on-the-rock.ftel.co.uk (RFC931) Organization: Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Ltd References: <DnFtLs.E37.0.bloor@torfree.net> <DnrMsq.239.0.bloor@torfree.net> <Dnsrnu.Jr1.0.bloor@torfree.net> <DntKEo.86E.0.bloor@torfree.net> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 09:12:56 GMT Lines: 54 In article <DntKEo.86E.0.bloor@torfree.net>, Mike Corley <bu765@torfree.net> wrote: >Mike Corley (bu765@torfree.net) wrote: >: >Do you happen to have a copy of this MPs letter? After all, a scanned >: >copy of it would lend great weight to your case here. At the moment, >: >you've offered us nothing in the way of evidence, which is one of the >: >main reasons we all think you've truly gone fishing. So? > >: The letter was by email, not on paper. (In addition to snail-mailing, I >: emailed all the relevant addresses I could find.) I'll see if I can find >: it, I keep a record of most of this correspondence so I may still have it. > >I'm afraid I don't have a copy of the correspondence. In future I will keep >useful letters, so with luck there may be a "next time". Don't believe you. Because that might be proof, and we just *cant* have that. >The MP was Jeff Rooker, Labour MP. Having looked again at the Labour web page I >find he doesn't have an address listed, but I have a record of his address as >having been jeff.rooker@geo2.poptel.org.uk. I don't know where I got the >address from. I'm so disorganised! I did Email this MP yesterday. This is what I wrote: Smid>I am sorry to bother you, but there is a person with a known Smid>personality disorder on the internet usenet, claiming that you Smid>as an MP have backed up his claims that he is being persecuted Smid>by MI5. Smid>His name is Mike Corely, and posts from canada (email address Smid>available if you require). Smid> Smid>He claims that you have told him that his claims that the Smid>"television is watching him", are justified, yet cannot find the Smid>email in which he did so.. Smid>I'd be interested in what you have said to him, because we have Smid>had a long term battle to convince him that he really is schizophrenic Smid>and that Chris Tarrent, MI5 and Martin Lewis from News On Ten are Smid>persecuting him... If you do have the original Email, then that'd Smid>be nice... Smid>If you nothing of this subject, it would not suprise me, however. His reply, surpise, suprise was: MP>No idea what you are on about. I am getting really sick of some of MP>the junk on E mail. I just dump it so he may have contacted MP>but as to an answer I 've better things to do. Your move, Mike. Smid 10023 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179587
  - 8
    - MI5 Persecution: Flight or fight 7/1/96 (8509) From: huge@axalotl.demon.co.uk (Hugh Davies) Newsgroups: uk.misc Subject: Re: persecution rant (re-post) Reply-To: huge@axalotl.demon.co.uk Date: Sun Jan 7 04:43:41 1996 Yo, Mike, Happy New Year! Haven't you killed yourself yet? In article <DKMIs5.158.0.bloor@torfree.net>, bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wri >For anyone who hasn't yet read this, There is no-one in the known Universe who hasn't read this at least 5 times. >and really really wants to then here No-one wants to read it, Mike. It's drivel. >is the article that was posted last year in this newsgroup.... Over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.... -- Regards, Huge. ================================================== Subject: persecution rant (re-post) Newsgroups: uk.misc Organization: Toronto Free-Net Summary: Keywords: >Yo, Mike, Happy New Year! Haven't you killed yourself yet? But I can't, you see then I wouldn't know how things would turn out ("we're only doing this because we don't know how it's all going to end" - logic error in line 100) >There is no-one in the known Universe who hasn't read this at least 5 times. It doesn't seem to have done a whole lot of good since the good old persecution stuff is still going on. Over Christmas I was flying BA and got hassled by a couple of people on the flight (sounds like something you've heard before, doesn't it?). All the usual stuff about the town I'd been staying, "he doesn't know who we are", self-justification that we're doing it because he's a "nutter" etc. Real friendly like. Also a fairly obvious wind-up and attempt to get some reaction. I think they're trying quite hard to get a reaction. If I hit someone on a flight over the Atlantic, am I actually breaking any laws, and if so whose? Is a BA aircraft British territory subject to British laws while it's in mid-flight? It is really tempting to "reply" and that's obviously what they want, so who am I to refuse a blow to the head for people who ask for it so consistently? 8509 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179586
  - 9
    - MI5 Persecution: Dihydrocodeine 26/11/95 (6995) From: michaelm@easynet.co.uk (michaelm@easynet.co.uk) Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.media,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,alt.radio.uk Subject: Re: Britain's Shame (repost) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:19:13 GMT Organization: ------------ Lines: 89 Message-ID: <817374781.20251@michaelm.easynet.co.uk> References: <DIM34L.755.0.bloor@torfree.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: michaelm.easynet.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: michaelm.easynet.co.uk X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corblymee) wrote: | In June 1990 a horrifying campaign of harassment was initiated in London by | what are believed to be elements of the security services. The harassment has | continued for over five years, starting from the broadcast and print media, | and encompassing abuse through set-up situations and by people in public | places. It has been brought to the attention of the police and they are aware | what is happening, but are not taking any action to prevent it. <whopping great snip of 884 lines> corley, you puzzle me! i've narrowed your possible motives down to one or more of the following: 1) you work on behalf of the british government with a hidden agenda of furthering the largely right wing (most to hide) censorship brigade's cause, "a drug-crazed psycho posting dangerous nonsense - how very very sad - but in the public interest,we must act." draft internet (censorship) bills rolling off hm govt's banders at this very moment, I don't doubt it! 2) you work for the daily mail which has started to feel the "internet pinch" as it suddenly clicks in the chronically adled minds of yet more and more of their readers - that shudder-inducing realisation that the entire editorial staff at the mail are scaremongering, imbecilic, blood-leeching , totalitarian twats - can any else sense a coordinated campaign on its way ??- "Mail urges (their) government to act - internet safety endangered by uncontrolled surfing lunatics - boys hands blown off by internet maniacs - net porn responsible for 392323rd rape " .net porn responsible for 392324th rape " .net porn responsible for 392325th rape " .net porn responsible for 392326th rape " .net porn responsible for 392327th rape " net porn responsible for 392328th rape " .net porn responsible for 392329th rape " <yawn> .net porn responsible for 392330th rape " .net porn responsible for 392331st rape " .net porn responsible for 392332nd rape " net porn responsible for 392333rd rape " <yawn> .net porn responsible for 392334th rape " .net porn responsible for 392335th rape " .net porn responsible for 392336th rape " .net porn responsible for 392337th rape " net porn responsible for 392338th rape " etcetera, straight from the old nag's mouth.. lee-potter (and english), take particular note.. (how ever you two common ********* managed to avoid encarceration for what was, quite evidently,wilful contempt of court in the regina v taylforth & knights case, is frankly beyond me.. those dreaded and now all too familiar words "endemic corruption" were muttered by at least one Q.C. >3) you (at least) believe there's (some) substance to your claim(s) and you >have a genuine axe to grind. If so, bloody well go for it, but scrape the >heavy layer of steaming dung off the top (that's assuming you're even >capable of distinguishing fantasy from reality.) 4) you (as an email address) are serving as some bizarre "educational" programme orchestrated by the psychiatric industry - ever keen to justify enforced electrical lobotomies, electroshock and dwugs .All poised for the echo? - "corley frigging well needs lobotomising" 5) you're just clinically insane with absolutely no comprehension or insight into the consequences you will possibly face as a result of repeatedly posting what, certainly on the face of it, looks like complete and utter bullshit. 6) you're some weirdo prankster(s) - probably a group of student psychiatrists having a cheap crack whilst high as kites on pilfered dihydrocodeine. 7) You are infact working for the ss yourself, gauging public awareness of the extent and methods of bugging - infinity transmitters, microwave surveillance devices, satellite tracking equipment, 'chipping' of black crims, say no more. 8) You're fuelling the central usenet administration committee, who, it is believed, are keen to see the introduction of a wide-reaching framework of self-created powers relating to posting cancellation. (see the 'son of RFC1036') my bet's on (5) - but just fuck off corley- irritate the lard-arsed canucks instead. The cia's financing of "professor" cameron's brain-washing experiments in montreal.. would be a good starting point ... or perhaps "professor" watts and his widely admired masterful double eye-jabbing trick - a couple of wallops with an icepick. such a waste of perfectly edible four year old hispanics !!!!.. Perhaps the old marylebone rd posse could fill us in with a few more facts on this one...?? You are all on the .net now ????? A very warm welcome :-) ... christmas rapidly approaching.. >business booming?? Do we all get a look in at flotation ??!! ====================================================== From: Gulliver <kst2co@herts.ac.uk> Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.media,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,alt.radio.uk Subject: Re: Britain's Shame (repost) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 18:25:32 +0000 Organization: University of Hertfordshire Lines: 12 Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951126182156.16879B-100000@altair.herts.ac.uk> References: <DIM34L.755.0.bloor@torfree.net> <817343873snz@objmedia.demon.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: altair.herts.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII In-Reply-To: <817343873snz@objmedia.demon.co.uk> Actually, upon thinking about Mike's story it reminds me of someone I heard about who suffered from a persecution copmlex. He was an immigrant from some Eastern Bloc country who believed that 30 years after he emigrated the KGB were still after him. He would blame them if he had difficulty unlocking his car for instance (he reckoned they were putting something into the locks!). Something is very wrong, probably in Mike's head but what the hell, loonies make life more fun! -- Angus Gulliver ======================================================= Subject: Castrate the depraved MI5 buggers now Newsgroups: uk.misc Organization: Toronto Free-Net >Something is very wrong, probably in Mike's head but what the hell, >loonies make life more fun! Something is very wrong when the security services abandon their usual target of politicians and the well-known, to pursue the hitherto unknown nonentities such as myself. >corley, you puzzle me! Why? Because of my pathological truthfulness? >3) you (at least) believe there's (some) substance to your claim(s) and you >have a genuine axe to grind. If so, bloody well go for it, but scrape the >heavy layer of steaming dung off the top (that's assuming you're even >capable of distinguishing fantasy from reality.) Bloody well go for it I will. I think the "standard spiel" is quite studded with facts actually. There's plenty of "meat" there if the appropriate people can be motivated to get their act together and pursue the case. >my bet's on (5) - but just fuck off corley- irritate the lard-arsed canucks >instead. The cia's financing of "professor" cameron's brain-washing the lard-arsed canucks (?) are irritating me, but you don't want to hear about that >business booming?? Do we all get a look in at flotation ??!! 6995 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179585
