How can we, the spam victims, prove that we NEVER gave consent to such-and-such website?
Only a person's maintaining a complete archive of all the email they've sent and recieved will solve that problem.
To avoid this problem, use a throwaway email address at sites like jetable.org spamgourmet.com or mailinator.com and let the spammers spam those addresses instead. Of course, the smart spammer/marketer will not accept an email address from such places in the first place.
On a related note, here are simple, uncomplicated techniques to stop a lot of spam and keep the existing system intact.
Without scrapping SMTP/POP3 for something else that doesn't have the ubiquitous presence and widespread acceptance as an email transport medium as SMTP/POP3, what more can be done?
For the record, below is one 'shining' example of mindless abuse comitted, filtered by CF13, documented, and recently reported to a 'blackhole ip list' site: (all email addresses and message id's below are 'munged' by replacing @ with 0x40 except for iamcf13@hotpop.com. This way, people who don't have effective spam filtering are spared needless spam. Also the name of my pc in the message id has been changed to [mypc] for privacy reasons as this is being posted in a public forum.)
--- Draft copy of actual sent email below --- --- Had to edit the content below --- --- to get past the lameness filter ---
From: iamcf13@hotpop.com --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: To: submissions0x40ahbl.org --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Subject: BLACKLIST ABUSIVE, MALWARE SENDING IP REQUEST: 0330088S-DNS.AC-BORDEAUX.FR [195.83.187.234] --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
BLACKLIST ABUSIVE, MALWARE SENDING IP REQUEST: 0330088S-DNS.AC-BORDEAUX.FR [195.83.187.234] --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
ac-bordeaux.fr on file at rfc-ignorant.org so it is pointless to contact them. --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
Please pass this information on to the appropriate news.admin.net-abuse Usenet newsgroup. --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
Regards, --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
Bryan Taylor --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
--- non-working postmaster0x40ac-bordeaux.fr addressess per rfc-ignorant.org ---
Return-Path: --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Received: from mx1.ac-bordeaux.fr (picsou.ac-bordeaux.fr [194.199.33.126]) --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
by mx2.hotpop.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93B963FA035 --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
for ; Mon, 3 May 2004 13:04:08 +0000 (UTC) --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: To: iamcf13@hotpop.com --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: From: Mail Administrator --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Reply-To: Mail Administrator --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Subject: Mail System Error - Returned Mail --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 15:29:19 +0200 --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Message-Id: --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: MIME-Version: 1.0 --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
Boundary="=_ _= 9711519(17729+1117966264)" --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: X-HotPOP-Delivered-To: iamcf13@hotpop.com --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
--=_ _= 9711519(17729+1117966264) --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason: --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter:
Your message was not delivered because the destination computer was --Ignore this text, its for the Slashdot lameness filter: not found. C
I don't know about you but to me CGI doesn't look real. The movements, textures, and impacts are always too perfect.
And therefore, not perfect. The mind boggles! If I were an android, smoke would be coming out of my realistic fleshy ears. Also, my name would be Norman.
Here you go!
http://soundwavs.trekkieguy.com/2/37/lie.wav
go to
http://soundwavs.trekkieguy.com/
first if 'direct linking' is not allowed.
Above links are not clickable to avoid Slashdotting and possible abuse issues....
And certainly Haydens' portrayal of his emotional aftermation was far from good acting.
I think Hayden Christansen's worst scene to date was with Natalie Portman and the (in)famous 'fireplace scene' from AOTC.
I was wincing inwardly watching that scene!
However, if Lucas's aim was to convey awkwardness in Anakin toward his relationship to Amidala, he succeeded handily in spades.... Otherwise, that scene is BAD BAD BAD!:P
Remember the (barely) restrained fury of Anakin when he brought is mother's body to the Skywalker homestead? I thought that was a brilliant bit of acting from Christansen along with John William's (memorable) music playing during that bit: memorable and scary! I think this scene showed Anakin Skywalker becoming Darth Vader better than anything else in AOTC--including 'BOTE' where all he has to do is put on the (in)famous suit of armor/life support system after is 'lava bath'....
