Fighting The Smears – Cloaked IP, Proxy IP, Hiddden IP , Anonymous IP – Internet Protocol Numbers – Internet Protocol Address
What is an ‘IP’? Information About Internet Protocol Numbers:
An IP is an acronym for “Internet Protocol”, which is an address that can uniquely identify a computer-user to his/her ISP (Internet Service Provider). An IP usually resolves to a “netname” and country unless it is a proxy IP (also called “anonymous IP”, “hidden IP” or “cloaked IP”). Proxy IPs are generated by masking one’s real IP with an anonymous IP generated through an anonymous proxy server. An IP contains 4 sets of numbers that are separated by periods (for example: 184.108.40.206). IPs usually fall within a “range” that makes the last 2 sets of number static. For example, the IP: 220.127.116.11 would fall into the IP range:
18.104.22.168 – 22.214.171.124
This means that the last 2 sets of numbers may vary between 64.0 to 127.255. Although these last 2 sets of numbers may be static, they will not change the ISP, netname or country that the IP resolves to and is not indicative of multiple users or different computers.
Internet Bully Robert Priddy’s Failed Case For Cloaked IPs Against Joe Moreno:
At home.chello.no/~reirob/geodata.htm, Robert Priddy (a caustic defamer and critic of Sathya Sai Baba and others) duplicated four of Moreno’s known IPs (yes, Moreno fully acknowledge the IPs in question were his) and said the following about them:
“Three different geographical locators showed the following results for one of the IPs used by Gerald Moreno: Anyone can check Moreno’s various IPs at these websites…The source data for the mailform sent to ExBaba.com was forwarded to me by the webmaster and I copy it here below. This is only necessary because Moreno would doubtless deny having sent it otherwise. His other e-mails and visits to ExBaba are also duly recorded for anyone who wishes to check these facts. The can send a mailform to ExBaba on the Guestbook if they wish for further verification of Moreno’s use of cloaked and anonymous IPs.”
The four IPs in question are:
Attempting to prove that these IPs were “cloaked” and “anonymous” Robert Priddy published screen-capped IP results from the GeoBytes, MelissaData and GeoPinPoint IP Address Locator websites. View the results for yourself (along with other Internet Protocol Address Locator results):
IP LOCATOR: GEOPINPOINT:
- 126.96.36.199 (Resolves to Deming with a 33% certainty)
- 188.8.131.52 (Resolves to Las Cruces with a 90% certainty)
- 184.108.40.206 (Resolves to Las Cruces with a 41% certainty)
- 220.127.116.11 (Resolves to Angel Fire with an 80% certainty)
IP LOCATOR: GEOBYTES:
- 18.104.22.168 (Resolves to Deming, 33% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP)
- 22.214.171.124 (Resolves to Las Cruces, 88% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP)
- 126.96.36.199 (Resolves to Las Cruces, 41% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP
- 188.8.131.52 (Resolves to Angel Fire, 80% Certain, Is not a Proxy IP)
IP LOCATOR: MELISSADATA:
- 184.108.40.206 (Does not resolve)
- 220.127.116.11 (Resolves to Las Cruces)
- 18.104.22.168 (Does not resolve)
- 22.214.171.124 (Resolves to Angel Fire)
IP LOCATOR: ARIN:
- 126.96.36.199 (Resolves to Denver Colorado)
- 188.8.131.52 (Resolves to Denver Colorado)
- 184.108.40.206 (Resolves to Broomfield Colorado)
- 220.127.116.11 (Resolves to Broomfield Colorado)
IP LOCATOR: UNIVERSALWEBSERVICES:
- 18.104.22.168 (Resolves to Phoenix Arizona)
- 22.214.171.124 (Resolves to Las Cruces, New Mexico)
- 126.96.36.199 (Resolves to Mount Vernon, Washington)
- 188.8.131.52 (Resolves to Alamogordo, New Mexico)
IP HOST LOCATOR: IPCOUNTRY:
- 184.108.40.206 Resolves to Host: 0-1pool236-65.nas17.albuquerque1.nm.us.da.qwest.net
- 220.127.116.11 Resolves to Host: 0-1pool212-28.nas7.albuquerque1.nm.us.da.qwest.net
- 18.104.22.168 Resolves to Host: dialup-22.214.171.124.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
- 126.96.36.199 Resolves to Host: dialup-188.8.131.52.Dial1.Phoenix1.Level3.net
IP LOCATOR: MAXMIND:
One will notice how various IP Address Locators resolve the same IPs differently. For example, Moreno’s 184.108.40.206 IP resolved to: Tucson, Arizona – Broomfield, Colorado – Las Cruces, New Mexico – Mount Vernon, Washington – Unresolved Location. One will also notice how several of these “What Is My IP” websites gave percentages of certainty (as they know IPs do not always resolve to the exact city of the user). Since Moreno’s ISP is a national provider, his three IPs will not resolve the same way and will even resolve to a different state. Apparently Robert Priddy is clueless about these facts.
Why Do The IP Addresses Resolve Differently?
The answer is quite simple: Software. Not all IP software is the same. Different software parameters (each website utilizes its own IP software) establishes possible locations for an IP based on the software’s components and parameters. Some software is more complex than others and this would account for the differences one sees on IP Locator websites. Some IP websites can only establish the Country for the IP while other IP websites can list potential cities, latitudes/longitudes and other information. Most IP websites do not list the Host for an IP but ipcountry.org does. This is due to IP software.
Because the four IPs did not resolve exactly the same way and because the four IPs did not miraculously divulge Moreno’s name, address and phone number, Robert Priddy erroneously concluded that Moreno was using “cloaked” and “anonymous” IPs. What is amusing about this is that Robert Priddy published a screencaps from GeoBytes which clearly showed that Moreno’s IPs were not Proxy (aka “cloaked” or “anonymous”) IPs. Moreno’s four IPs, as checked through GeoBytes’ IP Address Locator, prove that his IPs were not cloaked or anonymous (see “is proxy” line):
Robert Priddy’s himself supplied proof that Moreno is not using cloaked or anonymous IPs (even though he attempted to cite GeoBytes as proof that Moreno was using cloaked and anonymous IPs). Apparently, Robert Priddy forgot to read the line that stated the IPs tested “false” for a Proxy IP. This is the guy who claims he is a “scholar” and knows how to conduct research like one.
Robert Priddy Attributed The 127.0.0.1 IP To Joe Moreno:
Robert Priddy also claimed that Moreno used the anonymous “loopback” IP of 127.0.0.1.
Needless to say, it is clear that Robert Priddy is unaware that the “loopback” IP originated from the internal computer system that opened the email to begin with. As a matter of fact, the IP 127.0.0.1 is discussed on Wikipedia:
“IETF document ‘Special-Use IPv4 Addresses’ (RFC 3330) describes the 127.0.0.0/8 as a reserved IPv4 address block for loopback…Within a host system, the loopback interface is normally assigned the address ‘127.0.0.1’ with subnetwork mask ‘255.0.0.0’. This makes the routing table of the local system set with a routing entry of ‘127.0.0.0/8’, so that packets destined to any address of this ‘127.0.0.0/8’ would be routed internally within the local system.
HUMOR: An urban legend involving 127.0.0.1 is often circulated among the more technical computer related forums on the web. The story often involves an antagonist often referred to as ‘The World’s Worst Computer Hacker’. The story generally involves the Hacker hacking himself when tricked into using 127.0.0.1 as the IP address to hack into.
HUMOR: In the same vein, 127.0.0.1 is often used as an IP address given to inexperienced computer users as a practical joke. Another story involves a user who, after finding that pinging 127.0.0.1 pings his computer, tells all of his associates that his IP is 127.0.0.1.” (Reference)
Psychic Medium Conny Larsson Cited The Wrong IP Header Against Joe Moreno:
Psychic Medium Conny Larsson claimed that Moreno used an anonymous IP that his IP resolved to iana.org. Conny Larsson’s email provider is mail.com (firstname.lastname@example.org). Moreno decided to set up his own mail.com account to view the type of headers used on their emails so that he could compare them to the headers Conny Larsson attributed to him.
