FAQ 7 Part E: Staying Safe

As FAQ 12 Section: Viruses mentions, I will use the more popular definition of viruses which includes all Torjan horses and logic bombs, rather than the technical and more precise definition which is more limited.

Q: Why do you advise that I don't run programs given out by strangers?

Many strangers in the past have passed out viruses, and unfortunately some people ran them and lost the contents of their hard drive.

Q: But what if I don't think it has a virus?

Chances are, any given program will not be a virus. However, if you have the habit of running mystery programs then you have a good chance of getting a virus eventually. Several months ago I gave this warning, and a few people did not believe me. A few weeks later someone posted a virus on a website claiming it could do magical things for you. Obviously, it was a virus, and several people lost the contents of their hard drive because of this.

As an analogy, if you do not wear your seatbelt once, you probably will not get injured as a result. Does this necessarily mean you shouldn't wear your seatbelt and think that it is safe to ride without one? If you don't believe so, then don't believe that just because one mystery program doesn't have a virus that the next one won't. In fact, if you don't wear your seat belt your entire life you might never get hurt as a result, but also that does not mean you should not wear your seat belt.

Of course, seeing that I have I have a hard enough time convincing a few children to wear their seatbelts, I'm not going to try to convince you of anything. So, I ask only that you draw your own conclusions.

There have been several websites in the past that were either scams or something worse. This section details a few of these cases.

Q: Is the site http://##.###.to/### worth using?

The site you refer to may very well be a scam. Several other sites specifically using the .to extension have pretended to offer news service (for example http://www.news-service.to/). However, they have all proven to be malicious scams, and I would not be surprised if this site was set up by the exact same people as before. For this reason I suggest you never give any information to strangers (particuarly ones that have no credentials like these), as this site neither has any credentials or any proof that they even exist. Notice that they use a third-party verification system that anyone like you or I could set up for free. Also notice that they provide no information or credentials for their "business". Also, several characteristics of this site are identical to earlier scam sites. There is also no reason to use them when there are better alternatives anyways.

On the other hand, services like Newscene or Supernews provide extensive credentials and contacts. They also have publicly available FAQs and instructions, whereas the scam site tells you to "wait until after you've signed up" to take care of the details. Even the smallest amateur news services like Barditch provide such information. For this reason even if this were a perfectly legitimate site there is no reason to use it when you can try better alternatives like Newscene.

Q: I don't trust message the board at http://##.###.##/###. What do you think?
(This question was asked at a p-style board)

I don't think any board is to be trusted. If information is accurate and you can verify it then use it. If it is inaccurate or cannot be verified then let it collect dust until it becomes otherwise. The information at the OCM board can be verified to be accurate, and anything or anyone there that is strictly not to be trusted can be found in greater abundance in other boards like this one.

If you have any reason to be suspicious about a board itself, then if you post do so anonymously.

Q: This person is offering to sell me videos by mail. He's sent me a list of videos that he has and uses a PO box. What do you think?

There is no indication you have that this total stranger has any videos at all. A 10 year old kid could easily make up a fake list of videos.

However, let us assume that he somehow does have these videos. If you send this person money, there is absolutely no reason why he would send you anything in return. Even if he really had the videos, why would he send them to you if they are so valuable and he already has all your money? In addition, why break the law any more than they have to when they can make just as much money and even save themselves the cost of sending you the video?

Anyone can own a PO box, and authorities have been known to use them as well as such shady individuals.

Also note that even if everything were legitimate, in some countries customs can sieze anything that crosses international lines even if what is being transferred is normally legal. If this does not apply to you, ignore.

Q: Why don't many news servers like Newscene censor groups?

The main reason servers like Newscene are protected by the law in this fashion is because what is illegal in one country can be perfectly legal in another.

For example, while talking about politics might be illegal in some countries, it doesn't mean Newscene has to censor such posts because talking about politics is legal in other countries.

Besides, if Newscene censored everything that was illegal in some country, it would have to censor everything (in some countries it is illegal to go on the internet).

One person once asked me a legal question about what happens when a message board has information on something that is legal in some countries but not others.

Q: A server is responsible for the content of their domain? Is not suggesting a link to others(when it may very well be illegal in their country) counselling the commision of a crime?

One example I've given in the past is that in some countries it is illegal to publically promote Christianity (this is an actual example in some atheistic countries). However, you are probably aware that a webpage in Japan or South Korea could make a perfectly legal webpage about Christianity. Counselling visitors to such a website about Christianity would not be illegal on the part of the webmaster since in Japan and Korea it is not against the law to talk about Christianity. Japan and Korea also do not force their citizens to obey the laws of every country in the world.

Any criminal act would be on the part of the person who belongs to the particular country where discussion of Christianity is illegal, if applicable.

Keep in mind that in several countries it is perfectly legal to write books on how to make bombs, how to commit and get away with murder, and how to commit terrorist acts (all three are actual examples).

After my first answer, the person said nothing more to me for a day (though he did try to talk with several others). However, the next day, the person asks another question, which implied that my first example was somehow more than just an example.

...after analyzing your replies, I thought to ask you if you have some sort of 'bias' against religion(or Christians)as I did not mention that I could be one or not.. or did you assume that anyone who might be opposed to this board would have to be one...or other?

I have no bias for or against any religion in particular, and anything you may interpret as such was either done to humor others or was unintentional. If you would prefer, I coudl give examples referring to politics instead? Would you accuse me of having a bias against politics?

Let me give another example then. In some countries it is perfectly legal to produce encryption software. In several countries, encryption software is entirely illegal.
However, that does not mean that PGP cannot make a website distributing free encryption software and setup help pages. They are also not obligated under any laws to do a background check on anyone contacting them for assistance in using their software.
If this example made me sound like I was a retro anti-technology nut, please mention it and I will give you yet another example. ;)

If I had used politics as an example, I can gaurantee you that someone out there will be unhappy because they think I am a Fascist Neo-Nazi (you'd be surprised).
In fact, last time I used technology as an example, someone attacked me in chat saying that I was an ignorant anti-Microsoft fanatic (another actual example). That attack came seemingly at random (in the middle of me telling someone a joke), so I can only assume the person saw something in what I said that I did not intend (if they did, it was probably just a joke I was making).
Besides, there's no way I can say anything without offending someone out there, so if something I say makes me look like a nut, then completely ignore me. ;)