[ExI] scurrilous commentary

[spike]

>... On Behalf Of spike
Subject: Re: [ExI] scurrilous commentary


>... We could get tricky with it, such that the spam filter would only take
out messages in which the number of characters in the message times the
number of "th" combinations is equal to the product of exactly two primes,
one of which is 37 (for instance.)  The eye couldn't readily tell which
messages were wheat and which ones were robo-chaff...With that, we wouldn't
even need sincere passwords...spike

_______________________________________________

To create a message which would be sure to fall into the filter, we could
have a computer generated tacked-on sentence that is out of context with the
rest of the message.  Then to the genuine message, we would tack on a
message that would make it look like the computer-generated ones, which
could later add to the deniability of the genuine message.  Examples of a
tacked-on phrase or sentence:  

Keep the aspidistra flying.
The aardvaark sits among the lily roots.
Place it over by the samovar.
Yorktown is soon to visit with the wind.

If we get tricky, we could figure out a code which would allow the user to
know for sure which messages were genuine and which were bogus.

That way, if we have a recipient who is leaking private info, we could catch
them too.

Another cool idea: we could intentionally create a hacker trap, baited with
racy embarrassing but bogus messages.  Then we pretend to fall for their
extortions, with Oh please Mister Hacker, please don't reveal my email, I
will be so ruined!  I will do whatever you ask!  

We have another account with bogus messages, where the victim takes the
opposite strategy: Mister Hacker, go ahead, make my day.  

Then we watch for the messages to show up on the internet and CATCH the
sleazy bastards by figuring out where they are showing up, and which
strategy is effective, the Sniveling Worm or the Dirty Harry.

Code hipsters, can you do it?

spike