  - 10
    - MI5 Persecution: A new Kafka? 3/10/95 (5481) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,uk.media,uk.politics From: jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson) Subject: Re: What it's like to be watched by the security services Message-ID: <1995Oct13.225312.6514@ttinews.tti.com> Sender: usenet@ttinews.tti.com (Usenet Admin) Nntp-Posting-Host: soldev Organization: Citicorp-TTI at Santa Monica (CA) by the Sea References: <DFy9tB.3JK.0.bloor@torfree.net> <813188298snz129.os2.7@blackcat.demon.co.uk> <DGE7uJ.8tF.0.bloor@torfree.net> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 22:53:12 GMT Lines: 34 In article <DGE7uJ.8tF.0.bloor@torfree.net> bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) writes: > >Strangers in the street have recognized me on sight many times, and shown >awareness of the current thread of abuse. To give you one example, in 1992 >I was seriously ill, and a manager at work somewhat humouroursly said that >"it wasn't fair" that people were bullying me. A few days later, I >attended for the first time a clinic in London as an outpatient, and on my >way out was accosted by someone who asked if "they had paid my fare", with >emphasis on the word "fare". He repeated the word several times in this >different context; that they should have paid my "fare", each time >emphasising the word. > >For two and a half years from the time their harassment started until >November 1992 I refused to see a psychiatrist, because I reasoned that I >was not ill of my own action or fault, but through the stress caused by >harassment, and that a lessening of the illness would have to be >consequent to a removal of its immediate cause, in other words a cessation >of harassment. I also reasoned that since they were taunting me with jokes >about mental illness, if I were to seek treatment then the abusers would >think that they had "won" and been proved "right". <I've deleted a lot, but I think this gives the idea> I have so far not contributed to this tread, it has been unpleasant in my opinion. However, I was struck by the resemblance of the above passages to the writing of Franz Kafka. Viz. while from an objective viewpoint it seems to refer to a abnormal world, in a strange way it does resonate strongly at other levels. Mr. Corley, have you tried to write for publication? I honestly think it might lead somewhere positive. Dick Jackson (serious for a change and expecting to get beaten up) 5481 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179584
  - 11
    - MI5 Persecution: Do they fear truth? 3/10/95 (3967) From: flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk (Peter Krüger) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,uk.politics,alt.politics.british Subject: Re: What it's like to be watched by the security services Date: 3 Oct 1995 15:38:20 GMT Organization: Steinkrug Publications Lines: 66 Message-ID: <44rldc$nrm@news.cityscape.co.uk> References: <DFus24.HxB.0.bloor@torfree.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: aa040.du.pipex.com X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+ In article <DFus24.HxB.0.bloor@torfree.net>, bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) says: > >It completely mystifies me how it can be done. One night in June 1992 I >was in a bed-and-breakfast in Oxford (some hard facts now, you?ll be >bored of the generalisations). I booked the B&B from the office phone. >So if they had the office bugged, or the phone system bugged, they could >have heard the call. If it was as late as 1992 then there was already a system available to feed digital video out of a domestic TV via the mains. Each raster of video was preceded by a sixteen bit address which identified the television set. All that was needed was a decoder box plugged into the mains somewhere between your room and the grid transformer. The signal was decoded and then fed down to the phone line. They probably even had a PC which enabled them to see the picture as well. By 1992 the technology had moved on from slowscan to near real time video with the advent of devices from Brooktree and Harris etc. >the newsreader reacted. Breathed deeply, as if in psychological relief. Maybe, or perhaps as if in:- sci.psychology.announce sci.psychology.consciousness sci.psychology.journals.psyche sci.psychology.journals.psycoloquy sci.psychology.misc sci.psychology.personality sci.psychology.psychotherapy sci.psychology.research sci.psychology.theory >I can't describe to you what goes through your mind when you know >someone on TV is "seeing" you the viewer. You?re doing OK so far. >Your instinct is to switch the TV off, to change channel, Not much point unless you switch off the TV at the mains >like an ostrich, Looks like Ostrich farming is going to catch on in the UK as you may have seen in some of the other uk newsgroups >The one time I did directly ask someone in the company who knew what was >going on, first he spewed wool about, "well we have to think what is >reality and what is proof anyway", then went into barefaced denial liar >mode. It opens your eyes, if they can't say out loud what they keep >saying in a disguised fashion, they must fear exposure, they must fear >the truth. wool_ barefaced_ denial_ liar_ eyes_ fashion_ fear_ exposure, How is your mother these days Mike? And BTW - How is the thesis coming along? Peter Kruger ------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.gold.net/flames/ flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk 3967 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179583
  - 12
    - MI5 Persecution: Grievous Bodily Harm 2/10/95 (2453) From: jeibisch@revolver.demon.co.uk (James Eibisch) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,uk.politics,uk.media,rec.arts.tv.uk.misc Subject: Re: Auntie gets it in the emails Reply-To: jeibisch@revolver.demon.co.uk Date: Mon Oct 2 19:44:19 1995 lig0007@queens-belfast.ac.uk (TOM OATES) wrote: >However, I'm pleased to say that, in the past couple of days, Mike Corley has >stopped doing it and he appears (I say this cautiously) to be acting more >reasonably. True, his postings are still based on paranoid delusions. >However, so long as he doesn't go back to his old practices of multiple, >identical, unreadable postings, I'm sure that most people on this newsgroup >are willing to put up with him. Time to come out of the woodwork of this thread (or variations thereof)... I find it annoying that discussion of Mike's situation is spread over multiple threads - it makes it hard to follow, and especially to follow up. If it could be consolidated into one thread on relevant newsgroups (I'm reading this on uk.media btw). I'm a little surprised with the volume of abuse Mike has received, but believe strongly in freedom of speech if such a thing were to exist, which clearly includes abuse as much as anything. One thing which has been missing from this discussion is this simple prognosis: that maybe Mike is right and that, despite his admitted mental condition, there really is a campaign against him organised by now-influential ex-students of his university. Does anyone remember the TV series GBH, a fictional account of security service and governmental power games? Fictional, certainly, but one of the most powerful pieces of TV drama I've seen in many years, fascinating and quite believable, even. The fact is, as Mike has pointed out (oh, so many times :-), that the security services _do_ have the influence, contacts, resources, and time to conduct such a campaign of surveillance and even psychological terror if they so chose. If they have this power, then they will surely use it We still don't have all the facts from Mike, and the most pertinent here I think would be about his time at university - the people who took against him, the ringleaders. We need to know far more about Mike: his political and social affiliations, put in context with his univeristy years, the enemies he made, the reasons people ganged up on him at the very early stages. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories generally, but I know there is far more that goes on in the universities, old boy's clubs, civil and secret services and Parliament than is ever made public. Mike, I leave it to you to construct a _single_ thread in a relevant newsgroup about this topic and keep to this thread to give us new information and answer questions about your situation. Ignore the 'Mike Corley is a nutter' posts unless they are relevant. Give us more detail. Who knows? It may be true, stranger things have happened. _ James Eibisch ('v') N : E : T : A : D : E : L : I : C : A Reading, U.K. (,_,) http://metro.turnpike.net/J/jeibisch/ ======= ------------------------------- Tue, 03 Oct 1995 04:01:34 uk.misc Thread 3 of 14 Lines 58 Re: Auntie gets it in the emails Respno 16 of 16 J.J.Smith@ftel.co.uk John J Smith at Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Ltd In article <812677261.12841@revolver.demon.co.uk>, James Eibisch <jeibisch@revolver.demon.co.uk> wrote: >lig0007@queens-belfast.ac.uk (TOM OATES) wrote: >One thing which has been missing from this discussion is this simple >prognosis: that maybe Mike is right and that, despite his admitted >mental condition, there really is a campaign against him organised by >now-influential ex-students of his university. We're trying to find this out on uk.misc. He's posted some *new* *huge* replies (which I'd have to give up my day job to reply to), detailing some things like: a) Mike Corley is *not* his real name b) Exactly what the "abuse" is (it seems be such things, as taking completely unrelated newspaper articles, striving to make them a disgusting insult, then redirecting against himself). c) How he came to the conclusion. I think he's doing rather better nowadays.. >Does anyone remember the TV series GBH, a fictional account of security >service and governmental power games? Fictional, certainly, but one of >the most powerful pieces of TV drama I've seen in many years, >fascinating and quite believable, even. This would be a point, apart from the fact that this was directed against someone of political importance. I don't believe Mike is... >The fact is, as Mike has pointed out (oh, so many times :-), that the >security services _do_ have the influence, contacts, resources, and time >to conduct such a campaign of surveillance and even psychological terror >if they so chose. If they have this power, then they will surely use it >at some point against some people. It appears he has formed the Security Service conclusion, because they are the only ones capable of doing it. A "searching for an enemy capable of it". >We still don't have all the facts from Mike, and the most pertinent here >I think would be about his time at university - the people who took >against him, the ringleaders. We need to know far more about Mike: his >political and social affiliations, put in context with his univeristy >years, the enemies he made, the reasons people ganged up on him at the >very early stages. I'm beginning to think that we never will get all the facts from Mike. We may, however, get enough... >Mike, I leave it to you to construct a _single_ thread in a relevant >newsgroup about this topic and keep to this thread to give us new >information and answer questions about your situation. Ignore the 'Mike >Corley is a nutter' posts unless they are relevant. Uk.misc, me boy... Smid ========================================================== From: flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk (Peter Kr|ger) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,uk.media,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,alt.conspiracy Subject: Re: What it's like to be watched by the security services Date: Tue Oct 3 15:41:54 1995 In article <44rrrh$t6v@news.ox.ac.uk>, idaniel@jesus.ox.ac.uk (Illtud Daniel) says: > >And what do you mean when you state that the symptoms are too >'textbook'? Are the textbooks wrong? I think what is meant by 'textbook' is that some of the symptoms of 'illness' displayed in the posts seem to have been lifted from textbooks describing mental instability and personality disorders. I must admit I haven't seen Mike's postings before has he only just started posting again? Peter Kruger ------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.gold.net/flames/ flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk 2453 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179582
