XPost: alt.privacy.anon-server   
   From: fritz@spamexpire-202602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net   
      
   On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:08:56 +0100, you wrote:   
   >   
   > Fritz Wuehler wrote:   
   > >   
   > > Any average Usenet user can use QSL.  There's no way the average non-   
   > > tech user can begin to figure out all that supposedly anon stuff   
   > > posted by others in a.p.a-s.   
   > >   
   > > Template used for this post:   
   > >   
   > > Fcc: anon   
   > > Host: sec3   
   > > From: anonymous@anonymous.com   
   > > From: QSLUser   
   > > Chain: middleman,*,frell; copies=3;   
   > > To: mail2news@dizum.com, mail2news@neodome.net   
   > > Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server, alt.privacy   
   > > Subject: QSL Still WORKS!   
   > >   
   > > SMTP Server: mailrelay.sec3.net   
   > > Port: 587   
   > > TLS   
   > > No Authentivation   
   >   
   > Only <5 users are using QSL in the United States...   
      
   He shows immediately in the above what a lying suck he is.   
      
   > Can QSL MIME base64 encode the Subject   
      
   Who cares about the Subject?  Do you actually think some crook is   
   going to use a Subject such as: "I've decided to rob McDonalds   
   tomorrow night..."   
      
   > case UTF-8 characters are used?   
      
   An average user of QSL doesn't need to know what the F'k a UTF   
   character is. Only pretentious tekkies discuss stuff like "UTF-8   
   characters".   
      
   > Mixmaster 3.1 can't   
   > handle properly folded MIME base64 Subject: content   
   > and removes half of the Subject line... Has Richard   
   > fixed this, from Elvis's Mixmaster 3.1?   
      
   Like the average Usenet poster needs to know what the hell a "folded   
   MIME base64" whatever is.  Keep a QSL Subject line a max of 80   
   characters and it won't screw up the Subject line. Who needs more   
   than that?  It's the Subject line, fool, It's not intended to be the   
   same length as the body message, nor the length of a 5,000 word short   
   story. (But then you modern feebs don't know what a "story" is if it   
   doesn't come attached with a Youtube URL.)   
      
   Elvis or no Elvis, there is no valid mention anywhere as to QSL being   
    hacked.  Outside of the pgp/MIME e-fail problem, which can be   
   avoided by typing and encrypting  your e-mail message outside of your   
   e-mail program, QSL pgp is safe.   
      
   Of course, if you are a professional criminal or terrorists, you   
   aren't going to fully trust any anon program. But as far as the   
   average QSL user's fear of troublemakers using their id from posts to   
   cause more problems, QSL is TOTALLY safe.   
      
   And to say again, Time is the true arbiter of software security. The   
   new crap you and others proclaim to be invincible for anon security   
   can only be proven over time, as has QSL and pgp.   
      
   In closing, STFU!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)