Honesty Rocks! truth rules.

Similar Ips And Posts From Different Users

HOME      >>       Staff Room

Dooga

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

 

The IPs are similar, and the users have similar posts. Looks like the same person to me.

I apologize if this image stretches your screen.

Posted Image

 

Here's another one: http://forums.xisto.com/index.php?shomp;

 

Edit: I guess here is a one page list with all the posts. http://forums.xisto.com/index.php?actsult_type=posts


jlhaslip

Do a check of Member / Posts from 91.124.*.* to see the full story...Very likely the same person or a couple of young girls who are friends. Likely a revolving IP number from the same ISP???Admins have different / better IP tools than we get, but that would be my take on it.


rvalkass

Looking at the sheer number of members that come up from that IP block (91.124.*.*) it would seem that they are dynamic IPs from the ISP (or one person has been incredibly busy :XD:) That whole block is owned by one ISP in Ukraine, so it might be possible that the three users in the screenshot are the same person (or friends) but I doubt all of them on that IP block are.


Plenoptic

I can see what you are getting at. Each of the three users have posted one or two posts that have just a link and an explanation of the offer in one sentence. But it could just be people of the same age group. One of the topics had answers from two of them, at the same time of day just a day apart but who knows. One day they may screw up and we'll find out.


Dooga

By the way I did a search on another person with this IP:tigercat 68.62.39.217 18 26-August 07 [HOSTED] Edit Memberhelpfulbuffalo 68.62.39.217 0 18-August 07 Members Edit Memberrekaerbpart 68.62.39.217 2 14-August 07 Members Edit Memberabc123 68.62.39.217 0 9-August 07 Members Edit MemberClearly he has many accounts on the forum. And the "HelpfulBuffalo" is probably here to cause havoc. And many of his accounts are complaints about the forum, not to mention the "offically funniest post in Xisto" as declared by OpaQue :XD:I think when we screen or approve new accounts there is an additional trouble to worry about: IP addresses


jlhaslip

By the way I did a search on another person with this IP:
tigercat 68.62.39.217 18 26-August 07 [HOSTED]Edit Member
helpfulbuffalo 68.62.39.217 0 18-August 07 Members Edit Member
rekaerbpart 68.62.39.217 2 14-August 07 Members Edit Member
abc123 68.62.39.217 0 9-August 07 Members Edit Member

We knew of the connection between the last three, but tigercat is news to me...

Could that IP be a Proxy Server? BH has some tools/tricks for figuring that out.

rvalkass

They might not be the same person - that IP address is owned by Comcast and appears to be used for people in Michigan. If they've all got dynamic IPs and use Comcast accounts then they may not be the same person (but could be neighbours :XD:). Then again it is possible they are one person. I don't know if COmcast give people static or dynamic IPs?

I think when we screen or approve new accounts there is an additional trouble to worry about: IP addresses

Yeah, it looks like we may need to start doing IP lookups for each application. Although, if people do have dynamic IPs, its not entirely reliable.

BuffaloHelp

I was searching to see if someone with Comcast was running a proxy service. I have contacted Comcast directly but the idiots want spam proof and did not concern themselves with proxy service. Frankly, I don't think they understood what a proxy service was or even thought about someone running a proxy service with their ISP.It's bit too late to IP block them since the latter 3 clowns are not logging in anymore. But if they return I will place their latest IP's on the block list.tigercat seems to be unrelated with the 3 clowns as of this point. His/her dynamic IP was just recycled by ISP--Comcast Michigan area.Regarding the topic start: obviously the first topic was spam since it offered no real contribution/description and plastered a live url for linkback. And followed by one-liner and a bump, this topic should have been in STTBA--clearly :XD: