Untraceable email?

Yeah. Like CSI Miami where they got a guys ip address from one piece of email (just before cut to commercial), and right after commercial they were knocking on the guys front door.

As if.

That is traceable.

If you really need "untraceable" then print out your email/letter on any printer and mail it from the downtown post office.

snipped-for-privacy@spamhole.com wrote:

Not only that, if it's that important, just report them to OSHA.

Oh, and no matter what you think, the will find you, and no matter what they say, you will suffer. If it's really a serious violation it's still better to get it resolved than live with the knowledge that you could have saved someone from pain/injury/death.

In article , degrub wrote: :If you really need "untraceable" then print out your email/letter on any :printer and mail it from the downtown post office.

That's not particularily untraceable

-- different printers have different chemical compositions of their inks

-- fingerprints on the paper

-- fingerprints on the envelope

-- DNA from the siliva from when the stamp was licked or the envelope was sealed

-- store/post-office security cameras

One should also keep in mind that grammar, spelling, sentance complexity, and word choice may be analyzed to determine likelyhood that a particular piece was written by a particular author. The same techniques that are used to authenticate Shakesphear et al. can be (and are) applied to more prosaic works.

As a simple example: even if I was careful to run my messages through a spell checker, it would be clear to any practiced analyst that I am Canadian, if if only by examining my pattern of choice of 's' versus 'z'.

ROFL - I guess the television series CSI has had its permanent impact on society.

Sounds to me like a spammer looking for a way not to get caught.

|> That's not particularily untraceable |> -- different printers have different chemical compositions of their inks [...] |> One should also keep in mind that grammar, spelling, sentance |> complexity, and word choice may be analyzed to determine likelyhood

|ROFL - I guess the television series CSI has had its permanent impact on |society.

I wouldn't know -- I pretty much stopped watching TV nearly 25 years ago.

When one works on security, the question tends to get transformed from "Is it possible?" to "How badly do your opponents want the information?" And that's something that we have a tendancy to both underestimate and overestimate.

I've seen the usual "The government is beaming things into my head" postings -- but I've also been informed [years later] by authoratative sources about information having been stolen by someone whose family was threatened by a powerful foreign agency. Who, then, am I to make casual judgements about the needs in a situation that I know only the superficial about?

Allow a little pedantry here... You can't trace anyone from fingerprints or DNA on a piece of evidence. You can use the fingerprint/DNA to obtain a positive identification with someone on a list of suspects, but it's not backwards traceable as such (well, with mithocondrial DNA you could possibly trace a person back to one particular ancestor, but I doubt that would help too much).

You're sure about that, eh? :-)

Most people have idiolects that can betray them, but knowing that can help you avoid it. Since I know I tend to write fairly long sentences and use certain words and phrases more than what's common, I can try to avoid doing that. It won't be foolproof, but enough to not immediately point the finger at myself.

Regards,

snipped-for-privacy@spamhole.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

The first step is not to tell the world you are posting from an adddress at Anant Systems in Montgomery Village, MD.

Being Dutch and out of curiosity I found

You don't trust those folks? [quote] To help ensure that employees are, in fact, free to participation in safety and health activities, Section 11(c) of the Act prohibits any person from discharging or in any manner discriminating against any employee because the employee has exercised rights under the Act.

These rights include complaining to OSHA and seeking an OSHA inspection, participating in an OSHA inspection, and participating or testifying in any proceeding related to an OSHA inspection. [unquote]

Gr. Jan

So, you've _never_ had your fingerprints taken? I've got two ID cards that have my fingerprints on them, and as part of various (admittedly "military-industrial complex") jobs had them taken there to. If you've ever been detained by the police, I'm sure your prints were also taken too. Heck, if you are detained by the Maricopa Country (Arizona, US) sheriff for any reason (they do law enforcement outside of those cities that do have police, and run the local jail), you are also "invited" to provide a DNA sample (though local civil rights groups are furious about it.

