Give me ideas: Im devvin networking/dox/etc tools

[funbox]

I've actually used a tool like this in the past to legitimately stress test my hosting (and my security on my computer.) It's stupid he had to be banned for this. If he had worded it slightly differently then it'd be fine. When can Sythe stop treating people differently? This isn't politics. Just cut the bullshit. The closest rule he broke was Blackhat/Malicious activity and even that says specifically using them for harmful intent. A Sythe user actually develops something and requests feedback and this is what he gets. No wonder we're just left with faggots who contribute nothing to the community. And keep in mind, with the screenshot he provided, he just has basic tools that can all be useful in non-harmful ways.

"The goal is for this package to become your personal (hosted by yourself) go-to when you want to find dirt on someone, or attack them. All in one"

That, by itself is malicious intentions, and since i see that he edited it, i'm more than positive it was worse than this.

 

[nodnarbusn]

I've actually used a tool like this in the past to legitimately stress test my hosting (and my security on my computer.) It's stupid he had to be banned for this. If he had worded it slightly differently then it'd be fine. When can Sythe stop treating people differently? This isn't politics. Just cut the bullshit. The closest rule he broke was Blackhat/Malicious activity and even that says specifically using them for harmful intent. A Sythe user actually develops something and requests feedback and this is what he gets. No wonder we're just left with faggots who contribute nothing to the community. And keep in mind, with the screenshot he provided, he just has basic tools that can all be useful in non-harmful ways.

You obviously didnt see his unedited posts. Also what legitimate use it there for doxxing others?

 

Grave he edited out where he specifically mentioned attacking and DoSing. If it was just used for stress then sure, but he's a scary blackhat.

 

just some of it for reference from before he deleted it

 

[Cas]

Google cache to the rescue:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...ideas-im-devvin-networking-dox-etc-tools.html

 

[Imagine]

To be honest I think the anti-blackhat rule on a cheating forum is ridiculous to begin with. As long as there aren't tutorials or "pay me $10 to do this illegal thing", I think that discussion should be allowed.

 

[Emperor Nero]

To be honest I think the anti-blackhat rule on a cheating forum is ridiculous to begin with. As long as there aren't tutorials or "pay me $10 to do this illegal thing", I think that discussion should be allowed.

There is a difference in saying:
"How does DoSing work?"

and saying:
"Here, I've made a tool to attack people, how can I make it better?"

 

[Cas]

There is a difference in saying:
"How does DoSing work?"

and saying:
"Here, I've made a tool to attack people, how can I make it better?"

^^^^^^^^^^

 

called it

 

[Imagine]

There is a difference in saying:
"How does DoSing work?"

and saying:
"Here, I've made a tool to attack people, how can I make it better?"

^^^^^^^^^^

Doesn't matter. Both should be okay IMO. Nothing explicitly illegal is occurring here. (No proof of a DDOS). Besides, while I see the actual act as morally questionable/wrong, DDOSing is really one of the "first" cyber attacks one usually hears about. (At least it was one of the first I heard about). Using it as a stepping stone to other learning about other cyber-security topics is completely possible, and something that, in my opinion, is a good thing.

Also, before "you don't actually need to code it to know what it is or how it works. You can just read an article about it."
Not true. You have no idea how it works until you write a program that does it. Its sort of like saying "I can drive because I've seen my parents drive" before I've actually driven a car. You need to actually do in order to learn.

 

[funbox]

Doesn't matter. Both should be okay IMO. Nothing explicitly illegal is occurring here. (No proof of a DDOS).

You make no sense what-so-ever.

Your first line is already false.

"Nothing explicitly illegal is occurring here"
Yes, it is illegal, so your statement is false, and "no proof of a ddos" is your backup statement?

My god is it a joke of a defensive argument. So in your mind, it should be allowed in the rules to hit other members offline simply because there's no proof of it.


oh my fucking god i'm laughing right now.

 

Doesn't matter. Both should be okay IMO. Nothing explicitly illegal is occurring here. (No proof of a DDOS). Besides, while I see the actual act as morally questionable/wrong, DDOSing is really one of the "first" cyber attacks one usually hears about. (At least it was one of the first I heard about). Using it as a stepping stone to other learning about other cyber-security topics is completely possible, and something that, in my opinion, is a good thing.

Also, before "you don't actually need to code it to know what it is or how it works. You can just read an article about it."
Not true. You have no idea how it works until you write a program that does it. Its sort of like saying "I can drive because I've seen my parents drive" before I've actually driven a car. You need to actually do in order to learn.

ROFL

he specifically mentions hitting people offline in his instructions. You can learn how DoS works without hitting people offline. It's like knowing what driving IS before being able to drive. If he knows exactly how to do it because he's hitting people offline, he deserves the slammer aye.

 

[nodnarbusn]

Doesn't matter. Both should be okay IMO. Nothing explicitly illegal is occurring here. (No proof of a DDOS). Besides, while I see the actual act as morally questionable/wrong, DDOSing is really one of the "first" cyber attacks one usually hears about. (At least it was one of the first I heard about). Using it as a stepping stone to other learning about other cyber-security topics is completely possible, and something that, in my opinion, is a good thing.

Also, before "you don't actually need to code it to know what it is or how it works. You can just read an article about it."
Not true. You have no idea how it works until you write a program that does it. Its sort of like saying "I can drive because I've seen my parents drive" before I've actually driven a car. You need to actually do in order to learn.

You are a fucking idiot dude. You should be hammered for even saying this shit. Smh

 

[Imagine]

You make no sense what-so-ever.

Your first line is already false.

"Nothing explicitly illegal is occurring here"
Yes, it is illegal, so your statement is false, and "no proof of a ddos" is your backup statement?

My god is it a joke of a defensive argument. So in your mind, it should be allowed in the rules to hit other members offline simply because there's no proof of it.


oh my fucking god i'm laughing right now.

My point is that the website is protected because there is no proof. Not that nothing illegal is happening. What people do on their own time is their problem and their own concern.
EDIT: If it is illegal by US laws or whatever, then so be it. I don't think it is under Sythe's jurisdiction to decide what people do on their own time, unless it directly affects another Sythe user (at which point Report a Scammer could be used and so on).

ROFL

he specifically mentions hitting people offline in his instructions. You can learn how DoS works without hitting people offline. It's like knowing what driving IS before being able to drive. If he knows exactly how to do it because he's hitting people offline, he deserves the slammer aye.

And knowing what driving is, is utterly useless. You can't drive because you know what driving is. Try finding a cure for cancer because you know what cancer is. Try to teach someone calculus by just knowing what calculus is. (If you've taken a calculus course, that doesn't count). Knowing what something is is the same thing as knowing the definition. Useless. Knowledge, attempt to expand knowledge, and attempt to spread knowledge should not be punishable. (yes, I know the government thinks otherwise yadda yadda Edward Snowden blah blah blah. Don't commit the ought-is fallacy).

You can't protect against a DDOS if you can't do a DDOS attack yourself (unless you use somebody else's code/product). I'm not telling people to go DDOS others. I'm saying that to have an understanding of it, you need to be able to do one. "being able to do one" just consists of writing a program to do one, not necessarily using it.

You are a fucking idiot dude. You should be hammered for even saying this shit. Smh

lel. go ahead. Banning me will change nothing. I'll still hold the same opinion and I'll continue to do whatever I want. Honestly I use Sythe so little now that being banned makes no difference to me.