  - 13
    - MI5 Persecution: Goldfish and Piranha 29/9/95 (939) I just thought I'd let you know what I've been reading into the "Crusader" spam. I don't want to post this to usenet because somebody might try to tie that in to my posts in some way (someone already has, in uk.misc). First of all, I'd like to ask you to believe that my phone line in my apartment is bugged, and has been for many months. I have moved a couple of times this year, but "they" have faithfully been on my trail. Anyway, let's suppose my phone line is bugged. Now, when I talk to my internet service provider, it's over a SLIP (now PPP) connection. So if you wanted to bug what was said, either you'd listen in over the line and have to decode the transmission, or you could go to the service provider (more difficult) and ask them to decode a particular user's connection. OK, so now they're listening to everything I do over my SLIP/PPP connection. A couple of months ago I was messing around with faking articles through nntp servers and through anonymous remailers. I chose a nice inconspicuous newsgroup for my little tests, something no-one would ever notice. Guess which newsgroup I chose??? Yes, _FISH_!!! or rec.aquaria to be precise And guess what articles I tried to post? Goldfish, Koi carp and, you'll never guess... PIRANHA!!! The goldfish article and the Koi went through, but the piranha didn';t appear. by now you probably think this is too silly for words. But if you look in the papers a few eeks ago you will find John Major, Tonny Blair and Paddy Ashdown sharing a "private joke" about Major's sunburnt goldfish. We haven't had anything about Koi yet (they must be too dull ). Now, sent by someone who clearly knew what they were doing (they chose an Italian backbone site for their launch point) we have many thousands of messages to people all over the globe. All about piranha, and with the punchline "that gives you something to think about, doesn't it?" The way it works is that they're trying to kill two birds with one stone again. I don't knoiw why they should be against these national alliance people, but my interpretation is that they simultaneously try to discredit them, and stem the flow of Corley articles. ================================================================= In article <DFnE55.8tF.0.bloor@torfree.net>, Mike Corley <bu765@torfree.net> wrote: > >John J Smith (J.J.Smith@ftel.co.uk) wrote: > >: b) we do know who you are. Or are you someone else we don't know about? >: You are currently known as "That bloody persistant net nutter, who's >: expanding from uk.misc to the rest of the world". > >I think the point I was trying to make is that I could tell you things >from my personal life, at home and at work, which would add credibility >to my story. But if I named people, then (a) they would object violently >to being included in this shenanigans, and (b) I would be revealing my >identity which would be bad for my personal life and my work life. Of >course some people in my personal life, and at work, do know who "mike >corley" is. But at least we're observing a studied silence for now. :People can always be called "MR X", to save them being named. : :I'm completely perplexed as to what you mean by b). Revealing identity? :To who? And why would this be bad for any part of your life when you :already have a less than respectful reputation here? I'll just enumerate one or two things that I can still remember. Sometime around August/Sept 1992 I was living in a house in Oxford, and coming out of the house was physically attacked by someone - not punched, just grabbed by the coat, with some verbals thrown in for good measure. That was something the people at work shouldn't have known about... but soon after a couple of people were talking right in front of me about, "yeah, I heard he was attacked". Again, one I went for a walk in some woods outside Oxford. The next day, at work, someone said "you know he went to the forest yesterday". I don't want to put details on usenet of what happened because to do so would be to risk it happening again. If you put ideas in peoples' heads then you can find them reflecting back at you, and I don't want that. Also I can't remember that much from three years ago. From november 1992 I started taking "major tranquilizers" and just blotted the whole thing from my mind. >This is a feature time and time again, that the security services >(presumed) get at you by manipulating other people around you to get at >you. If you have their contacts, manpower, resources and technology then >you can do that sort of thing. :But why? Are you a threat? They pretend they "have" to get at me. After the first few weeks they had to find a reason to spy and abuse. You can't abuse someone unless they're in the wrong in some way. What I did "wrong" was to be ill. So it became "nutter" and "monster" and "he's going to attack us" coupled with "ha ha ha, he can't do anything to defend himself, it was so funny". That obvious contradiction within their propaganda is something they blithely ignore. :So, the Security Services never *actually* appear, and you assume that :they get someone else to do your dirty work. This is a bit of a big :logical step, here: That person doesn't like me, or is causing me trouble, :it's not because they've got problems themselves, it must be the "Security :Services". Yes. Because people are infallible. Or is there more? A single source is indicated because of the range of harassment. BBC + Capital + manipulated_public_at_large + set_up_situations, what does that add up to? Add in the technology to carry out the covert spying and the manpower and knowhow to follow you around for five years without being spotted. It smells very much of the security services, because there is no other organization (to my knowledge) which does the things I've seen these people do. Remember, they have deliberately chosen the softest of soft targets to victimize. They purposely chose a mentally ill person who they thought would be likely to kill himself anyway, so that they could get away with murder. And in all likelihood it will have started as a personal vendetta by someone. Who could that be? I don't know, but I can give you some clues. The first possibility (deep breath) is that someone from my college set me up. Six years ago I graduated from university in the UK, during the last year there I was steadily getting more and more ill. I know that I was talking in my sleep; although I don't know what I was saying, it got me a reputation, and if someone from my college talked afterwards to the "wrong" people then that could be the reason for all that has followed. I think that's the strongest contender for source. Directly beneath my room lived another bloke who frequently had his friends round late at night, after the time that I went to sleep. So they could have heard what I was saying in my sleep, and that could have got me the reputation for "talking to myself". What I don't know is why that should have rebounded a year after I left. You'd think it would have happened sooner; it's a bit odd to wait for a year and then start abuse. That leads me to question what in particular happened around May/June 1990 for them to start then. >What I don't know is how it looks from the other side, from the side of >the people who are being manipulated to get at me. On a couple of >occasions I have challenged people to tell the truth of the matter, but >they have alwats ducked the challenge. :Have you ever considered the possibility, that you have made a mistake, and :the people don't know what you are talking about? Yes. I am currently considering the possibility that some people around me know only what is being posted on Usenet, and have not been "contacted" by "them". But I _know_ that others have been contacted. :What words? Are they in common use? Could they be a catchphrase of a :popular comedian?: "Nice to see you, to see you nice"? In England the all-time No. 1 is "nutter". Easter this year, returning home from Clapham police station to report five years of harassment ("we're not saying it's happening and we're not saying it isn't happening"), another "not happening" incident of harassment when a cowardly little slut did her country proud by yelling "nutter, nutter, nutter" in the face of the hated enemy. What can you do about that? You can't yell abuse back in their face, because they know they're supported by their peers, by the media, by the murderers in the security forces. You can't put them down when the fascist establishment is on their side. You can't hit them, because they would deny their abuse, they would deny knowing anything, and bring charges against the "nutter" who attacked them "at random". >You know, you're >passing saomeone, they're hardly going to construct an argument for your >benefit, so they work a word of abuse into the conversation which they >can giggle at. :Abuse such as what? We're all adults here, we can take it. Is this abuse :aimed at you? How can you tell it is? I think I've said already what the words are. Thing is, at any given time the language is consistent. In January everyone's calling you X, then a few weeks later people stop calling you X and start calling you Y. You can tell it's aimed at me, because when people repeatedly say the same words are you walk past, then laugh, you would have to be hard of understanding not to recognize it. >Or they repeat something that's been said somewhere else... the PE thing >being a case in point. PE says it, then other people pick up the refrain. :Remind me who PE is again. PE = "Private Eye" >: >To give you an example, which I mentioned in another posting. In around >: >October 1992, Private Eye ran a cover with the heading "Major's support >: >lowest ever", with John calling to Norma on the cover "come back, Norma". >: >Only one obvious interpretation to that, isn';;t there? I certainly >: >thought so when I saw that cover. Wrongo!! Down the pub with people from work >: >Simon says to phil, "don';t you think it's wrong then?" phil says, "well >: >private eye are usuallyright"..."hislop strikes again.. > >: Erm. Mike? Heeeelllllooo? What are you on about. What is the other >: interpretation then? Norma having an affair? Seems a bit wrong, with the >: heading "Majors support Lowest ever"... > >No, this one isn't obvious , it really does need to be explained. I >certainly didn't understand it when I first saw it. You see, the kernel >of vitriol is in the words "come back". At the time, the themes of >abuse were centred around interpretations of those two words (stretch your >mind a little bit, I don't have to spell it out for you, surely). :You did in your mail item. : :You seem to be scouting about something called a "Double Entendre". The :inference being "Come" = Ejaculation, "Back" = Anus (not the first part :of the body I would have went for, I would have foolishly gone for "Back", :silly old me). : :You see