[ot] have we done this one yet

[darsy]

google for:

inurl:"view/index.shtml"
returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.

--
d.

[Ace]

On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:

>google for:
>
>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.

So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
worth watching?

--
Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
GSX-R1000K3
BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2

[Preston Kemp]

Ace wrote:

> On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > google for:
> >
> > inurl: "view/index.shtml"
> > returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>
> So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
> to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
> worth watching?

Rather spookily, this was the 3rd I tried:
http://66.179.101.58:2003/view/index.shtml

--
Preston.

http://www.muddystuff.co.uk
Off-road classifieds

'02 MV Senna '96 Tiger '79 Fantic 250
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uk_tiger_rides

[tallbloke]

Ace <b.rogers@virgin.net> wrote in news:cha5u0tn22o5q5gk2hjdunsmcq8k85b68m@
4ax.com:

> On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>google for:
>>
>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>
> So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
> to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
> worth watching?
>

Well aquick search pulled this one up:

http://65.40.185.58:8080/view/index.shtml?videos=one

On topic too.

--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3

[Macie]

On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:

>google for:
>
>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference/point of
unsecured/secured webcams?

--

Macie
ZZR600E1

[Ben Blaney]

Ace wrote:

>On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>google for:
>>
>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>
>So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
>to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
>worth watching?

darsy?

--
Ben Blaney

[tallbloke]

Macie <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:34c5u05g7gtsv2945l45d7enbtbhvoffus@
4ax.com:

> On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>google for:
>>
>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>
> Pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference/point of
> unsecured/secured webcams?
>

difference. You can't connect to a secured cam without authorisation in the
form of a username and password.

Point. You might want to monitor places or people.

--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3

[Cane]

"Ace" <b.rogers@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:cha5u0tn22o5q5gk2hjdunsmcq8k85b68m@4ax.com...

> >google for:
> >
> >inurl:"view/index.shtml"
> >returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>
> So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
> to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
> worth watching?

http://www.livejasmin.com/freechat.php?Performer=yoursweetangel&audio=0

[Champ]

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:43:24 +0300, Ben Blaney <m7@privacy.net> wrote:

>Ace wrote:
>
>>On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>google for:
>>>
>>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>
>>So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
>>to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
>>worth watching?
>
>darsy?

Well, certainly in the old days its the sort of service he would have
provided. Since he became a manage, however, his priorities seem to
have changed.
--
Please add "imo" to above post.
Champ
GSX-R 1000, GPz 750 turbo, ZX7RR Endurance Racer x 2
GYASB#0 BotToS#2 BOTAFO(T|F)#35 WG*#1 DFV#8
Team UKRM Racing : www.team-ukrm.com

[Muck]

tallbloke wrote:
> Ace <b.rogers@virgin.net> wrote in news:cha5u0tn22o5q5gk2hjdunsmcq8k85b68m@
> 4ax.com:
>
>
>>On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>google for:
>>>
>>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>
>>So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
>>to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
>>worth watching?
>>
>
>
> Well aquick search pulled this one up:
>
> http://65.40.185.58:8080/view/index.shtml?videos=one
>
> On topic too.
>

inurl:"ViewerFrame?Mode="

bought up a load of them too.

--
Bandit 600; CG125; FZR250RR; DS#1 ; DOMO#1 ; SH#2 ; SKoGA#7 ; BOMB#16
"CG125 the most fun you can have at Mach 0.08539"
Remove _TEETH_ to e-mail

[Whinging Courier]

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Cane wrote:

> "Ace" <b.rogers@virgin.net> wrote in message
> news:cha5u0tn22o5q5gk2hjdunsmcq8k85b68m@4ax.com...
>
> > >google for:
> > >
> > >inurl:"view/index.shtml"
> > >returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
> >
> > So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
> > to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
> > worth watching?
>
> http://www.livejasmin.com/freechat.php?Performer=yoursweetangel&audio=0

Heh. I got a kiss but I don't think she liked what I just asked her to
do.