Moreno sent an email from his yahoo.com account to his new mail.com account and discovered that Conny Larsson purposely lied about his IP. Indeed, an iana.org IP appeared in “X-ob-received ” line. However, Moreno’s IP clearly showed up in the “received” line, below the “message-ID” line. Here is the relevant information:
The: “X-Ob-Received: from unknown (192.168.9.68)” resolves to IANA, however, the “Received: from [220.127.116.11]” is the correct line that shows Moreno’s IP. Compare these headers with the incorrect headers that Conny Larsson posted and attributed to Moreno:
Received: (qmail 15141 invoked by uid 0); 9 Nov 2005 23:52:04 -0000
X-OB-Received: from unknown (192.168.9.27) by mta1-6.us4.outblaze.com; 9 Nov 2005 23:52:04 -0000
Received: from web53006.mail.yahoo.com (web53006.mail.yahoo.com [18.104.22.168])
Another perfect example of the hypocrisy and chronic lies that Conny Larsson & Co. resort to smear Moreno’s name. Conny purposely posted only 5 lines when there were actually 12 lines (leaving out the line that had Moreno’s IP). Anyone is free to set up a mail.com account and verify this information first-hand for him/her self. Needless to say, Robert Priddy repeated Conny’s lie about Moreno’s IP like a well trained parrot and continues to repeat his fraudulent “proxy IP” lies despite Moreno’s detailed rebuttals.
A Look At Robert Priddy’s IP & Penchant For Proxy IP Accusations:
On Wikipedia, Robert Priddy submitted a signed comment under the IP 22.214.171.124 (Ref). Running this IP through GeoPoint, Arin and UniversalWebServices the following results were obtained:
- GeoPinPoint – 126.96.36.199 (Resolves to Oslo, Norway)
- Arin – 188.8.131.52 (Resolves to Amsterdam, Netherlands)
- UniversalWebServices – 184.108.40.206 (Resolves to Sweden)
Does this mean that Robert Priddy is using cloaked and anonymous IPs? Using Robert Priddy’s illogic, the answer is “yes”.
Needless to say, Moreno is not the only person who Robert Priddy erroneously accused of using Proxy IPs. On wordpress.com, the owner of the “awmyth” blog (using the name “little indian”) wrote an article entitled Just Another Arrogant Westerner about Robert Priddy’s systematic bashing of India and Hinduism.
In a second blogged article entitled Arrogant Westerner Continued, “little indian” duplicated emails sent to him by Robert Priddy in which Priddy accused “little indian” of “using different anonymous IPs” and “suffering from a deep cognitive disorder”. “Little indian” responded by saying:
“I have Google Web Accelerator installed on my browser. I do not control, or modify my IP, Google does that, ‘from Texas’. Maybe you do not know what that is.”
Not only does Robert Priddy believe that he is perfectly entitled to defame others with impunity, he also feels he is perfectly entitled to bludgeon others with his colossal ignorance about IPs, which he obviously can’t research despite his egotistic claims of being a “scholar” and conducting thorough research!
Proxy IPs – In Conclusion:
Let it go on record that Moreno fully acknowledge that the following four IPs belong to him:
All of these IPs faithfully resolve to known destinations and are not listed on any Proxy IP Servers. Moreno has openly used these IPs on Wikipedia, Yahoo Groups and in his Email Correspondence with Ex-Devotees. Moreno has absolutely nothing to hide and is not afraid to state the truth regarding this matter.
Although Robert Priddy takes such a vehement stand against cloaked and anonymous IPs, he completely disregards it when his fellow Anti-Sai friends use Proxy Servers and Anonymous IPs to spam Moreno with hate mail and to submit Moreno’s email address to pornography websites. This has been shown (with proof) to be the case with Sanjay Dadlani (who even posted a link to Moreno’s site through a proxy server on a Yahoo Group: 01 – 02), Afshin Khorramshahgol (who admitted using Proxy IPs 01 – 02) and Reinier Van Der Sandt (who spammed Moreno with hate mail through Proxy IPs).
One will not find even one word from Robert Priddy remonstrating his fellow friends and their proven attempts in subterfuge and deceit. This was even more the case when Ex-Devotees thought their IPs were not being recorded on QuickTopic (they were) and they collectively used no less than 90+ fake identities (including Moreno’s identity). These are the shameless hypocrites and equivocators who consistently fail to make a sober argument against Moreno (even less so against Sathya Sai Baba).
Moreno emailed Robert Priddy a link to this page so he could trace his IP again :-)
Let’s hope this time the poor chap does it right.
Filed under: Anonymous IP, Cloaked IP, Gerald Moreno, Hidden IP, Hide My IP, Internet Protocol Address, Internet Protocol Numbers, Joe Moreno, What Is My IP | Tagged: Anonymizer, Anonymouse, Defamation, Gerald Joe Moreno, Internet, Internet Protocol, IP, IP Internet Protocol, Proxy IP, Proxy List, Proxy Server, Robert Priddy, sathya sai baba, Smears |