to have picked a sodomy double entendre out of a Private Eye :headline. They are everywhere. The English language has much double :meaning in it, and if you put your mind to it, you could pull a double :entendre out of a randomly chosen page of the bible. So what? >The point is that when Simon pointed it out to Phil, he did recognise >what it meant after a moment's thought... and so did I... and so did the >people who repeated it several times later... so however murky it may >seem to you, that is the meaning they intended it to have... I still don't really know if the meaning was intended when that headline was written, or if it was simply "found" after the fact. The reason I think it might be the former is that I got quite a lot of abuse along the lines of "sound-alike" or "double-entendre" at work, in particularly from Steve. So "double" inevitably came to mean split-personality, "two people in one"; "back" inevitably came to mean "backside", "come" inevitably meant you-know- what, "split" (well, we'd better split now) again you can guess, "bent" (of a similar bent), the list goes on forever. These aren't "nice" double- entendres intended for comedy, they're nasty words to humiliate and cause pain. If I could turn the clock back three years then I would sue my former employers for harassment and I would almost certainly win. I had to take pills after a year of Oxford, so they wouldn't be able to lie their way out of it. Actually, I could still take them to court - the main obstacle being that three years after the fact is a bit late and much of what happened, the details that would be necessary for a case to go to court, has just been obliterated by time. : Smid ============================================== From: flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk (Peter Kr|ger) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,alt.conspiracy,uk.media,uk.legal Subject: Re: Mike Corley - a (helpful) suggestion Date: Mon Oct 2 05:43:42 1995 In article <812551172snz@objmedia.demon.co.uk>, Snail <snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk> says: >Indeed, I feel that my Usenet access is censored simply because I don't want >to download groups he is partaking in, because of his behaviour. > >I wasn't that bothered, but I am starting to get seriously pissed off >with him. Which takes a lot. Hi Snail This person Corley seems quite interesting for three reasons. I put the following at the end of a post in another thread just to see if he was reading any other threads in uk.media. It seems he is probably not. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Heres an interesting little story from back in the early days of CCD technology. There was this miniature camera which was designed to fit behind the infrared receiver lens of the remote control system (just beside the IR sensor itself) the camera clocked out the data in 256 lines of 256 pixels from a Fairchild chip and fed it out, a line at a time, into the VBI within the TV set itself. The signal could be picked up remotely from a standard license detector van from where it was stripped out of the surrounding RF signal and relayed back to the TV station where it was displayed as a slowscan monochrome image in a corner of the news readers monitor. 939 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179581
  - 14
    - SBS 2000 with ISA and VISTA I have a user who needs access to pop mail from an external source and has been happily using the vista firewall client and outlook 2003 to achieve this. He has now upgraded to Visat and Office 2007. As the existing firewall client is not VISTA compatible he has upgraded to the latest ISA 2004 firewall client but is till unable to pop mail. Questions: IS the ISA 2004 firewall client useble with ISA 2000? Has anyone else made this configuration to work??? Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179575
  - 15
    - Share your Forte about the Latest in Computers & Internet Have you submitted articles in koonji.com? Share your expertise in computers and internet. The world needs Mavens like you who loves to learn and gather information and share your knowledge to educate others. Koonji allows you to share, organize and enhance every kind of information in a step by step how-to guide. It redefines the way people search for and use information on the web. It's a great way to educate others more about the computer and internet. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179572
  - 16
    - SBS 2000 to Windows 2003 I have read some posts sorta pertaining to this but is still unclear. I have 2 servers. 1 SBS 2000 and 1 win2k3 standard The 2k3 box is joined to the 2000 domain and is acting as a secondary domain controller. 1) The goal would be to install Exchange 2003 on the 2k3 box and migrate all users mailboxes to the new server. 2) Follow the KB to remove the first Exchange server from the domain 3) Move the FSMO roles to the new server 4) Decommission 1st server Is there any reason that this would not work if the only thing to save is the Exchange and AD Accounts. The ultimate goal would be to add another new server as second domain controller acting as file and print. Thanks in advance! Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179566
  - 17
    - will this work? BO2k domain to 2k3 standard domain - but on new hardware, so not 'upgrading' existing OS I found no group specific to Microsoft BackOffice 2000 Server, this group is as close as I found. Hopefully some of you are also familiar with it. I currently have MS BackOffice 2000 Server accross 3 servers, 2 of which are acting as domain controllers for a windows 2000 native mode domain. Exchange 2000 is also on one of the DC's and SQL 2000 is on the other DC. ISA lives by itself on the 3rd. I now have 3 brand new servers on which I have Windows Server 2003 R2 Standard licenses for. I intend on upgrading the existing 2000 domain to a windows server 2003 domain (one forest, one site, one domain). Below is my current plan, which I'm in the middle of researching for issues. I found reference to not being able to upgrade a SBS 2000 domain to a standard windows 2003 domain which is the first thing that may wrinkle my plan... Although I did just find out, thankfully, that SBS 2000 is not the same as BackOffice 2000 Server, I was not sure of this thinking it may have just been a name change. So maybe this issue will not apply to me, but, since I'm assuming this issue takes place when adprep.exe tries to update the schema and sees the SBS custom objects, thus failing it, that the same may happen for BackOffice since it also has a modified schema, like SBS. my plan: 1) fresh install of windows server 2003 R2 on a new server (not trying to upgrade existing backoffice 2000 machines) 2) join new 2k3 machine to the existing backoffice 2000 domain, then promote it as an additional domain controller in the existing domain. 3) transfer all FSMO roles to the new 2k3 domain controller 4) dcpromo down (demote) the existing 2 backoffice 2000 domain controllers back to member servers. that leaves me with only the 2k3 domain controller at which point I assumed I could raise the forest and domain functional levels to windows server 2003. will it work? Not considering any exchange 2000 issues yet, thats next. So assuming for now that there are no exchange servers involved, does the plan for upgrading the domain look like it should work? I will be looking into exchange issues next, as I have already seen refernce to them as well, but one thing at a time... Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179564
  - 18
    - Remove or bypass ISA Server from SBS 2000 I want to discontinue using ISA server and instead rely on a hardware firewall. Can I simply use the internet configuration wizard to state I am only using a single NIC and proceed from there or must I physically uninstall ISA. Any sugestions as to how to proceed would be appreciated. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179561
  - 19
    - Message POP UP Is it possible to generate a message on access of a folder? Thanks in advance umeriq Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179560
  - 20
    - Terminal Services Logon Windows 2000 SP4. New install and after a day or so the user is unable to logon remotely to the server using terminal services. After a reboot the issue is temporarily resolved. This has been an ongoing issu even after the system has been reloaded several times. Event logs are not full and there dosent seem to be an apparent reason for it to stop. The web server functions normally. Local desktop logon is also restricted until restarted. Shared file acces within the LAN is available. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179556
  - 21
    - USER LAN Settings access. Hi, I have a group of users who need on a regular basis to be able to change the LAN settings (more correctly enable or disable proxy settings) in Internet Explorer. I.E. Tools > Internet Options > Connections > LAN Settings. I would like to create a group in AD to achieve this that I can then add the necessary users to. One way I am aware is to add these users to the Domain Admins group, I don't want to do this! Could anyone advise on this please? Thanks Gawen. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179554
  - 22
    - Must Read An excellent resource on ISA Server providing in depth knowledge of configuration, ISA Control service, Single-homed ISA server features and much more. Worth reading!! http://www.brsx.co.uk/Networking/Articles/ISAServer/isaart.asp Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179553
  - 23
    - Moving shared folders Hi I've just added some additional space to my RAID array, and want to move some existing shared folders/files to better balance disk space usage. How can I do this without cutting off my users? Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179549
  - 24
    - hi hi, all friends....... Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179548
  - 25
    - Limit external email access Hi to all, I have a user that the owner wants restricted external mail to Send/Receive from only 2 specific external addresses (mother & sister). Does anyone know of a way to do this? I can filter the "Receive" with Sunbelt Messaging Ninja but I can't find anything on the "Send". SBS 2000 Exchange 2000 Thanks, Teddy Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179540
- Next
  - 1
    - Great Computing Surface for Road Warriors I'm sharing with you my secret of the ultimate comfort using a laptop. Working with a laptop desk helps cool my laptop and it's a lot more easier to handle. The painful experience of aching wrists, strained neck and back is a story of the past with ergonomic typing and viewing angles. I feel more at ease with the wide mousing area and raised screen. It only pops-up one question in my mind "Why didn't I buy it earlier? Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179539
  - 2