Old guy

Actually if it was a spammer, the O/P wouldn't need to ask. The instructions come with those "10 Million E-Mail Address" CDs they buy to be able to offer all their valuable services that you just really need.

In fact, you point the O/P to the solution. Using wide open computers owned by innocent idiots connected to wide bandwidth connections and currently used to deliver spam. The poster need only connect to several such open boxes, and then send his mail.

Then the O/P needs only to think about two things:

Will OSHA act on his anonymous complaint, or will they look at it, and toss it as the workings of a disgruntled [ex-]employee. The complaint is going to have to have enough "meat" in it so that OSHA will be convinced it's not a total waste of time to investigate it.

Second, by supplying enough "usable" information in the complaint, is he also not providing enough information for the employer to at least narrow down a list of suspects.

Not withstanding the post by "OldBoy"

In article , Arthur Hagen wrote: :Allow a little pedantry here... You can't trace anyone from fingerprints or :DNA on a piece of evidence. You can use the fingerprint/DNA to obtain a :positive identification with someone on a list of suspects, but it's not :backwards traceable as such

True, but if a company suspected an inside leak and was displeased enough to persue it by hiring investigators, then it would be relatively simple to take samples from (e.g.,) the front-door, mix them together, check to see whether the test sample was fairly close to something in the mix -- and once so determined, to use the standard "detect the counterfeit coin in a mix" algorithms on mixes of samples from (e.g.,) office doorknobs or keyboards to narrow down the search area drastically.

:> As a simple example: even if I was careful to run my messages through :> a spell checker, it would be clear to any practiced analyst that I am :> Canadian, if if only by examining my pattern of choice of 's' versus :> 'z'.

:Most people have idiolects that can betray them, but knowing that can help :you avoid it.

Of course, I would know to use (e.g.,) color instead of colour . 'o' vs 'ou' is easy -- but 's' vs 'z' is much less rational and the alternative spellings really *look* wrong.

: Since I know I tend to write fairly long sentences and use :certain words and phrases more than what's common, I can try to avoid doing :that. It won't be foolproof, but enough to not immediately point the finger :at myself.

I suspect I would have to babblefish through half a dozen languages to scrub my idioms adequately ;-)

I only wish Newsfeeds would stop adding some nice spam to every one of your messages? ;-) Used to be, you could post to their text only servers, and no banner would be added. But they changed that - rendering Newsfeeds useless and annoying for posting to text groups.

Basically they're using their customers to spam all the text groups for them.

Advanced Usenet Netiquette Rule #1: Snip Newsfeed.com's spam signatures, when posting followups. ;-)

Go here...

-Frank

Message untraceablity is desired, NOT message encryption. I could care

less about encryption. UNTRACEABILITY is required.

Based on my own research, I am planning to do the following

1) Direct my browser to connect to internet via proxy server, located overseas. A list of which are found at

2) Upon doing that, I will go to internet site

OR

3) Once I do that, I will compose and send the message using the maximum number of remailers offered (4 to 6).

an additional note on #1 above is I may go to public library computer, configure browser, and then do steps 2 thru 3. Necessary?

comments, thoughts?

again, encryption is not important. However I need UNTRACEABILITY

just curious. After reading a great reply of using the Post Office I am still laughing. What I want to say was already said but I feel it must be said louder. IF YOU ARE NEEDING TO REPORT TO OSHA THEN WHY THE PRIVACY HELL I WOULD WANT THEM TO KNOW I BURNED THEM IF THEY R VIOLATING A EMPLOYEES SAFTEY GEESH YELL IT FROM A ROOF TOP, k nough said thank you for letting me talk,

ROFL - I guess the television series CSI has had its permanent impact on society.

AMEN.. Oh wait am I beeing traced right now shoot they may find me,(whoever they r) ROFLMAO at this topic and all your answers thanks for making my mood swing to the better