--
CBR1000 - Work in progress
BOMB#14 ibW#40

[steve auvache]

Ace wrote
>On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>google for:
>>
>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>
>So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
>to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
>worth watching?

the monotreme

>

--
steve auvache
MZ TS150: for sale still.
Bandit 600

[tallbloke]

"darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> google for:
>
> inurl:"view/index.shtml"
> returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>

Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who *doesn't* use
NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously. Anyone here?

--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3

[steve auvache]

tallbloke wrote
>"darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
>@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
>> google for:
>>
>> inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>> returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>
>
>Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who *doesn't* use
>NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously. Anyone here?

Does it actually matter? I mean if it enables me to see tarts in their
undies doing rude things do I really care?

--
steve auvache
MZ TS150: for sale still.
Bandit 600

[sweller]

steve auvache wrote:

> Does it actually matter? I mean if it enables me to see tarts in their
> undies doing rude things do I really care?

All I got was a list of blogs all saying if you search on inurl:
"view/index.shtml" you'll see shed loads of nubile wenches accidentally
naked in front of webcams in their bedrooms.

--
Simon

http://www.sweller.co.uk/sob/

[Preston Kemp]

sweller wrote:

> steve auvache wrote:
>
> > Does it actually matter? I mean if it enables me to see tarts in
> > their undies doing rude things do I really care?
>
> All I got was a list of blogs all saying if you search on inurl:
> "view/index.shtml" you'll see shed loads of nubile wenches
> accidentally naked in front of webcams in their bedrooms.

Try it again without a space after inurl: (if you care enough to
bother...)

--
Preston.

http://www.muddystuff.co.uk
Off-road classifieds

'02 MV Senna '96 Tiger '79 Fantic 250
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uk_tiger_rides

['Hog]

"tallbloke" <spamtrap@tallbloke.net> wrote in message
news:Xns95DAB76276B8Eguinnessisgood@216.196.97.142 ...
> "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
> @c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
>> google for:
>>
>> inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>> returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>
>
> Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who
> *doesn't* use
> NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously.
> Anyone here?

People who want to use IP phones internally perhaps?

'Hog

[Macie]

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:50:54 -0600, tallbloke <spamtrap@tallbloke.net>
wrote:

>Macie <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:34c5u05g7gtsv2945l45d7enbtbhvoffus@
>4ax.com:

>> Pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference/point of
>> unsecured/secured webcams?
>>
>
>difference. You can't connect to a secured cam without authorisation in the
>form of a username and password.
>
>Point. You might want to monitor places or people.

Ta.
<fx: goes off to plot>

--

Macie
ZZR600E1

[tallbloke]

Macie <me@privacy.net> wrote in
news:fbk5u0dfcg87p11oev0ko7mrgbt9c4albf@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:50:54 -0600, tallbloke <spamtrap@tallbloke.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Macie <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:34c5u05g7gtsv2945l45d7enbtbhvoffus@
>>4ax.com:
>
>>> Pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference/point of
>>> unsecured/secured webcams?
>>>
>>
>>difference. You can't connect to a secured cam without authorisation in
>>the form of a username and password.
>>
>>Point. You might want to monitor places or people.
>
> Ta.
> <fx: goes off to plot>
>

Just be aware that secretly monitoring people leads to lawsuits, busted
relationships, and loneliness.

--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3

[Cane]

"tallbloke" <spamtrap@tallbloke.net> wrote in message
news:Xns95DAC3A6BB473guinnessisgood@216.196.97.142 ...

>>>> Pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference/point of
>>>> unsecured/secured webcams?
>>>>
>>>
>>>difference. You can't connect to a secured cam without authorisation
>>>in
>>>the form of a username and password.
>>>
>>>Point. You might want to monitor places or people.
>>
>> Ta.
>> <fx: goes off to plot>
>>
> Just be aware that secretly monitoring people leads to lawsuits,
> busted
> relationships, and loneliness.

Got caught eh, bummer.

--
cane ¦ fireblade
Aquila non captat muscas

[Brownz]

"steve auvache" <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote in message
news:i6$0yeDPOs4BFw4K@thecow.me.uk...
> tallbloke wrote
>>"darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
>>@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>> google for:
>>> inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>> returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who *doesn't*
>>use
>>NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously. Anyone
>>here?
> Does it actually matter? I mean if it enables me to see tarts in their
> undies doing rude things do I really care?

Close, you can almost make out the top shelf in this garage.

--
Cheerz - Brownz
http://www.brownz.org/

[Brownz]

"Brownz" <someone@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:c_BEd.331$X4.137@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> "steve auvache" <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote in message
> news:i6$0yeDPOs4BFw4K@thecow.me.uk...
>> tallbloke wrote
>>>"darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
>>>@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>>> google for:
>>>> inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>>> returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>>Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who *doesn't*
>>>use
>>>NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously. Anyone
>>>here?
>> Does it actually matter? I mean if it enables me to see tarts in their
>> undies doing rude things do I really care?
>
> Close, you can almost make out the top shelf in this garage.
>

Which garage ? This Garage ....
http://81.86.66.171:1035/view/index.shtml?videos=one

Duh.....

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "'Hog" <invalid@ukrm.net> saying
something like:

>> Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who
>> *doesn't* use
>> NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously.
>> Anyone here?
>
>People who want to use IP phones internally perhaps?

"I'll take that phone..."

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

[Ben Blaney]

Champ wrote:

>On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:43:24 +0300, Ben Blaney <m7@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>Ace wrote:
>>
>>>On 10 Jan 2005 08:08:19 -0800, "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>google for:
>>>>
>>>>inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>>>>returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>>>
>>>So, there's a list of 1010 webcams - now who's going to be sad enough
>>>to trawl through them all and find out if any of them have anything
>>>worth watching?
>>
>>darsy?
>
>Well, certainly in the old days its the sort of service he would have
>provided. Since he became a manage, however, his priorities seem to
>have changed.

****ing cunt.

--
Ben Blaney

[ogden]

tallbloke wrote:
>
> "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
> @c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> > google for:
> >
> > inurl:"view/index.shtml"
> > returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
> >
>
> Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who *doesn't* use
> NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams obviously. Anyone here?
>
Eh?

These webcams are almost all Axis units, and so function as what could
best be described as image servers.

How would you suggest a client on t'internet grab an image from a server
behind a one-way NAT firewall? And what use is a firewall when you've
punched a hole through it to allow access to port 80 anyway?

And, fwiw, I don't use NAT unless I have to. It's a crufty hack of a
technology which has its uses, but isn't the panacea some people try
and present it as being.

--
ogden, zx7r, not so much a power curve as a stepladder.

[tallbloke]

ogden <ogden@pre.org> wrote in news:41E4863B.6B5215F7@pre.org:

> tallbloke wrote:
>>
>> "darsy" <darsyx@gmail.com> wrote in news:1105373299.888536.42920
>> @c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > google for:
>> >
>> > inurl:"view/index.shtml"
>> > returns a list of hundreds of unsecured webcams.
>> >
>>
>> Not only unsecured but on real world ip addresses. I mean, who
>> *doesn't* use NAT these days? Apart from the zebes with the webcams
>> obviously. Anyone here?
>>
> Eh?
>
> These webcams are almost all Axis units, and so function as what could
> best be described as image servers.
>
> How would you suggest a client on t'internet grab an image from a server
> behind a one-way NAT firewall? And what use is a firewall when you've
> punched a hole through it to allow access to port 80 anyway?

Well poisonally if it was a camera showing stuff inside my building, I'd
set it up to remote desktop onto a mchine inside the network and use that
to view the camera on an internal address.

>
> And, fwiw, I don't use NAT unless I have to. It's a crufty hack of a
> technology which has its uses, but isn't the panacea some people try
> and present it as being.
>

PNAT is more useful I'd agree.

--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3