I simplified the script somewhat and extended the number of messages and
intervals. Here are the notes. Please give it a try and point out any
weaknesses.


This little script will send from 0 to 24 messages per execution. The
time it takes before a message is actually sent out will vary from about
30 minutes to about 24 hours. The variations in these things are randomly
determined.

The idea is to provide cover traffic which is indistinguishable from real
traffic. It's not needed for someone, like a remailer operator, who is
sending a lot of traffic anyway, but anyone else may find it useful.

I suggest you run it at least once every 12 hours. The more real messages
you send, the more often you should run this, so as to make sure the real
messages don't become noticeable, even if they cannot be told apart from
the dummy traffic.

The script is at http://eelbash.info:8000/dumm.zip
eelbash@yahoo.com

eelbash@yahoo.com wrote:

> I simplified the script somewhat

STILL a complete train wreck. About 100 times larger than it needs
to be, if it even needed to be at all, which it doesn't. Read the
man page for 'at' and 'random'.

And you're still meddling with things enough to produce
discriminable patterns (maybe on purpose?), not to mention still
coding like a 9 year old who started learning Pyton 12.15 minutes
ago. Get off your lazy fat behind and start actually LEARNING
Python.

Once again people, you're far better off just sending out dummy
traffic at regular intervals along with, or instead of, you regular
traffic. Everyone but eel-dummy realizes this, which is why every
other client that generates dummy traffic does it that way. If you
use any of the crap this loon dreams up you'll stick out like a
sore thumb. Remember that.

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:48:35 +0100, Anonymous wrote:

> eelbash@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> I simplified the script somewhat
>
> STILL a complete train wreck. About 100 times larger than it needs to
> be

The version you are talking about is at http://eelbash.info:8000/dumm.zip

and it is pretty lean. If you can make it any leaner, please do it.
Here is the code. It will do a good job of hiding your real messages
among the dummy traffic that it generates:


from random import randint,randrange,choice,uniform
import os
import sys
from time import sleep


v = []#how many seconds to sleep

w = [] #how many messages per execution

x = [] # how many copies


doit = 20
for q in range(doit):
v.append(randint(2000, 7200))#range of seconds to sleep
w.append(randint(0,24))#how many messages per execution
x.append(randint(3,6))#number of copies of each message


for cnt in range(choice(w)):
sleep(choice(v))
cmdline = "mixmaster -d -c %s" % (choice(x))
os.system(cmdline)

eelbash@yahoo.com wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:48:35 +0100, Anonymous wrote:
>
> > eelbash@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> >> I simplified the script somewhat
> >
> > STILL a complete train wreck. About 100 times larger than it needs to
> > be
>
> The version you are talking about is at http://eelbash.info:8000/dumm.zip
>
> and it is pretty lean. If you can make it any leaner, please do it.

Be my pleasure...

> from random impo

<FLUSH!>

Pretty lean now, eh?

The fact that your "solution" is both conceptually flawed and
unnecessary aside, you're still importing baggage you never use.
Another glaring indication you haven't spent 20 minutes with a
manual yet.

You're also initializing arrays that wouldn't need
"pre-initialized" even if you actually did have to use arrays
anywhere in your code at all.

And NOW you're so confused you've actually created a situation
where it's possible to have many multiple copies of your trash
sitting around in memory doing absolutely nothing but wasting clock
ticks for way, WAY too long.

That last one highlights what's probably the most pertinent reason
why you'll never succeed at this. Why you can't even begin to
honestly understand the stuff you stole, much less come up with
something original. You've hopped from one disaster to another
because you lack the ability to think "spatially". To visualize a
problem and create a procedural solution that's not, well... a
train wreck.

Some folks have the ability, some do not. You're in the latter
class. Most women are. It's just a simple fact of life that, in
general, men think more critically, women more creatively, and
you're no exception. While creativity can play a role in good
problem solving, it's actually worse than useless without being
tempered by logic and the ability to conceptualize in "three
dimensions". It leads right to the situation we have here. Someone
trying to solve a problem by flailing their arms in every possible
direction they can imagine and relying on dumb luck to lead them to
a clue.

Luck ain't your friend today. Sorry.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the way you are; in this
particular respect anyway; you're just not up to the task at hand.
Even your "FAQ's" are rambling and ill thought, for the same
reason... you're infatuated with something you're just not suited
to be a part of.

Seriously. Just about everyone under the sun from Alex on down has
suggested you find another hobby. Don't you think it's time to
seriously consider it? I mean, what attracts you to anonymous mail
anyway? You obviously don't care about free speech, at least not in
any way that doesn't directly conflict with the ideal itself, so
why are you even here in the first place? Is it, as has been
suggested, some bizarre bit of cybervoyeurism that drives you to
this obsession? Or did some particular anonymous user(s) get under
your skin so badly that it's more of a personal Jihad? Or are you
associated with some person or organization, and adopting theirs?

No, I'm not being facetious, I really would like to know. Something
in that head of yours is cross wired or shorted, and I'm really
trying to get a grip on what it is.

Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it