    - MI5 Persecution: Goldfish and Piranha 29/9/95 (5481) I just thought I'd let you know what I've been reading into the "Crusader" spam. I don't want to post this to usenet because somebody might try to tie that in to my posts in some way (someone already has, in uk.misc). First of all, I'd like to ask you to believe that my phone line in my apartment is bugged, and has been for many months. I have moved a couple of times this year, but "they" have faithfully been on my trail. Anyway, let's suppose my phone line is bugged. Now, when I talk to my internet service provider, it's over a SLIP (now PPP) connection. So if you wanted to bug what was said, either you'd listen in over the line and have to decode the transmission, or you could go to the service provider (more difficult) and ask them to decode a particular user's connection. OK, so now they're listening to everything I do over my SLIP/PPP connection. A couple of months ago I was messing around with faking articles through nntp servers and through anonymous remailers. I chose a nice inconspicuous newsgroup for my little tests, something no-one would ever notice. Guess which newsgroup I chose??? Yes, _FISH_!!! or rec.aquaria to be precise And guess what articles I tried to post? Goldfish, Koi carp and, you'll never guess... PIRANHA!!! The goldfish article and the Koi went through, but the piranha didn';t appear. by now you probably think this is too silly for words. But if you look in the papers a few eeks ago you will find John Major, Tonny Blair and Paddy Ashdown sharing a "private joke" about Major's sunburnt goldfish. We haven't had anything about Koi yet (they must be too dull ). Now, sent by someone who clearly knew what they were doing (they chose an Italian backbone site for their launch point) we have many thousands of messages to people all over the globe. All about piranha, and with the punchline "that gives you something to think about, doesn't it?" The way it works is that they're trying to kill two birds with one stone again. I don't knoiw why they should be against these national alliance people, but my interpretation is that they simultaneously try to discredit them, and stem the flow of Corley articles. ================================================================= In article <DFnE55.8tF.0.bloor@torfree.net>, Mike Corley <bu765@torfree.net> wrote: > >John J Smith (J.J.Smith@ftel.co.uk) wrote: > >: b) we do know who you are. Or are you someone else we don't know about? >: You are currently known as "That bloody persistant net nutter, who's >: expanding from uk.misc to the rest of the world". > >I think the point I was trying to make is that I could tell you things >from my personal life, at home and at work, which would add credibility >to my story. But if I named people, then (a) they would object violently >to being included in this shenanigans, and (b) I would be revealing my >identity which would be bad for my personal life and my work life. Of >course some people in my personal life, and at work, do know who "mike >corley" is. But at least we're observing a studied silence for now. :People can always be called "MR X", to save them being named. : :I'm completely perplexed as to what you mean by b). Revealing identity? :To who? And why would this be bad for any part of your life when you :already have a less than respectful reputation here? I'll just enumerate one or two things that I can still remember. Sometime around August/Sept 1992 I was living in a house in Oxford, and coming out of the house was physically attacked by someone - not punched, just grabbed by the coat, with some verbals thrown in for good measure. That was something the people at work shouldn't have known about... but soon after a couple of people were talking right in front of me about, "yeah, I heard he was attacked". Again, one I went for a walk in some woods outside Oxford. The next day, at work, someone said "you know he went to the forest yesterday". I don't want to put details on usenet of what happened because to do so would be to risk it happening again. If you put ideas in peoples' heads then you can find them reflecting back at you, and I don't want that. Also I can't remember that much from three years ago. From november 1992 I started taking "major tranquilizers" and just blotted the whole thing from my mind. >This is a feature time and time again, that the security services >(presumed) get at you by manipulating other people around you to get at >you. If you have their contacts, manpower, resources and technology then >you can do that sort of thing. :But why? Are you a threat? They pretend they "have" to get at me. After the first few weeks they had to find a reason to spy and abuse. You can't abuse someone unless they're in the wrong in some way. What I did "wrong" was to be ill. So it became "nutter" and "monster" and "he's going to attack us" coupled with "ha ha ha, he can't do anything to defend himself, it was so funny". That obvious contradiction within their propaganda is something they blithely ignore. :So, the Security Services never *actually* appear, and you assume that :they get someone else to do your dirty work. This is a bit of a big :logical step, here: That person doesn't like me, or is causing me trouble, :it's not because they've got problems themselves, it must be the "Security :Services". Yes. Because people are infallible. Or is there more? A single source is indicated because of the range of harassment. BBC + Capital + manipulated_public_at_large + set_up_situations, what does that add up to? Add in the technology to carry out the covert spying and the manpower and knowhow to follow you around for five years without being spotted. It smells very much of the security services, because there is no other organization (to my knowledge) which does the things I've seen these people do. Remember, they have deliberately chosen the softest of soft targets to victimize. They purposely chose a mentally ill person who they thought would be likely to kill himself anyway, so that they could get away with murder. And in all likelihood it will have started as a personal vendetta by someone. Who could that be? I don't know, but I can give you some clues. The first possibility (deep breath) is that someone from my college set me up. Six years ago I graduated from university in the UK, during the last year there I was steadily getting more and more ill. I know that I was talking in my sleep; although I don't know what I was saying, it got me a reputation, and if someone from my college talked afterwards to the "wrong" people then that could be the reason for all that has followed. I think that's the strongest contender for source. Directly beneath my room lived another bloke who frequently had his friends round late at night, after the time that I went to sleep. So they could have heard what I was saying in my sleep, and that could have got me the reputation for "talking to myself". What I don't know is why that should have rebounded a year after I left. You'd think it would have happened sooner; it's a bit odd to wait for a year and then start abuse. That leads me to question what in particular happened around May/June 1990 for them to start then. >What I don't know is how it looks from the other side, from the side of >the people who are being manipulated to get at me. On a couple of >occasions I have challenged people to tell the truth of the matter, but >they have alwats ducked the challenge. :Have you ever considered the possibility, that you have made a mistake, and :the people don't know what you are talking about? Yes. I am currently considering the possibility that some people around me know only what is being posted on Usenet, and have not been "contacted" by "them". But I _know_ that others have been contacted. :What words? Are they in common use? Could they be a catchphrase of a :popular comedian?: "Nice to see you, to see you nice"? In England the all-time No. 1 is "nutter". Easter this year, returning home from Clapham police station to report five years of harassment ("we're not saying it's happening and we're not saying it isn't happening"), another "not happening" incident of harassment when a cowardly little slut did her country proud by yelling "nutter, nutter, nutter" in the face of the hated enemy. What can you do about that? You can't yell abuse back in their face, because they know they're supported by their peers, by the media, by the murderers in the security forces. You can't put them down when the fascist establishment is on their side. You can't hit them, because they would deny their abuse, they would deny knowing anything, and bring charges against the "nutter" who attacked them "at random". >You know, you're >passing saomeone, they're hardly going to construct an argument for your >benefit, so they work a word of abuse into the conversation which they >can giggle at. :Abuse such as what? We're all adults here, we can take it. Is this abuse :aimed at you? How can you tell it is? I think I've said already what the words are. Thing is, at any given time the language is consistent. In January everyone's calling you X, then a few weeks later people stop calling you X and start calling you Y. You can tell it's aimed at me, because when people repeatedly say the same words are you walk past, then laugh, you would have to be hard of understanding not to recognize it. >Or they repeat something that's been said somewhere else... the PE thing >being a case in point. PE says it, then other people pick up the refrain. :Remind me who PE is again. PE = "Private Eye" >: >To give you an example, which I mentioned in another posting. In around >: >October 1992, Private Eye ran a cover with the heading "Major's support >: >lowest ever", with John calling to Norma on the cover "come back, Norma". >: >Only one obvious interpretation to that, isn';;t there? I certainly >: >thought so when I saw that cover. Wrongo!! Down the pub with people from work >: >Simon says to phil, "don';t you think it's wrong then?" phil says, "well >: >private eye are usuallyright"..."hislop strikes again.. > >: Erm. Mike? Heeeelllllooo? What are you on about. What is the other >: interpretation then? Norma having an affair? Seems a bit wrong, with the >: heading "Majors support Lowest ever"... > >No, this one isn't obvious , it really does need to be explained. I >certainly didn't understand it when I first saw it. You see, the kernel >of vitriol is in the words "come back". At the time, the themes of >abuse were centred around interpretations of those two words (stretch your >mind a little bit, I don't have to spell it out for you, surely). :You did in your mail item. : :You seem to be scouting about something called a "Double Entendre". The :inference being "Come" = Ejaculation, "Back" = Anus (not the first part :of the body I would have went for, I would have foolishly gone for "Back", :silly old me). : :You see to have picked a sodomy double entendre out of a Private Eye :headline. They are everywhere. The English language has much double :meaning in it, and if you put your mind to it, you could pull a double :entendre out of a randomly chosen page of the bible. So what? >The point is that when Simon pointed it out to Phil, he did recognise >what it meant after a moment's thought... and so did I... and so did the >people who repeated it several times later... so however murky it may >seem to you, that is the meaning they intended it to have... I still don't really know if the meaning was intended when that headline was written, or if it was simply "found" after the fact. The reason I think it might be the former is that I got quite a lot of abuse along the lines of "sound-alike" or "double-entendre" at work, in particularly from Steve. So "double" inevitably came to mean split-personality, "two people in one"; "back" inevitably came to mean "backside", "come" inevitably meant you-know- what, "split" (well, we'd better split now) again you can guess, "bent" (of a similar bent), the list goes on forever. These aren't "nice" double- entendres intended for comedy, they're nasty words to humiliate and cause pain. If I could turn the clock back three years then I would sue my former employers for harassment and I would almost certainly win. I had to take pills after a year of Oxford, so they wouldn't be able to lie their way out of it. Actually, I could still take them to court - the main obstacle being that three years after the fact is a bit late and much of what happened, the details that would be necessary for a case to go to court, has just been obliterated by time. : Smid ============================================== From: flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk (Peter Kr|ger) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,alt.conspiracy,uk.media,uk.legal Subject: Re: Mike Corley - a (helpful) suggestion Date: Mon Oct 2 05:43:42 1995 In article <812551172snz@objmedia.demon.co.uk>, Snail <snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk> says: >Indeed, I feel that my Usenet access is censored simply because I don't want >to download groups he is partaking in, because of his behaviour. > >I wasn't that bothered, but I am starting to get seriously pissed off >with him. Which takes a lot. Hi Snail This person Corley seems quite interesting for three reasons. I put the following at the end of a post in another thread just to see if he was reading any other threads in uk.media. It seems he is probably not. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Heres an interesting little story from back in the early days of CCD technology. There was this miniature camera which was designed to fit behind the infrared receiver lens of the remote control system (just beside the IR sensor itself) the camera clocked out the data in 256 lines of 256 pixels from a Fairchild chip and fed it out, a line at a time, into the VBI within the TV set itself. The signal could be picked up remotely from a standard license detector van from where it was stripped out of the surrounding RF signal and relayed back to the TV station where it was displayed as a slowscan monochrome image in a corner of the news readers monitor. 5481 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179538
