Xerobank questions ?

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by CloneRanger, Sep 4, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nathan C

    Nathan C Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Posts:
    50
    Re: Metropipe - CyrptoHippie - Xerobank - This Doesn't Look Good!

    Here's the URL for the complete argument:
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=1190124#post1190124


    It's a classic Topletz argument (as has been noted by others as well, Steve Topletz is his worse enemy when he takes on an irritating condescending tone or belittles those who challenge him).

    If a xerobank person ever comes back here (which by default has become 'the' Xerobank discussion forum) hopefully both parties will take care not to push the other side's 'annoyance buttons'!
     
  2. hierophant

    hierophant Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Posts:
    854
    The "XeroBank=Metropipe=Cryptohippie=Rayservers=Roque" meme is classic innuendo. That is, critics use evidence for relationships among these companies, and evidence that such relationships have been denied or discounted, to create FUD. Given everything that I've read about them since 2007, I believe that the principals of these companies are colleagues who have cooperated and competed in various ways for many years. AFAIK, they're all strongly committed to freedom. Some have employed and/or mentored others.

    None of that bothers me. Indeed, it's reassuring that such a community exists, and that I'd have trustworthy alternatives if XeroBank disappeared. Wake up, and see the [bounce][glow=red]fnords[/glow] ;)[/bounce]
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2011
  3. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825
    Your missing the point....

    Steve has clearly stated that he knows nothing about anything of this, but it has been also stated that Rogers Holdings is the company that owns all of them.

    So all I really want to know is who is this Rogers Holdings, do they own all three companies and if they do, then how can Steve say he has no part in any of this?

    Ok make any better sense now?
     
  4. hierophant

    hierophant Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Posts:
    854
    Please provide a quotation and citation for that statement.

    I presume that you mean Roque Holdings Corp. According to that Cryptohippie page, it and Roque Holdings Corp merged in June 2007. Please provide quotations and citations supporting the claim that Roque Holdings Corp and/or Cryptohippie also owns XeroBank and/or Metropipe and/or Rayservers.

    I invite you to consider the possibility that you have no right to know any of that. This section of Wilders is about privacy, after all ;)
     
  5. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
  6. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825

    I'm not saying we need to know Roque Holdings to a point that would endanger them in anyway but to know if there is a relationship here is all...




    Who's this Logan?
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2011
  7. Nathan C

    Nathan C Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Posts:
    50

    I haven't run across any postings where Steve was asked about Rogers Holdings. Going through the 2 threads that lockbox referred us to, this is what I could find out about what Steve Topletz says about the relationship between Xerobank and metropipe (the relationship with the other entities were not asked about on those threads that I could see, and thus there is no information about them):


    STEVE: What about metropipe? They are a pretty good anonymity provider and we know them and people who work with them. You might be surprised that most of us anonymity people know each other. However, they have a bad rep started on the fake-site "privacy.li" which is just a low-grade competitor. Nobody with half a mind takes them seriously, as their allegations are mostly made by the admin and his aliases, and then when asked for proof you get your post deleted or deafening silence. However, I think there are legitimate issues with their customer support, but that is just a question of what you consider timely. Personally, I don't trust anonymity providers that don't tell you who they really are. Steve Topletz isn't an alias.

    we hired one of their [Metropipe’s] programmers because we like the designs and wanted to get the inside scoop on our competition. No worries though, we have other programmers who go through the code, and independent auditors who go behind them. You'll get the transparency you want, which *nobody else* can provide. We're just bringing everything online, so be a little patient, there are only so many hours in the day to manage all these mini-projects.

    Quote:
    Is there a business relationship - at all - with Metropipe?

    STEVE: Let me be completely clear: XeroBank is an entirely separate and independent entity from Metropipe, legally AND operationally. XeroBank has aquired talent from independent individuals. Without stepping on anyone's feet in public, this is the same way the competing fierce rivals Microsoft and Apple operate, they source the best and the brightest personnel and resources to create high quality products. I'll leave it up to you to figure out which one of us is Microsoft, and which of us is Apple

    Quote:
    Your admitting to knowing the Metropipe people, etc. is a little scary. I know more than I should talk about. But, you say you've heard the stories and just looking for the proof. Well, if you know the stories, you know why there is no proof.

