Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

Sorry guy, but no one will buy bullsh|t about router that You were permitted to attack, yet, You had no idea about mac filtering being set on router.

Still, I'm not planning to continue this discussion here - it won't change a thing.

/Estel

// edit

As Your reply doesn't deserve answer in dedicated post:
Yea, world will care. We really couldn't live without You announcing it - take Your time and go cry somewhere else.

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

people like you are killing open source community..
have a nice day..

all updates will be sent to saturn, this is my last message on this board..

have a nice day you ego maniac

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

Relax guys.

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

looks like we got a fight over here !
security :p

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

Estel, you have not been provoked and you have not been called names. Your behaviour is totally unacceptable. This is an open community, you don't own it and you have to respect it.

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

Well, i haven't been calling names either. ho ever, if You feel that is OK an acceptable to seek assistance here, when using software - that You've written - for malicious purposes - it's Your business. Just consider, that it makes Your disclaimer inside application quite pointless, in case of any legal problems.

BTW, it's not kindergarden. I've stated clearly in 2dn post, that I'm not going to continue this discussion, and honestly, someone's declaration "I write that I won't write [sic!] anything again, now feel how it is to miss me!" is miserable at best, IMO.

Little disclaimer - "enforcing" fair use, in only way that is possible to us (i.e. denying help when someone is clearly using it for wrongs reasons, and/or asking to stop it) was a common and fair practice in any thread related to aircrack-ng in maemo.org.

I don't feel nor see anything unacceptable in what I've written - although, I do accept the fact that thread OP doesn't want "fair use, respect others" practice being actively presented here.

/Estel

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

i like this Estel this is the wrong thing that noobs trying to do.
at my first use to aircrack i got all wirelesses pwds in my neighborhood but then i realized this bad thing im doing reflecting on me so i stopped it and now im clean from that :D

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

I'm especially meaning things that create DoS effect on honest users - and using actually assigned MAC, without waiting for client to deauthenticate, does it for sure, same for most routers while reaver'ing - but, whatever...

Please, keep this productive thread clean from this discussion. It would be shame to bloat it, and thread OP clearly presented his position on this subject. I respect that, even if not agreeing, or thinking about it as "childish" at best.

/Estel

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

Estel, you clearly didn't understand what I told you. My point is: you cannot start bashing someone whenever you don't agree with him, even if you have hints he is doing something wrong. First because you might be wrong; second, it's not pedagogical; and third most importantly being polite is the only way a community can function properly.

An example might make it more clear to you:

The abusive ad hominem you have added at the end of the sentence is the worst thing you can do in a conversation..

Re: [Announce] Cleven - an aircrack gui
 

Sorry Saturn, but if someone write "I tried to attack with Reaver and couldn't succeed for long time, then I tried to spoof MAC and it was it - damn, he was using MAC filtering" and, in next post "It was my friend/neighbour/dog's router, and I got permission to attack it", it's really abusive - it means that he is treating us as idiots.

Writing "you can never be sure about intentions" is pure sophism from your side - you can say like that in any situation, even if someone asks You details about preparing a most cheap, yet destructive bomb filled with steel nails.

As for "argumentum ad hominem" - it seems to me, that You're trying to tell me, that You actually agree with "fair use" requiment. Yet, You argue, due to out-of-merit things, trying to accuse me, because I haven't sugar-coated my post. It seems to fill criteria for "argumentum ad hominem" perfectly, even if You don't realize it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Example:

What the hell owning Community have to do with fair use of software (that YOU have asked for in program disclaimer)?

/Estel