Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00)

[seconserv]

Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00):

antisteg100.zip AntiSteg 1.00: Anti-Steganography

AntiSteg is a command line tool for cleaning images of potentially
harmful
steganographical content. Many popular image formats (especially those
used
on the Web) are handled by the tool.

Steganography is a means by which information is hidden inside of
images
(often via high-encryption algorithms), making them completely
invisible to
all standard image viewers. Stegged images can carry extremely harmful
payloads,
which include, but are not limited to:

Child pornography
Viruses, Trojans, Spyware, Spamware, and other Malware
Sensitive personal/corporate Data

AntiSteg does not attempt to extract the actual hidden data, but
simply antistegs
the content, making it impossible to be retrieved at a later point in
time.
This approach allows it to quickly clean a computer, even if 100,000s
of images
are stored on it. In contrast, trying to desteg just one image which
uses a high
encryption encoding (256 bit or higher), and a properly selected
password is
computationally nearly infeasible.

Since the amount of images stored on the Web approaches staggering
numbers
(anywhere from 100s of billions to trillions), the possibility to
successfully
store and trade/sell child pornography, distribute viruses, or
exchange sensitive
information is very high. Even worse, anybody who operates a web site
(personal
or corporate) that contains images, may unwittingly be helping
pedophiles,
black-hat hackers, or data spies in their operations. Of course, the
same holds
true for any e-mail attachment, or MMS being sent!

Currently available antivirus, antispyware, and antimalware tools do
NOT address
this problem!
Companies that allow image specific searches - like Google - do
NOTHING to prevent
stegged images from being spread via their services!

Special requirements: None.

Freeware. Uploaded by the author.

Security Online Services

E-Mail:
(e-mail address removed)

Web:
http://geocities.com/seconserv

NewsGroups:
http://groups.google.com/group/antisteg

 

[Zen Clark]

spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

Of course it's spam. The guy is using Google Groups...

 

[Roedy Green]

Announcing the release of Anti-Steganography (AntiSteg v1.00):

how does it work? Do you just xor is some random noise in the low bit
to scramble anything potentially hidden there?

 

[Roedy Green]

spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, Eggs & spam, ...

It is relevant to the topic. It is a free product. You are going
knee jerk on your spam accusation.

 

[RedGrittyBrick]

It is relevant to the topic. It is a free product. You are going
knee jerk on your spam accusation.

The OP had an interesting choice of newsgroups.

borland.public.delphi.graphics, comp.soft-sys.matlab,
comp.os.linux.security, comp.lang.java.programmer, alt.2600.hackers

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

It is relevant to the topic. It is a free product. You are going
knee jerk on your spam accusation.

It is not related to Java or programming, so I find it a bit hard to
consider it relevant here.

Oh - and I did bother to find the download site and then Google
gave me:

<quote>
This web site at www.upfordown.com has been reported as an attack site
and has been blocked based on your security preferences.

Attack sites try to install programs that steal private information, use
your computer to attack others, or damage your system.

Some attack sites intentionally distribute harmful software, but many
are compromised without the knowledge or permission of their owners.
</quote>

I do not find it particular tempting to install after that !

Arne

 

[Lew]

It is not related to Java or programming, so I find it a bit hard to
consider it relevant here.

Oh - and I did bother to find the download site and then Google
gave me:

<quote>
This web site atwww.upfordown.comhas been reported as an attack site
and has been blocked based on your security preferences.

Attack sites try to install programs that steal private information, use
your computer to attack others, or damage your system.

Some attack sites intentionally distribute harmful software, but many
are compromised without the knowledge or permission of their owners.
</quote>

I do not find it particular tempting to install after that !

I feel so validated. It puts a tear in my eye!

For those who feel an accusation of "spam" was "knee-jerk", next time
consider the facts.

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

I feel so validated. It puts a tear in my eye!

For those who feel an accusation of "spam" was "knee-jerk", next time
consider the facts.

Do you think we will hear from Roedy ?

Arne

 

[Roedy Green]

I feel so validated. It puts a tear in my eye!

For those who feel an accusation of "spam" was "knee-jerk", next time
consider the facts.

--

It was knee jerk. You did little investigation. I strongly suspect you
did not even visit the website before passing your judgment. My own
website has been blocked just as that site was. All it means is
somebody had a grudge and sent in an unsubstantiated complaint.
Beside, you did not even know about that block, so it could not have
had any part in your own judgment.

 

[Roedy Green]

It was knee jerk. You did little investigation. I strongly suspect you
did not even visit the website before passing your judgment. My own
website has been blocked just as that site was. All it means is
somebody had a grudge and sent in an unsubstantiated complaint.
Beside, you did not even know about that block, so it could not have
had any part in your own judgment.

Further it was rude. The author offered you a FREE gift, of what
appears to me useful code you might incorporate into your own problem
and you scream at him as if he were a child molester


How do you treat your mother when she offers you a glass of orange
juice? Do you say "You spamming bitch. I wanted apple juice."

You probably do.

 

[Roedy Green]

I feel so validated. It puts a tear in my eye!

For those who feel an accusation of "spam" was "knee-jerk", next time
consider the facts.

What code have you given to the community? NOTHING. All you do is
spit on other people's contributions.

 

[Roedy Green]

I feel so validated. It puts a tear in my eye!

For those who feel an accusation of "spam" was "knee-jerk", next time
consider the facts.

Most of your time you spend trying to discourage newbies from pursuing
Java. Never a word of encouragement. Nothing but put downs. You are
a pustule on the community.

 

[Andreas Leitgeb]

How do you treat your mother when she offers you a glass of orange
juice? Do you say "You spamming bitch. I wanted apple juice."
You probably do.

First of all, it wasn't his mother (I can't really know for sure,
but winning all lotteries in the world at the same time and surviving
being struck by a lightning, and ... altogether seems much more likely)
but some anonymous person, who offended lots of people with an
excessive cross-post.

So taking this to another real-world analogon:
Someone approaches people randomly on a busy street and proactively
offers them small bottles of "medicine" for free that he claims will
protect them against "mongolean flu" (whatever that may be).

Suppose you were approached, would you really take and apply
that medicine on yourself? Or would you just take the bottle and
toss it in a waste-bin around the next corner? Or wouldn't it be
more of a public service to warn others (who may be more naive)
from taking unknown medicine from unknown persons on the street?

(Not that taking medicine bought from an official drugstore is
necessarily safer ... That's another thing shared by the example
and the case at hand ;-) It's all just about the likelihood of
disaster. I for myself would trust the drugstore, even if they
give away samples for free, but not a foreign man on the street.
Also, I'd likely take the medicine, if the person dispersing it
was my mom.

 

[Lew]

I did enough.

I didn't need to, as I explained.

Nor did I claim it was. Did you even read the evidence I cited for assessing
the clearly spamacious post as such?

I "strongly suspect" you did not.

Further it was rude. The author offered you a FREE gift, of what
appears to me useful code you might incorporate into your own problem
and you scream at him as if he were a child molester


How do you treat your mother when she offers you a glass of orange
juice? Do you say "You spamming bitch. I wanted apple juice."

You probably do.

Settle down, Roedy. I described the evidence I used to form my judgment, if
you were listening, and you will note, again if you were listening, that I did
not use "visiting the site" as part of the evidence. The evidence of spam was
damning enough without that.

It was not rude. The author didn't offer me a "FREE" gift, he spammed a host
of newsgroups with advertisement. Plain and simple.

Bringing up my mother is rude. You are rude. You go all /ad hominem/ when
you are wrong.

The post was obvious spam, on the evidence. No need for knee jerk, as I
explained and you apparently ignored, because the evidence was strong, and in
the end, justified.

Apparently you just feel like insulting me. It worked. I am offended.
Thanks, Mr. Peacenik.

 

[Lew]

Most of your time you spend trying to discourage newbies from pursuing
Java. Never a word of encouragement. Nothing but put downs. You are
a pustule on the community.

You are rude, arrogant, nasty, unworthy and plonked.

 

[Lew]

Most of the time you spend repeating answers that others have already given
and pointing people to your website as if you were the one providing all the
help. Perhaps you object to the characterization of the ad at the top of this
thread as "spam" because you fear that others will recognize that ultimately
all your posts are actually spam for mindprod.com

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

It was knee jerk. You did little investigation. I strongly suspect you
did not even visit the website before passing your judgment.

Why should he.

Just the fact that it was not about Java and not about programming made
it spam.

My own
website has been blocked just as that site was. All it means is
somebody had a grudge and sent in an unsubstantiated complaint.

If you think so, then you really should try and install that software
on your PC.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Further it was rude. The author offered you a FREE gift,

There are also lots of email that promise you millions from
bank accounts belonging to dead african dictators or from
winnings in lottery's that you have not played.

That is usually called spam not gifts.

of what
appears to me useful code you might incorporate into your own problem

If you had bother read the post in question, then you would have seen
that it was a command line tool not a library.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

What code have you given to the community? NOTHING. All you do is
spit on other people's contributions.

I have no idea about what Lew may have contributed or not contributed.

How do you know what Lew has contributed ?

Oh - and the spam post was about a binary not source code, so it
did not really contribute any code.

Maybe you should have read the post.

Arne

 

[RedGrittyBrick]

Most of your time you spend trying to discourage newbies from pursuing
Java. Never a word of encouragement. Nothing but put downs. You are
a pustule on the community.

Here's why I think you have over-reacted:


seconserv's entire posting history is 41 messages in 34 groups. all (so
far as I can tell) promoting anti-steg.

Groups include alt.books.tom-clancy, soc.culture.cambodia,
alt.prophecies.nostradumus and so on.

The discussion google group seconserv created contains one message with
the same content.

seconserv has absolutely no other history that I can find. It looks like
an ID created specifically for promoting antisteg.

seconserv's message seems to me to be designed to stimulate fear of what
might be hidden in images on your computer.

There is no source code available, only a "zip" file of the alleged program.

The usage instructions seem to have been written in more of a hurry than
the rest of the text. Numerous spelling errors and odd characters.

None of the above gives me any confidence in the motives of the author
or the real purpose of the download.


Lew might not have known any of the above when he labelled seconserv's
posting as spam, but I think his instincts were right in this case.