    STEVE: Ah yes, the case of the missing proof: All too common among us paranoids. Don't worry, I don't think anyone is going to assassinate you for spilling the beans and telling "more than [you] should talk about." However at this point I can't say I'm terribly interested. I can go down to the pub for similar tales about the-one-that-got-away, but unless I see a wallmount or at least a photo or *something*, it is all just couch fishing.

    The exit nodes are managed by the same tech company because then the leases aren't in our name, and they get to be the initial handler for the subpoenas and court order requests, further insulating our users. If you are familiar with networking, imagine these nodes as concentrators. It enhances the anonymity to have as much traffic going through the exit nodes as possible. Finding an entity with expertise in commercial anonymity techniques, law, and technology is more rare than a red diamond. Not much of a coincidence at all, because the other guys in town couldn't even find that. That's why they suck at what they do.

    As far as I know, the only involvement is one admin of MP, who brought us some code like the IPSpy, some very nice implementations of SSH, and turned us on to the previous server mgmt company MeshMX (which was recently purchased I *think*). However, the new network won't be using MeshMX at all, as we've acquired our own expertise on these matters.
     
  8. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825

    Nathan go back up and very carefully read my post, especially as it relates to a Domain Name Registration and what I have outlined here and Steve's replies to this in the other post I linked to and what I have explained that it doesn't work that way, which Steve is trying to explain that you can have the same WHOIS information and you can't....
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2011
  9. Sheldon7

    Sheldon7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Posts:
    73
    As described in the PDF file posted above by Nix:
     
  10. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825
    Ok....

    I fail to see where Logan has anything to do with Domain Registrar Information...


    THANKS
     
  11. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
    I feel like I'm in the "anonymity and absurdity" category of some internet quiz bowl. Remember College Bowl? Like that, but the participants are free to just call in. On acid.

    Hey, it's a thought. Why not? ;)

    That works, too. :D

    And DasFox, just...wow.
     
  12. hierophant

    hierophant Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Posts:
    854
    Like on bad acid, IMHO ;)

    Anyway, I'm very tired of haggling over this issue. If it bothers you that there may be associations among XeroBank and these other anonymity providers, find another provider that you like. If that doesn't bother you, and especially if it reassures you, be joyous :)

    As much as I love XeroBank, that's just not accurate. XeroBank costs much less per GB throughput than Cryptohippie or Rayservers, for example. I believe that it's more accurate to characterize XeroBank as professional-level anonymity for the masses.
     
  13. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825
    nix your comments are not appreciated and it shows a lack of maturity and respect and if you had any sort of computer experience then you would know what it is I presented that is quite clear to see, that you have failed to see.

    hierophant you also failed to see what it is I've shown you, even when Steve made his own comments in regards to WHOIS information, plus being rude and disrespectful...

    Next time guys, don't be so rude and acting like some hot shots when you both seem to not have any clue and then start bashing.

    I'm an easy going guy and I'm respectful of others so don't act like jerks disrespecting people because I don't do this and I don't like it and it's not right.

    So I presented information on WHOIS, why don't the two of you explain it, as I said it can't happen that I guess you think it can?


    Here's what Steve said;

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    Okay, so let me get this right. Because some servers have the same whois registrant data or AS for the IP block, they are the same or linked or ... ? As you dreaded earlier, here comes the simple explanation.

    Some of you who register for domains may be familiar with whois privacy services. This happens when you do a whois on an IP, and it isn't the same company operating the servers, or the same business, a different company that is responsible for the registration.

    Many major registration and server management companies offer this. For example, idotz, 1&1, godaddy, etc. all have this. So if you whois'd 100,000 godaddy domains that have whois privacy, they come back with the same whois registrant data for some company.

    You can see that here: GoDaddy Private Registration

    Does that mean they are linked? Yes. They have the same company doing their whois privacy on that server! However, I think your whois data isn't updated. I had heard that MP wasn't using RHC anymore, but that could be a domain controller issue, no telling. I'm unsure of which xb servers have RHC for their whois, it may just be the www server because we work with them for server bulletproofing. Why? That's easy. We get 20 hacking attacks on our servers every minute. That is 51,840,000 hacking attempts per month. Guess how many succeed? I'll give you a hint: XeroBank - Bank, X = Z.