  - 3
    - MI5 Persecution: Watch Out, Forger About 27/9/95 (3967) From: ray@ultimate-tech.com (Ray Dunn) Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british Subject: Re: An apology from Mike Corley Date: Wed Sep 27 14:20:36 1995 In referenced article, David Wooding says... >Well, Mike Corley might or might not have written the apologies, but I >think not. I thought the following line both witty and imaginative. > >>>It was the razor blades stuffed down between the keys that told me. Corley himself denies posting this "apology", but I'm impressed if it is a forgery. Here's the header of my received email. It looks very genuine except for the fact that postings to newsgroups are directed through demon's mail to news gateway, which is strange. Also the message id is <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net> which seems to be in a different format from previous Corley postings, e.g. <DFJJB3.6Ft.0.bloor@torfree.net The mail seems to have been received directly from mail.torfree.net. One way of telling for sure would be if anyone on the recipient list contacted torfree, but did not publish any complaints on the newsgroups - he would not have had access to their address in that case. >Received: from SpoolDir by ULTIMATE (Mercury 1.20); 26 Sep 95 12:00:14 +0500 >Return-path: <bu765@torfree.net> >Received: from mail.torfree.net by smtp.ultimate-tech.com (Mercury 1.20); > 26 Sep 95 12:00:04 +0500 >Received: from bloor.torfree.net ([199.71.188.18]) by mail.torfree.net > (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.6; 16-jun-94) > via sendmail with smtp id <m0sxbyy-000LXSC@mail.torfree.net> > for <ray@ultimate-tech.com>; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:31 EDT >Received: from torfree.net by bloor.torfree.net with smtp > (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0sxbx2-000JEeC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 11:29 EDT >Message-Id: <m0sxbx2-000JEeC@bloor.torfree.net> >Apparently-To: bu765@torfree.net, snail@objmedia.demon.co.uk, > ray@ultimate-tech.com, Frank@acclaim.demon.co.uk, > p.marshall@axion.bt.co.uk, me93jrb@brunel.ac.uk, > mikeh@mordor.com, > michael@everyman.demon.co.uk, tim@xara.co.uk, > Alan.Holmes@brunel.ac.uk, uk.misc@news.demon.co.uk, > uk-misc@news.demon.co.uk, uk-media@news.demon.co.uk, > uk.media@news.demon.co.uk, uk.legal@news.demon.co.uk, > uk-legal@news.demon.co.uk, alt-conspiracy@news.demon.co.uk, > alt.conspiracy@news.demon.co.uk, > soc.culture.british@news.demon.co.uk, > soc-culture-british@news.demon.co.uk, > soc-culture-canada@news.demon.co.uk, > soc.culture.canada@news.demon.co.uk >Newsgroups: uk.misc, uk.media, soc.culture.british, soc.culture.canada, uk.legal, alt.conspiracy >From: bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) >Subject: Oops! Sorry! >Organization: Toronto Free-Net >X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] >Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1995 01:23:45 GMT >Lines: 27 >X-PMFLAGS: 33554560 -- Ray Dunn (opinions are my own) | Phone: (514) 938 9050 Montreal | Phax : (514) 938 5225 ray@ultimate-tech.com | Home : (514) 630 3749 3967 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179537
  - 4
    - MI5 Persecution: Question and Answer 27/9/95 (2453) In article <DFGxnF.Cr8.0.bloor@torfree.net> bu765@torfree.net "Mike Corley" writes: >>> ##: There were also a few other things said at the trial >>> ##: relating to this which I won't repeat here; it was in the papers >>> ##: at the time anyway. This quote and others said by and about this >>> ##: witness were repeating things that had been said by and about >>> ##: me at around that time. When, where and by whom ? Let's have some details that can be checked. I'm not going to repeat them. They're hurtful to me because they contained abuse that was directed against me by someone else at the time and which got picked up and thrown again in the trial. It is a matter of record but I won't repeat it here. >>> PM: >Who's character is being assassinated? It isn't clear from the post. >>> PM: >Are we talking about Grenville Janner? I thought he was a spook >>> PM: >himself? He's certainly able to hold his own on the issue you cite. >>> ##: Mine, mainly. The reason for putting that episode at the top >>> ##: of the posting is that they tried to kill two birds with one stone >>> ##: at the Beck trial - they simultaneously put words into the mouth >>> ##: of their invented "witness" to smear Janner, and repeated exactly, >>> ##: word-for-word, stuff which had been said by and about me. Why would "they" wish to assassinate your character? Well, let's put it this way - just because this is the first time it's happened in this way, from these people, on this scale, doesn't mean that it hasn't happened before, on a lesser scale. At university there were people who quite overtly hated me and would have wished something nasty to happen to me. Because of where I went making the wrong sort of enemies is pretty deadly. "They" would wish to assassinate my character because it had all been done before, and because they knew I would not be able to react in any other way than I'd reacted previously. >>> ##: They invaded my home with their bugs, they repeated what I >>> ##: was saying in the privacy of my home, and they laughed that it >>> ##: was "so funny", that I was impotent and could not even communicate >>> ##: what was going on. Who did this? Our friends on BBC television, >>> ##: our friends in ITN, last but not least our friends in Capital >>> ##: Radio in London and on Radio 1. Please give details of when, where and by whom these comments were made, so that they can be checked. This was four, five years ago... sorry, I don't remember. I can remember individual incidents, words which were repeated by different people at different times in different locations. Around the end of 1992 Private Eye rtan a front-cover with John and Norma Major, with the title "Major's support lowest ever" and John saying to Norma "Come back norma" on the front cover. What can you read in to that? Not a lot, seems like standard fare for PE. The first time I saw it I was in the pub with some people from work. One was expressing doubts to the other (let's call the first one Simon, shall we? and the second one Phil?) about whether what was going on was right. Phil's answer was that if Private Eye was doing it then it must be ok, "they're usually right". A few days later, again near work, there were some students laughing in the street, "Were you COMING BACK later? But I thought you said you were COMING BACK ha ha ha?" Play on words, you see. Not very nice, either. I had start medication soon afterwards. Clever people, these chaps who think up PE titles. Just slightly lacking in any sense of morality. >>> ##: How did they do this? I'll give you an example. About a year ago, >>> ##: I was listening to Chris Tarrant (Capital Radio DJ among other >>> ##: pursuits) on his radio morning show, when he said, talking about >>> ##: someone he didn't identify, "you know this bloke? he says we're >>> ##: trying to kill him. We should be done for attempted manslaughter" >>> ##: which mirrored something I had said a day or two before. >>> ##: Now that got broadcast to the whole of London - if any recordings >>> ##: are kept of the shows then it'll be there. What was the date of the broadcast ? Out of 2 million plus listeners, why should you be the only one that Tarrant was allegedly referring to ? Sometyime in spring 1994. I can't remember the date, I heard the broadcast in the car - I was going into the office from London that day and just happened to snap on the radio, and hey presto! Mr Tarrant gives us the benefit of his excellent understanding. >>> ##: That's exactly what we did. We went to a competent, professional >>> ##: detective agency in London, paid them over 400 quid to debug our house. >>> ##: They found nothing. What was the name of the detective agency and their address ? I don't see why I should tell you that, but they're in Yellow Pages; they're a well-established outfit. >>> PM: >What? Spend a quarter mil. a year to amuse themselves? And why not >>> PM: >change every now and again? Why keep watching you? (Unless you _are_ >>> PM: >doing something, and I don't think you are, though you may have some >>> PM: >deep, dark secret in your past.) >>> >>> ##: See the above. Is there a deep dark secret in your past ? Apart from "it's all happened before in a different way", no. >>> ##: In a couple of cases people have even known my name - when I was in >>> ##: London over Easter somebody (no idea who they were, just some bloke with >>> ##: his girlfriend) called me by name - quite clearly, and my name is >>> ##: distinctive. Is your name truly Mike Corley, or are you using it as an alias ? It's an alias. I'm not English by ethnic origin. If someone manages to pronounce my name as well as that guy did then they must have been really trying. >>> ##: There's a little story behind this. First of all, in 1992 I worked >>> ##: for a company where the people made clear they knew what was going on, >>> ##: first of all directly (the very first evening I was there I went out to >>> ##: the pub with them and the Technical Director said to another guy, >>> ##: "is this the bloke who's been on TV?" "yeah, I think so") Have you appeared, or been reported by name on TV ? When, where and by whom ? No. Never. Not directly. >>> ##: Also, in summer 1992 I went on a trip abroad to Europe by coach, What was the name of the coach company and your date of departure ? It was a national express coach. At dover we boarded a ferry for Holland somewhere. The company that organized the trip went out of business some time ago, so they won't have records of passengers - so we can't get any corroboration from anyone else that way. We tried all that last summer, ran into a brick wall. The other thing is in summer 1992 I was visibly ill, so other people in the party might remember that more than anyone getting at me on the coach trip. >>> ##: >>Yes, this gets me. I think the answer is that I was set up by >>> ##: >>someone. I was very aware when this started back in 1990 that I >>> ##: >>was being painted as a "threat" to which people had to "react" Why were you being painted as a "threat"; is this related to a "deep,dark, secret" ? Aaaarrrrgh. I think I should make clear that that's their created justification rather than the real reason. They started harassing first and then came up with the reasons for it. >>> >>> ##: I think I know who set me up. Who ? Someone who knew me some time ago. Someone who would have been able to talk this little campaign into existence. >>> ##: The bloke can't even control his own mind without medicine. Is this true ? What is the medication and dosage ? Yes, I'm afraid so. Sulpiride, 200mg a day. It's designed to stop people coming up with the sort of ideas you've heard here for the last few weeks. Give him a higher dose!! In the long term it causes tardive dyskinesia, tardive dementia and general nasty stuff to your brain. So it's three years of sulpiride talking to you here. >-- >john heelan 2453 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179536
