Alternatively titled, "David Icke forum and their relaxed attitude to YOUR security".

We all know how much i_am likes to play 'techie' on the David Icke Forum even though she has very little clue what she is doing. Time and time again she has been warned not to dabble in things she doesn't understand, but yet she persists and gets very shirty with you if you suggest that she may not be the best person for the job.

So I'm sure we all remember the first night of TPV when i_am set up a chatroom for us all to chat on as the DIF chatroom was down? Well it turns out her tech knowledge has again put forum members personal details at risk (not the first time DIF have been relaxed with members security). If you were running a chatroom with thousands of members logging on, you would put a password in place to stop people accessing the server logs, surely? Well it looks like i_am was either unaware of the existence of passwords, or just didn't really care about releasing the identity and personal details of David Icke Forum members to any Tom, Dick, or Harry.

Having been playing around in the chatroom that night pretending to be Sean (it just asked for a nickname, no passwords!), I thought it would be funny to login as i_am and cause a bit of havoc. Well it turns out that when I logged in as i_am (remember, she hadn't set any passwords up) it gave you access to the admin control panel. It gave me IP addresses, Forum names, Time of logins, Email addresses, Even some plaintext passwords!

I've attached a screenshot of a small section of the details below to show exactly what I mean (obviously hidden certain details as I care about members security, unlike the David Icke Forum). I've also got some PM's with i_am screenshotted so will upload those shortly. My favourite line from the PM's was "Do you think I'm not capable?" The irony was fantastic.

If they can't keep these kind of details secure, I feel sorry for anyone that has given them their card/bank details! If you'd like to know if your details were affected feel free to comment below and I'll check the records.

Roll on April the second,is all I can say.

It's a data-mining operation anyway so security is far from what they care about, any data will have been handed to the control system firstly via gchq and tavistock, then after they give the all clear, it would have been sold on to some corporate parasite.

Is this for real?

This is no April Fools Jiggly Bitz, this is just David Icke Fools.

3point5 wrote: I can't take you seriously with that avatar,everything you say creases me up laughing.

"They took my stapler"

3point5 wrote:

You mean they actually have an option labeled - gag? Surreal!

OK - I was Freda Bloggs on DIF. I could easily have been logged in at that time/date. I have a static IP. If you have it - PM me

In their defence, that is actually parachat's admin interface rather than wording the DIF have made.

Quality Street wrote: Yup.........its listed just below the options :- Gimp mask,whip,traffic cone and enema.

Jiggly Bitz. wrote:

Traffic cone

Seriously 3p5? This is legit?

I never logged in to the chat so I'm safe, but there is something I'd be interested to know....

Can you cross reference the IP's and usernames for differing usernames and the same IP? (Sock account finding)

Quality Street, good to know you were Freda Bloggs, I always liked your posts

Yep, completely legit. I did mention it publicly in a thread the day after the opening night of TPV although as I don't have an account on DIF at the moment it's a bit awkward to find it.

Will upload my PM's with i_am shortly, just running off to lunch!

3point5 wrote:
No worries bud

I dunno 3point5, you faked one moderator's pm already, and it wasn't even April fools.

Sorry, just realised I ignored your cross reference question as well.

There aren't any that I could see, but that's not to say that users aren't hiding behind proxies. I'll see if I can run get the data into an easier to manage format. At the moment it's just plain text in an .odt document

3point5 wrote:
I don't mind doing the donkey work if you're happy to send me the file?

I'm doing nowt else

Question for you .35 - Is forum chat inherently insecure? compared to the rest of a forum.
For example, would it be easier to hack someone when they are using forum chat?
Reason being, on an old forum where there was a weekly chat I always got multiple firewall warnings and sometimes my browser would crash - same used to happen on skype.....usually after being on for 10 to 15 minutes.
The reason I ask is I that it happened again on the chat quiz at SZ on Saturday - it kicked me out a couple of times for no reason. Just curious

I may very well take you up on that Silver. I'll drop you a message when I'm at my wits end with it! lol.

In regadrs to chat being insecure or not...

If done properly then it shouldn't be any less secure than the forum that's hosting it. The biggest issue with a lot of web based chat services is that a lot of them run on Java which itself is a minefield of back doors and insecurities (one of the reasons why there are always so many updates for Java). I'd imagine Parachat (the chat software/website DIF use) is more secure than the DIF itself, it's just when someone with very little tech knowledge sets something up, it's very easy for them to overlook 'small' details which in turn compromise the safety of the whole thing. A website is only as secure as their weakest point if that makes sense.