    Remember, when the choice is between a simple explanation or a vast conspiracy, occams razor suggests to choose the simple explanation.

    If you need some better digital private investigators, I can make some recommendations. They cost a fortune, but they do really good work.

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    LOOK AND READ CAREFULLY WHAT STEVE IS TALKING ABOUT. -----> PRIVACY REGISTERED DOMAINS!

    MY POINT IS STEVE IS TALKING ONLY ABOUT DOMAIN PRIVACY REGISTRATION INFORMATION, I AM NOT! THE WHOIS INFORMATION I HAVE SHOWN IS NOT PRIVACY REGISTERED! GO LOOK AT THE WHOIS ON ALL 3 DOMAINS THEY ARE NOT PRIVACY REGISTERED AND YET ARE LINKED WITH SOME OF THE SAME DATA. STEVE HOWEVER SEEMS TO BE POINTING THIS OUT BECAUSE OF PRIVACY REGISTRATION WHEN THEY ARE NOT!

    YES WITH PRIVACY REGISTERED DOMAINS THE REGISTRAR IS GOING TO KEEP CERTAIN INFORMATION THE SAME, THAT IS WHY IT'S PRIVATE AND IT CAN APPEAR TO LOOK SOMETHING LIKE THIS SAME, AS IT RELATES TO THE REGISTRAR! LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN, PRIVACY INFORMATION WILL ONLY HAVE THE SAME INFORMATION AS IT RELATES TO THE REGISTRAR! AS AN EXAMPLE CONTACT INFORMATION IS GOING TO LOOK THE SAME BECAUSE THE REGISTRAR WILL USE THEIR INFORMATION, BUT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO USE ANY INFORMATION OUTSIDE OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT MAKES YOU LOOK LIKE THE SAME COMPANY, FROM ANOTHER COMPANY!

    ONLY SOMEONE WITHOUT EXPERIENCE WOULD SEE AND THINK THIS, TO SUGGEST THIS TO THE EXPERIENCED IS UTTER FOOOLISHNESS, TO MAKE THEM THINK THIS IS WHY YOU LOOKED LINKED TO THE SAME BUSINESS OUTSIDE OF THE REGISTRAR ! BECAUSE REAL INFORMATION BEHIND THE PRIVACY WILL NOT LINK TO ANY OTHER DIFFERENT COMPANY OUTSIDE OF THE REGISTRAR!

    THE KEY WORDS HERE PEOPLE ARE 'OUTSIDE THE REGISTRAR', THAT A DOMAIN REGISTRAR UNDER PRIVACY REGISTRATION IS NOT GOING TO LINK YOU TO AN OUTSIDE COMPANY AS A MEANS OF PRIVACY!




    LOOK at these links;

    http://whois.domaintools.com/213.239.234.50 (Roque Holdings shown listed below as operated by Cryptohippie with the same IP as Xerobank.)

    Look at Xerobanks information here; (WHAT IPo_O)

    http://www.whoishostingthis.com/xerobank.com

    Now for that IP listed above showing for Xerobank, click the link below and look at what information you see?

    http://whois.domaintools.com/88.198.80.243

    Odd Cryptohippie is show!

    SORRY guys this is not how PRIVACY REGISTRATION works, if this is Xerobank then Xerobank is listed not Cryptohippie!

    Next LOOK at this REMARKS!

    ---> remarks: Operated by Roque Holdings Corporation.

    Now if this 'Operated' is just what it means in plain English, then Xerobanks and Cryptohippie are operated, by the same company.

    Let's be clear here with this CHOICE of words ----> 'Operated' but instead not chosen 'Hosted' and there is a difference!

    Those 'remarks' are also not a means of explaining WHO the PRIVACY REGISTRAR is so you know them, but explaining their position towards who...

    READ also all the REMARKS! (It reads as ONE SENTENCE of information because it is!)

    remarks: Operated by Roque Holdings Corporation.
    remarks: Anonymizing networks for
    remarks: Cryptohippie Inc., PA
    remarks: Please contact in case of abuse.

    On one line it reads just like this;

    Operated by Roque Holdings Corporation Anonymizing networks for Cryptohippie Inc., PA

    A REGISTRAR, when you are doing a PRIVACY REGISTRATION does not associate you, especially with an IP of a different company.

