Status
Not open for further replies.

danb

From VoodooShield
Verified
Developer
Says the developer that has been stalking others, incorrectly testing what he views competition products, misinforming average users, all while trying to promote his product and make money. This, is unbecoming of a Developer that is supposed to have everyone's well being as top priority.
Documenting disparaging claims made by individuals who communicate directly with, and are best friends with competitors, is not stalking.

mWave (Visa), this is obviously you as well… THAT is stalking.

I am not to one who said that VS would not block the EB / DP attack, while products with memory protection would block the attack. I was curious as well, and tired of people speculating, so I ran the test that was requested. The end result is that VS blocked the attack, and the product with memory protection did not. End of story.

Running the tests actually informed the users. Instead of speculating, they were able to experience the empirical evidence for themselves.

The tests were completely valid… I even reran the AG test with lsass protected, according to Umbra’s instruction, and the results were the same.

If you have a suggestion on how I can improve the tests, let me know and I will retest… but do not say that the tests were invalid, without explaining why you feel they are invalid, or how what changes are necessary to make them valid.
 

danb

From VoodooShield
Verified
Developer
I would like to thank Dan for posting the results of his tests and for requesting MRG Effitas test. I think that all of us know more about kernel exploits than before.
I also think that the main question in this thread was answered and it should be closed, before some of us will be hurt.:)
Sure, thank you! Yeah, it will be interesting to see the MRG results. I mean, we have already conclusively answered the question in this thread... but I am curious if he can get his port, with the extra payload, to work better than the plain EB / DP attack.

It is funny how I have said on multiple occasions how the attack is either within the scope of an AE, or it is not, yet a couple people want to argue both sides of this point. That is, they are suggesting that I am claiming that part of the attack is within the scope (when it is clearly not), and then bashing VS for not blocking that part of the attack... all while products they prefer were completely bypassed, without any mitigations whatsoever.

The attack is either inside the scope of the AE, or it is not... nothing more, nothing less.
 

danb

From VoodooShield
Verified
Developer
He has at least 3 acct's here and maybe more, I am not sure if @Jack allows for that.
I tagged him here so he will be aware. Ignore it Dan it's not worth it.
I agree... thank you! I am not going to spend my life arguing on forums, I would rather go to the park with Molly, or to Vegas. I would be happy to be part of an intelligent conversation, and contribute what I can, but bullying of any kind is completely unacceptable.
 

Visa

Level 1
He has at least 3 acct's here and maybe more, I am not sure if @Jack allows for that.
I tagged him here so he will be aware. Ignore it Dan it's not worth it.
This is the only account I have, stop making false accusations. I've already agreed not to speak about the VoodooShield product publicly and I haven't, and I am not getting people to post for me.

I agree... thank you!
mWave (Visa), this is obviously you as well… THAT is stalking.
You're really wrong with this one, I genuinely do not have any other accounts. Also, I am pretty sure I signed up here before you did? I am not "stalking" anybody.
 

danb

From VoodooShield
Verified
Developer
This is the only account I have, stop making false accusations. I've already agreed not to speak about the VoodooShield product publicly and I haven't, and I am not getting people to post for me.
It is obviously you. I busted you the first time, and you admitted it.
 

Visa

Level 1
It is obviously you. I busted you the first time, and you admitted it.
You didn't bust me the first time, people already knew it was me because I told them. I joined to be a genuine member here if I was allowed and put the past behind, not to comment about VoodooShield. Look at my username style, the avatar style and the writing style... Clearly I was never trying to hide.

No worries, just making Jack aware, no harm in that ;)
Yes, I will tag him myself. @Jack

Keep me out of your issues with other members. If anyone is doing the stalking it is the pair of you trying to follow me online and making false accusations against me.
 

Visa

Level 1
Sure thing skippy ;)
Ok.

You can think what you want, I don't have to answer to you. I've already said that I am not the other member you think I am and that I have no other account duplicates, but if you don't believe me then don't. You can never seem to just let me be, always trying to catch me out for something and make me look bad, all because of a point I was trying to prove about a product you seem to love... Even after I agreed not to publicly discuss VS and I haven't since!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy Ful
Documenting disparaging claims made by individuals who communicate directly with, and are best friends with competitors, is not stalking.

mWave (Visa), this is obviously you as well… THAT is stalking.

I am not to one who said that VS would not block the EB / DP attack, while products with memory protection would block the attack. I was curious as well, and tired of people speculating, so I ran the test that was requested. The end result is that VS blocked the attack, and the product with memory protection did not. End of story.

Running the tests actually informed the users. Instead of speculating, they were able to experience the empirical evidence for themselves.

The tests were completely valid… I even reran the AG test with lsass protected, according to Umbra’s instruction, and the results were the same.

If you have a suggestion on how I can improve the tests, let me know and I will retest… but do not say that the tests were invalid, without explaining why you feel they are invalid, or how what changes are necessary to make them valid.
Again, you are wrong. This is illumination aka Lucent Warrior, the same user that brought your product here and had its own place inserted among the other security apps here, and highly promoted your product via video tests. If you want me to prove it is me, I can state you once shared with me a secret about your portable voodooai, which I will state no more, as that should be enough. Now that you know clearly who I am, you will also realize there will be no pulling the wool over my eyes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.