  - 5
    - MI5 Persecution: Options 21/9/95 (939) From: john heelan <john@lorca.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: uk.misc,alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.journalism Subject: Re: CENSORHSIP IS IMMORAL, UNJUST AND WRONG Date: Thu, 21 Sep 95 19:17:30 GMT Organization: (Private) Lines: 65 Message-ID: <811711050snz@lorca.demon.co.uk> References: <DF8DMu.Dqu.0.bloor@torfree.net> <43qpdh$iki@news3.digex.net> Reply-To: john@lorca.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: lorca.demon.co.uk X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.29 You have to admit that Mike is persistent and obviously feels deeply that he is being hounded by the "Security Services" and there is a Conspiracy out to get him personally. If that is true, then we should be concerned; if he is just paranoid, then we should empathise with his sickness. What we should not do is to invite censorship....that just could be implicitly joining in the putative Conspiracy. Let's look at Mike's potential options (and the alleged responses he has received): > 1. Complain to the Police: (their alleged response > "Don't be silly, Sir"; Mike's rationale "They are part > of the Conspiracy") > I don't think the police as an organisation are part of it. They're certainly not the source. The officer I spoke to at Easter clearly didn't know anything about it. And that was at my local police station in London - if anyone in the police knew you would think the people at your local cop shop would. A couple of years ago I had to go into the station after a motoring infraction, the guy I spoke to then said something about "brain like a computer sir" which my suspicions latched on to - (I'm alleged to be a programmer as some people reading this know) - but as per the usual "can';t prove nuthin" and you ask yourself if you're just being stupid suspecting on the basis of a straw > 2. Complain to a Member of Parliament (Mike's rationale: "Can't > because they are part of the Conspiracy") > I could do that actually. But he would probably tell me to go see the police, for which see above. > 3. Make it visible through the UK Press. (Mike's rationale: > "Can't because they are part of the Conspiracy") > They are actually. There's a difference though in the way journalists react to this stuff when they're "got to" by the security service. This is completely giving the game away, but the trouble originally started with my reading into stuff that was being written by Times columnists, in particular our antagonistic friend Mr Levin. But you see that some journalists are taking part in the conspiracy and others are only doing it because their puppet masters have been feeding them information which they can't allow themselves to ignore. The security services have their hooks into the UK media, this case shows that very explicitly. You also see how things get gradualkly wqorse with a particular journalist; a couple of weeks ago Peter Tory in the Express was writing about "nerds seeking their revenge on him through the Net", guess what that was about. > 4. Complain to the UK Security Services. (Mike's rationale: "Can't > because they ARE the Cnspiracy") > Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? If the fascist Gestapo bastards plot to see you dead then who's going to deal with it? Not the security services, that's for sure. > 5. Make it visible through Internet: (Mike has done this > suvccessfully; but any gainsayers are "part of the Conspiracy". > I don;t think you';re part of the consipracy if you refuse to believe or email the postmaster. Those who do know are keeping their silence. > 6. Complain to the Canadian National and State Governments. (Has > Mike done this yet ?) > No. It's a UK problem so that's where it should be dealt with. The perpetrators are UK residents, are unidentified, and would be difficult to deal with through the Canadian courts. Ditto the police in Canada, ditto the press - it isn't their problem, it's caused by UK people against someone from the UK. Of course Canadian laws are being broken relating to harassment and "stalking" which do not exist in the UK, but the Canadian police do not have a very good record of enforcing those laws anyway. > 7. Complain to the Canadian Security Services (Has Mike done this > yet ?) > > 8. Complain to the Canadian Press. (Has Mike done this yet ?) > I think if they didn't knoiw, they'd just think you were having delusions; and if they did, then they would side with the people with the power, the smiling English people with their knives out. Remember, nobody uis going to side with the person who has less power in a copfrontation. The team over here in Canada have the resources of their organization behind them, other broadcasters etc in the UK would have influence with their counterparts in Canada; after all, this was once a British colony, there is still a feeling of "looking up to" the UK among many Canadians, so if a team of security services arrives from the UK with apparently limitless resources to pursue their target, people over here will forget anything they ever knew about basic human rights and go along with what they are told to do and how they are told to behave. > 9. Complain to non-UK TV Watchdogs (Does Canada have an "Oprah > Winfrey ? Has Mike done this yet ?) > > 10. Complain to the EC Court of Human Rights. (Has Mike done > this yet ?) > > ........or...are 6,7,8,9,10 also all part of > the Conspiracy ? > > > > -- > john heelan 939 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179535
  - 6
    - Email collected by POP connector but not being delivered Hi all, I have a customer whose POP3 connector is picking up the email from a global POP3 mailbox, collects the messages but none of it is being delivered to the users' mailboxes. It has been working fine for years up until this morning. I have upped the logging to max and it appears to collect the messages ok but I have no idea where they are going. Obviously this is quite a problem as it's all going down a black hole effectively. Please see the event viewer entries below. Would really appreciated any help. Thanks, Andy Event viewer messages: The POP3 agent is going to open the mailbox <postmaster@domainname.co.uk> on host <pop.clara.net> with the password <{ Secret Password }>. The authentication method is: Clear Text Password The delivery service is logging as a POP3 client on port 110 The POP3 host <pop.clara.net [80.168.70.82]> answered our connection with <+OK CPOP vCPOP_2_3_1 on minos.uk.clara.net Ready for Action> We have been granted access to <pop.clara.net [80.168.70.82]> logging as <postmaster@domainname.co.uk> There are 11 message(s) with a total of 4905557 byte(s) A message was downloaded from the POP3 server. The message ID is: MSG06072007-183052-1.MMD (11 of the same messages) The POP3 session transcript was: <G>: +OK CPOP vCPOP_2_3_1 on minos.uk.clara.net Ready for Action <C>: USER postmaster@domainname.co.uk <S>: +OK <C>: PASS <secret password> <S>: +OK <C>: STAT <S>: +OK 11 4905557 <C> { Downloaded and deleted messages if neccessary. } <C>: QUIT <S>: +OK Take it EZ The shared POP3 accounts have been checked for incoming messages Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179531
  - 7
    - Veritas backup At a client I have a SBS 2000 running where I want to backup both files and Exchange to a USB-harddrive. FOr a very long time backup from Veritas has been running like a dream, but for some reason it stopped a couple of weeks ago. I am able to do the full backup of the Exchange part and it will succeed and finish to verify the backup. However, this is not the case with the file share they are having - each time a backup is made from this the server will crash (i.e. all icons dissapear and the logon screen disappearr) and there is only the power swithc left to rescue us - ane I don't belive this has been the intention from MS or Veritas :-) Any experiences like this or any ideas on where to start looking to get my client start smiling again :-) Peter Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179527
  - 8
    - Custom Software Development iTechArt Group - Custom Software Development and Offshore outsourcing Company http://www.itechart.com/ Offshore custom software development company iTechArt - Web site and Content Management Solutions development, CMS consulting: Ektron, Drupal and DotNetNuke iTechArt Group provides high quality custom software development services and offshore software development. On December 2006, iTechArt Group became an authorized Microsoft Certified Partner. This means that our company has been recognized by Microsoft for our vast expertise and authorized to custom software development; provide IT service consulting and custom business solutions. Custom Software Development and Offshore outsourcing Company iTechArt has worked together since 2003 to design build and deliver .NET Web Content Management software solutions that help clients meet their strategic objectives. We are agile oriented development partner able to consistently deliver solid results. iTechArt software development team assemblies specialists in the development of custom software applications and offshore software outsourcing services. Working concepts of our company are based on proven approaches and international standards used for custom software development such as Capability Maturity Model Integration for Software Engineering (CMMI- SW). In the same breath we have our own standpoint on software development process management which is fully effective and comprehensible for our clients. iTechArt offers software development in the next main directions: 1. Custom Software Development (Offshore outsourcing for worldwide based software development companies.) 2. Software Development for Digital Signage (Media content development and remote displays / information kiosks Web-based software application management.) 3. Web Site Development (E-commerce solutions, CMS/DotNetNuke/Ektron/ Drupal, Web 2.0/PHP/MySQL/AJAX, Flash/Action script/Flex and many more.) 4. Offshore Development Center (Dedicated development team of software developers. Our offshore development centers operate as an extension to clients' existing software engineering business.) Contact iTechArt ( http://www.itechart.com/ )about custom software development, end-to-end software solutions, outsourcing software development, custom DotNetNuke module development, DotNetNuke consulting, dotnetnuke hosting, first class Java and .Net developers, software application design, software testing, Quality Assurance, functionality testing and defect analysis, performance and stress testing, usability testing, Microsoft Media Services and Adobe Media Flash Server solutions, digital signage solutions and custom development, Ektron CMS400.NET developers, CMS, .NET Web Content Management software solutions Web: http://www.itechart.com/ http://www.itechart.com/Pages/ProductsServices/HowWeWork.aspx http://www.itechart.com/Pages/ProductsServices/BusinessModels.aspx http://www.itechart.com/Pages/ProductsServices/CustomSoftwareDevelopment.aspx http://www.itechart.com/Pages/ProductsServices/DotNetNukeModuleDevelopment.aspx Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179525
  - 9