    They also don't tell you that you are operated under the same company too...
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2011
  14. Nathan C

    Nathan C Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Posts:
    50

    I agree with you, Fox. Both sides are capable of dismissing the other side. Heirophant, people obviously have the right to pursue and uncover what they can about these anonymity organisations whether or not they want to be customers.

    Das Fox, the issue is that there is no reason why domains for different privacy providers should be registered under the same entity, even if they're going through the same servers (possibly because of lack of any superb privacy alternatives). Am I correct?

    Another still outstanding issue are those crazy connections to thesis writing services on some of the Xerobank pages (if they're still there).

    The last outstanding issue is whether there's any set date for Xerobank to reopen its forum.

    I doubt if anyone has bothered to e-mail xerobank about any of this and see what they say (or report that they're not replying). I'm all for the transparency that public discussions on Wilders promotes, but there's no reason why that can't be achieved by first emailing, then posting the results of whatever reply is received from Xerobank. I think in most cases we're too lazy to make the effort to contact Xerobank.
     
  15. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825


    Here's what I'm saying, that Steve is trying to say that if you use PRIVACY for a Domain Registration it's going to make different companies look related and that is incorrect.

    Here let's further examine this;

    Here is a PRIVACY registered domain called POWERUSENET.COM look at their WHOIS information as shown below;

    Domain Name: POWERUSENET.COM
    Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
    Whois Server: whois.tucows.com
    Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net
    Name Server: NS1.LIVEWIRESERVICESINC.COM
    Name Server: NS2.LIVEWIRESERVICESINC.COM
    Status: clientTransferProhibited
    Status: clientUpdateProhibited
    Updated Date: 19-oct-2010
    Creation Date: 12-nov-2003
    Expiration Date: 18-oct-2020

    Here is a PRIVACY registered domain called GIGANEWS.COM look at their WHOIS information as shown below;

    Domain Name: GIGANEWS.COM
    Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
    Whois Server: whois.tucows.com
    Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net
    Name Server: NS1.AMS.GIGANEWS.COM
    Name Server: NS1.DCA.GIGANEWS.COM
    Status: clientDeleteProhibited
    Status: clientTransferProhibited
    Status: clientUpdateProhibited
    Updated Date: 30-sep-2010
    Creation Date: 27-jan-1998
    Expiration Date: 26-jan-2020

    Now I don't know if these two are the same company they were the only two I could whip up real fast to show you what this PRIVACY REGISTRATION looks like and what it's all about, regardless if they are related or not, but let's pretend they aren't...

    The POINT is, these are the ONLY similarities;

    Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
    Whois Server: whois.tucows.com
    Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net

    And based on those similarities alone, which are the same they do not link you to look like any other company in anyway as Steve was pointing out over PRIVACY REGISTERED DOMAINS

    Now let's further look at them, to then see a break down even further;

    http://www.whoishostingthis.com/powerusenet.com

    powerusenet.com is hosted by 1&1 and I happen to of used them for hosting several years ago so I know who they are, a HOSTING PROVIDER.

    Look now below at the IP information to further show you the relationship of 1&1

    http://whois.domaintools.com/74.208.171.41

    Next let's look at Giganews;

    http://www.whoishostingthis.com/giganews.com

    From the link above they HOST themselves and let's look at the IP you see there at this link below;

    http://whois.domaintools.com/216.196.100.135

    Now from all this information above do you see anything for two companies that have used PRIVACY REGISTRATION that links them in any way together? The answer is ----> NO!

    Now let's go back to Xerobank so you that you will all finally get a clearer picture.

    LOOK at this link; ( WHAT IS THE IP YOU SEE & ALSO WHO DOES IT SAY IT HOSTS THEM?)

    http://www.whoishostingthis.com/xerobank.com

    Now let's look up that Xerobank IP;

    http://whois.domaintools.com/88.198.80.243

    Now from the above information we see an association here to Xerobank.

    Look at what the 'remarks' section show for the above link;

    remarks: Operated by Roque Holdings Corporation.
    remarks: Anonymizing networks for
    remarks: Cryptohippie Inc., PA
    remarks: Please contact in case of abuse.

    Then here is that Cryptohippie.net Xerobank gets linked to with their information;

    http://www.whoishostingthis.com/cryptohippie.net

    NOW look

    Cryptohippie.net (This doesn't show us anything, but going to the .com it links up back to .net which is under Roque Holdings.)
    http://whois.domaintools.com/188.40.75.117

    But go to this URL and Roque is brought up; http://cryptohippie.net/about.html

    Cryptohippie.com (Now in this information Roque Holdings Corporation comes up linking it to Roque which is linked in Xerobank information to .net, quite interesting.)

    http://whois.domaintools.com/78.47.105.60

    Another thing that ties both of the Cryptohippie in the above information is Hetzner Online AG.

    Also one last interesting note here that I just now noticed is that Germany Zonice Menk & Fieseler Gbr is listed as the Host for Cryptohippie.com but Roque Holdings Corporation comes up as 'Operated' by'. This might seem to appear as very small information, but this is showing us something here...

    If you are a specialist as you've claimed to be like Steve, then why not come out and let us know if you are hosted or owned by the same company, because a person of this level of experience would know this, yet the information about this seems to go unavoided.

    So they are either hosted or owned by the same company, but because Steve, with his information has been quite lacking never telling us, it raises some doubt here...
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2011
  16. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Oz
    Well if he's been hangin' out with Steve he's probably been known by many names.:doubt:

    l_b60d1c3401dd3dd56977a3715a0cc142.gif
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2011
  17. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
    What we have here again is a failure to communicate, Das Fox. The point is, we have no way to determine the relationships under Roque Holdings. Until we do, I'd rather save the innuendo and grand conspiracy claims for, say, Abraxas. And if I have to pick between xb and anonymizer, I'm back at the quiz bowl. Now, let's get our lockout buzzers ready:

    Using accepted tenets of complexity theory, a theory that treats organizations and firms as collections of strategies and structures, assign xb and Anonymizer to the acronym that best describes the essence of their form, or in the vernacular, their "gestalt" :

    A) CIA
    B) MIA
    C) TBA
    D) WTF

    And to make it fun, this can be one of those "tossup" questions. That means only one person from your team gets to answer ;)
     
  18. Sheldon7

    Sheldon7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Posts:
    73
    Nathan, while I believe you are trying to be pragmatic, you again have used your catchphrase, that you "doubt anyone has bothered" to contact Xb. Thems fightin' words!

    I have emailed Wizard the questions above about Xb relationships with Cryptohippie. I have emailed the questions about downtime and node issues. I have emailed questions about the thesis writing service. And other issues, both big and small.

    Wizard has confirmed receipt of some of the emails, and said he will respond publicly on Wilders. I should note some of these emails are approaching a two months since he said he would reply publicly on Wilders (or privately via email for that matter).

    As I have said in the past, at least Wizard responds to emails. Xb cannot be criticised for not being available to customers as the guy does respond.

    Beyond technical advice though, the questions do still remain unanswered.
     
  19. Nathan C

    Nathan C Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Posts:
    50
    Now I understand. It's a good point. If a Xerobank person ever comes back on here, they should be asked. If they don't come back here, someone might make the effort to e-mail them and see if they'll reply. In any case, it's a standing mystery that xerobank should explain. I agree with ya.
     
  20. Nathan C

    Nathan C Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Posts:
    50
    Sheldon7, you've certainly provided more substance on this than many with their complaints. So it seems that Xerobank confirms receipt of e-mailed questions, but doesn't actually answer the questions. That's not much difference than providing no support at all. The longer Xerobank waits to answer questions like these, the more it seems (at least to me) that they're trying to work out a convincing answer... which isn't too convincing once it comes out.
     
  21. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825


    nix you either have very little computer experience and can't understand what I have shown which is quite damming or you think I'm some sort of newbie...

    The truth is Steve has been asked about this before and denied knowing anything, but then how do you get to be such a computer expert and you can't explain these similarities?

    But then guess what? He did try and explain as I also pointed out talking about the PRIVACY REGISTRATION as to why this could be like this and I said it can't. The TRUTH is it's impossible for two separate companies to be linked like this through PRIVACY REGISTRATION!

    So am I being CLEAR enough now for you nix? If not let me say it again, Steve tried to explain that a company can be linked to another company by PRIVACY REGISTRATION and you can't, it's IMPOSSIBLE nix!