    - SBS 2000 transition to standard server Hi. One of the sites that I look after is currently running SBS 2000 but due to the company restructure and site locations I have started to rebuild the network into a single domain structure. This is the problem. I am going to purchase a new server with 2003 R2 standard edition and run all the usual services from it. It will be part of the new domain, location.groupname.local but I want the old SBS server to also join the domain to be the email, print and archive server as well as a second DC. Now I know I can buy a transition pack that will upgrade to SBS 2003 R2 but can i get a pack that will upgrade to 2003 R2 standard plus does it still retain Exchange do I loose it? Also if I can what are the pit falls? Thanks for your time. Jason Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179521
  - 10
    - URLScan has entries I can't understand Hello, all. This SBS2000 system has about 15 users, and the URLSCAN.yymmdd.LOG file is usually empty or contains obvious entries. However, I've noticed lately some regular entries that I can't account for. Two workstations are involved. Every day, at 2:15 AM, one client's inside IP address is listed as the source for these in the URLSCAN log: Raw URL='/COMPANY.bat' Raw URL='/COMPANY.cmd' Raw URL='/COMPANY.exe' Raw URL='/COMPANY.com' Raw URL='/COMPANY.bat' Raw URL='/COMPANY.cmd' Raw URL='/COMPANY.exe' Raw URL='/COMPANY.com' Raw URL='/CLIENT%20FILES.bat' Raw URL='/CLIENT%20FILES.cmd' Raw URL='/CLIENT%20FILES.exe' Raw URL='/CLIENT%20FILES.com' The other workstation is listed as the source for these, always at 2:30 AM: Raw URL='/Client%20Files.bat' Raw URL='/Client%20Files.cmd' Raw URL='/Client%20Files.exe' Raw URL='/Client%20Files.com' There is a mapped drive from every workstation to a share on the SBS machine called "\\servername\Client Files", and COMPANY is a sharename on the SBS that may be mapped on the workstation that is issuing those commands. I certainly don't know what the BAT CMD EXE COM series means except it looks like it's looking for something to run. There's no untoward behavior on the network or any of the workstations (including these), so I suspect this is something benign. Can anyone explain where this is coming from? Thanks. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179519
  - 11
    - forex business You can earn upto $250 per day from currency business. for more details visit http://affiliates-online.blogspot.com Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179512
  - 12
    - forex business You can earn upto $250 per day from currency business. for more details visit http://affiliates-online.blogspot.com Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179511
  - 13
    - How do I remove a contact? Hi all, I created a contact on the server with an email address of advice@domainname.com but now I need to give it to a user instead but I can't as it already exists in the domain. How do I delete it so I can reassign it to a user? I've tried looking but can't find it anywhere. Thanks in advance, Andy. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179510
  - 14
    - DHCP I am having problems with clients trying to join the domain. When they try to join they are showing little or no connectivity on their network connections. XP clients with sp 2. When I go to the server I show a blue exclamation mark on the server in the DHCP scope. When I look at the address leases I only show ten active leases however when I right click on the server and click on the statistics it shows 202 of 202 leases taken and 100% taken. I am stumped. Something is not releasing the leases. All VPN clients can connect to the server no problem. Are the VPN connections not releasing? -- Mark Hickinbotham Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179508
  - 15
    - Mailbox sharing / generic mailbox question Hi there, My client has a pop box called advice@domainname.com. This is pulled down and routed to an individual users mailbox via the POP connector. When this user is on holiday other users have to log on as this user to check for any mail coming to the advice mailbox. How do I give other users access to their mailbox? I have looked in the user account properties Exchange tabs but can't find the same options as available in SBS 2003. A better alternative long term would be to create a generic user called advice, have the email routed there and then give the other users permission to open that mailbox as well, but I need to know how to do the permission bit first I guess. Any help appreciated, Thanks, Andy. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179505
  - 16
    - "User" cannot see newly created partitions Ran Disk Management "remotely" and sliced up the drive. created a 90 gig D: and a 10 gig P: logged off and on "remotely" and Administrator can see C: D: P: and F: (cdrom) logged in "remotely" as a User and cannot see D: and P: thanks for any pointers. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179496
  - 17
    - New Orleans Conference a Huge Success I've just arrived home from Jeff Middleton's IT Pro 2007 Conference in New Orleans and I just wanted to let everyone know that it was a huge success...from the key note...to the various panel discussions, the deep dive sessions, Microsoft's presentation on Cougar, the vendors and of course New Orleans, Bourbon St. and last nights cruise on the Mississippi. There was overwhelming indications from those present that they would like to see this happen again next year and Jeff seemed to indicate he'd put efforts in that direction. And I know we all came home with lots to think about. It was nice to put a face to some of you from the NG's here and unfortunate that many more of you did not make it. Remember that Wayne Small, SBS - MVP and founder of SBSFAQ.com is hosting a seminar in Sydney Austrailia over Thanksgiving...he has a great line up and activities planned... And start planning now to join us for Jeff's IT PRO 2008 Conference (or whatever it winds up being called). Meantime, Jeff and others are continuing the conference aboard a cruise ship bound for Mexico. Bon Voyage. I'll be happy to answer any questions anyone might have about this conference. -- Cris Hanna [SBS-MVP] ------------------------------ Please do not contact me directly, only respond in the Newsgroups MVPs do not work for Microsoft ------------------------------ Send via Windows Mail on Vista Ultimate connected to SBS 2003 R2 Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179495
  - 18
    - <<Survey: SBS WW Community Survey 2007: >> Survey: SBS WW Community Survey 2007: http://connect.microsoft.com/SBSCommunity/Survey/Survey.aspx?SurveyID=3232 It's that time of year when Susan comes and says... guys I know you are busy (and hopefully some are like me getting ready for travel today or tomorrow for New Orleans) but getting feedback is important to me as well as it should be to you. So please, take some time to give feedback. And thank you for being here. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179483
  - 19
    - Moving Old Company Data Hi All, I want to move data from The Company Drive which has not been accessed since 31 December 2005( for example) to a external drive and reduce the data content. How can i do this. If anyone can help me i would greatly appriciate. I like to move the data and keep the same folder structure too. Thank You Nalz Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179481
  - 20
    - Email Archiving Tools Naxian Digital Management Solutions offers a high functionality email archiving and compliance solution ideally suited to the smaller user. With licencing based closely on MS SBS Naxian Message Tracker is the ideal solution for those who need email archiving, the ability to track correspondence, compliance and a tool that adds value to data. For more info please feel free to visit www.naxian.co.za or drop me an email. Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179480
  - 21
    - Old user, old computer, new combination yields no rights I've got a small existing domain based on an SBS computer. There are 2 client machines running Win XP that see most of the use on this domain. (Well call them A and B.) One of my users has exclusively used machine A for several years now. This week I had her log in on machine B to get her set up, since A will soon be retired. Machine B is newer than A, but still nearly a year old and has been on the domain the entire time. She has no problem logging in on B, but once there, she appears to have no permissions, even to her own desktop and My Documents folder. For example, if she right-clicks the desktop and selects "New > Text Document" she gets an error dialog reading "Unable to create the file New Text Document.txt. Access is denied." She's set up with normal Domain User permissions (I generally don't use local permissions) and has no problem on the old machine (A). Other users on machine B aren't having problems. Am I missing something obvious in getting her set up on this other machine? Thanks, Andy Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179479
  - 22
    - SBS 2003 transition pack info needed Hello, We have a 70 user SBS2003 server and we want to get to 100 users. Is using the Transition pack the best approach? -- Thanks, Dan Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179475
  - 23
    - PROCESSOR RUNNING AT 100% Hi The processor is running at 100% all the time - SBS2000 Tried booting the server in 'safe' mode and the problem dissapeared I then re-booted in normal mode and went through all the services turning off each and checking for the processor to function normally - thought I'd found it when I turned off terminal services as the processor apperaed to start running at normal speed. When I looked in the Admin Console - Server Status - Health Monitor Alerts: I was seeing the following 2 messages still:- Severity Data Collector Alert Critical Network Interface WMI Status 2147749889 So I re-booted again but the problem with the processor running at 100% returned! Messages in Admin Console - Server Status - Health Monitor Alerts: are now different and as follows:- Severity Data Collector Threshold Alert Network Interface Bytes total/sec >500000 Network Interface Critical Condition WMI Status 2147749889 Network Interface Error code (from WMI) Network Interface Critical Condition WMI Status 2147749889 What is this? Have I got a dodgy network card possibly - or is it something else that is causing this? Any assistance would be greatly apprecieted. John Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179472
  - 24
    - Installing 2nd processor in SBS 2000 machine... We currently have a Dell SBS 2000 server running Exchange and SQL Server. We have purchased and are installing a 2nd processor into this machine. My question is this... Some PC Utilities and even SQL server already show the server as having two processors (right-click and select properties on the appropriate server group in SQL server enterprise manager and it shows number of processors = 2) when it does indeed only have ONE processor installed. I know for SQL server that this is definately by design. However, what will happen when it actually does have two processors??? Am I going to have to make some configuration changes to SQL server configuration etc.. (and whatever else) so that it will properly use two physical processors?? Help! Thanks, Brad Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179469
  - 25
    - SBS 2000 VPN Hi, I have a working VPN with the server at office (manage to set it up last couple of weeks withMerv Porter [SBS-MVP] ). Now I can login to it via my home pc. I tried to set another two clients, but they did get the error 800. Could anyone gide me how to sort this out Please. Thanks Ruwee Tag: audit logins. Tag: 179466

I would like to start an audit trail of who has logged in/out on the network
and when so that I can access the trail from time to time.

Can that that be done?

Thanks!
Joe.

Top

Re: audit logins. by Kevin

Kevin
Mon Jun 25 19:20:02 CDT 2007

Lazy man's way to track user logon/logoff
http://msmvps.com/blogs/kwsupport/archive/2005/02/24/36942.aspx

--
Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]
"The days