    And if you are truly just hosted by these companies, then as a supposed computer expert of your level why then would you not know that the competition was hosted by the same company and simply let us know?

    BUT as I pointed out one of the Cyrptohippie domains is under a different host, here look again;

    http://whois.domaintools.com/78.47.105.60

    They are hosted by Germany Zonice Menk & Fieseler Gbr and then listed under the 'remarks' as Operated by Roque Holdings Corporation.

    remarks: Operated by Roque Holdings Corporation.
    remarks: Anonymizing networks for
    remarks: Cryptohippie Inc., PA
    remarks: Please contact in case of abuse.

    As I pointed out, that based on that information it looks very much like they are the owners.

    So if you don't understand anything you are reading, then fine, but don't get on here when I have presented very legitimate credible evidence and explained it and act like it's all some BS when it's not.

    I'm not here to bash or cover up, but by your slanders towards me, with grand conspiracy claims are just rubbish, because this is no conspiracy, but you just obviously don't know how to interpret it and then when it's been explained failed to acknowledge it as well and then try to throw it back in my face like some circus act I'm putting on here.

    It seems clear you are on the side of covering up something, trying to make me look like a fool with very clear evidence.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2011
  22. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
    Yes, sir. Quite clear. ;)


    Well, DasFox, I have no more need to cover up anything than you do. I'm just pointing out that the legal entity involved with all three concerns is a holding company. I cannot begin to imagine the ways in which Roque Holdings might be structured. Therefore, Topletz's information in regard to relationships, or lack thereof, among the parties, when one takes into account leasing arrangements, ease and consolidation of legal agency, intellectual property concerns, etc., is thus plausible and conceivably segues with all the technical information you've so graciously provided :)

    Is that better?
     
  23. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825

    Sorry if I'm coming off rude, I just didn't appreciate you making this seem like the information I provided made this look like some circus act conspiracy because the information tells another story, because it's not.

    And regardless of how it's structure, well then in what way is this supposed Holding Company working?

    The bottom are facts that make this look very suspect...

    1. Steve tried to cover this up with the excuse of PRIVACY REGISTRATION.

    2. A supposed expert in their field, would also have the experience to explain why the similarities, but they are denied as other means, like number 1 above.

    3. If this is a holding company or any other venture then letting the general public know a little about it, to help dispel any myths will not in any way, ruin your company, but hiding known legitimate information as I've shown that some how link you and then deny that, shows, what appears as not being very upfront over this situation, like a possible cover up of his own.

    4. And the last fact I never mentioned is Metropipe, look at this information;

    http://www.whoishostingthis.com/metropipe.net
    http://whois.domaintools.com/213.239.234.50

    There has been a lot of information over Metropipe.net being a scam that also dates back 5 years, so if then possibly any of that is true and this Metropipe a part of all the others, well, maybe it's some of the reality here, or maybe not, but with the way Steve has been acting with his replies towards this and taking into account how Metropipe is some how tied to the others with a bad history, well it just makes things look worse.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2011
  24. hierophant

    hierophant Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Posts:
    854
    @DasFox

    IMHO, you are missing the point that ambiguity helps protect (in a small way, at least) the security of XeroBank and the other companies you've mentioned. Why would you expect clarification on a public website?
     
  25. DasFox

    DasFox Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,825

    This information is on their site;

    XeroBank is a brand of Xero Networks AG, a privately held corporation formed in the Republic of Panama.

    Now change it to this;

    XeroBank is a brand of Xero Networks AG, a privately held corporation formed in the Republic of Panama under Roque Holdings Inc.

    Changing the information in this way will not pose a threat to anyone, this is how little of clarification I would expect, yet we can't even get that...

    Since you mentioned in public, then like this, but I never asked for anything in public, just that the information is given when asked is all, where ever that may be...

    You can contact a lot of very private VPN providers the world over and get a lot more information out of them that doesn't jeopardize their business.

    Just because you have a name and some information doesn't mean you can do anything with it against anyone, to pose them any types of risks of attacks, unless they have made their information somewhere public that makes it easy to find them with the little bit of information you have. In this case getting a name, now just because we have a name, does that mean we can find anything else on them, addresses, contact information, etc.? No of course not if you are as good as Xerobank claims to be, then you'll never find anything with just a name, that's how absurd this really is.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2011
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.