Han Solo will probably show up as a junior officer on some Republic ship and he'll end up going AWOL after being sentenced to death for refusing to follow some outlandishly brutal order from Palpatine.
Betcha 'Han' goes and sees one of his senior officers played by Harrison Ford himself (in an uncredited cameo -- why bother, the SW crowd knows what he looks like)!
Any chance the 'cameo thing' will be done for Mark Hamil and Carrie Fisher (and possibly Billy Dee Williams and 'unmasked' David Prowse, Peter Mayhew, Kenny Baker, and Anthony Daniels [who had a 'real' cameo in AOTC?])?
Maybe,...maybe not.
If they did, the secrecy needed would make the NSA green with envy....
In this way, the principal cast from Episodes 4, 5, and 6 appear in unrelated, cameo roles in Episode 3, the last film of the second('first'?) trilogy.
PS: Whaddayaknow! Daniels did voiceover work on Ralph Bakshi's LOTR film as Legolas thus (tenuously) linking the Peter Jackson LOTR film trilogy with the Star Wars film series.
And the ultimate reason: Ep1 grossed 431 million, and Ep2 grossed 310 million. They're both on the top100 list of all time best grossing movies. And that's the justification... "we must be doing something right... full steam ahead!"
Then this means Episode 3 will do less than $300 million USD....Hence the 'proof' of the law of diminishing returns.
But then again, if Episoded 3 is not 'craptacular', I could be wrong....
1. Route all outgoing port 25 traffic through the sender's ISP mailserver NO MATTER WHAT.
2. If 1. is not done then use:
a. POP-BEFORE-SMTP to curtail unauthorized mailserver use. This is the simplest authentication scheme to use.
b. Otherwise only allow connections to bonafide mailservers. All other connections are refused (no more proxy access).
3. The recipient mailserver REFUSES to act as a 3rd party relay to relay email messages for the other two parties. The sender mailserver should look up the recipient's mailserver and directly talk to it instead.
4. The controversial step would be to employ spam filtering at the SMTP/DATA phase of the email transmission. Once the sender mailserver sends the recipient mailserver the email message, it is scanned for 'spamminess' and, if deemed spam, is rejected with a '421 try again' code to disconnect and slow down spammers or outright reject the message with a '570 THIS IS SPAM!' code and wait for the sender mailserver to disconnect. I wouldn't advise this as a rouge mailserver spewing spam could simply keep the connection open and tie up the recipient mailserver's resources.
A HAVENCO(-like) market opportunity....
on
Safe and Insecure?
·
· Score: 1
Let's cut to the chase and stop all the bellyaching....
Consider the existence of an ISP that offers 100% encrypted, 100% unlogged Internet access....
Kiddie porn is the only content not allowed at HavenCo but if everything flowing through such an ISP there is encrypted, they wouldn't be able to tell.
I am not advocating kiddie porn but this issue is the only drawback to my idea.
Chances are someone might take the plunge and set up such an ISP or may have done so already....
The RIAA / MPAA / BSA will be quaking in their boots if this becomes a reality. They would then pressure 'the powers that be' to unplug HavenCo from the Internet permenantly.
Re:Some "security" is based on zigs instead of zag
on
Safe and Insecure?
·
· Score: 1
It is still 'stealth or bust'.
By returning "I don't accept that kind of traffic!" means that the ruthless / badly written malware knows that particular IP address is a 'live one' ripe for the taking. Responding just opens you up to more abuse like responding to 'opt-outs' in spam email.
In the past year, I've had servers hacked, clients trojaned, and my spam filters bypassed in a dozen byzantine ways. Each time, I patch, upgrade, rebuild and move on. There is, fundamentally, a problem with this approach.
My program CF13 makes all those problems go away--making it virtually impossible to receive spam or get your system 0wned by emailed malware.
Here is the key test it uses to determine if a email message is spam or not:
If the email message contains anything more than letters and 'spaces', the sender is probably spamming.
Deceptively spelled words (i.e. V.1.4.g.r.@), all HTML text, URL addresses, email addresses, prices, phone numbers, and (almost) all postal mail addresses all violate the above simple rule and would be deemed spam.
The only form of spam CF13 can't detect is what I call 'striping' spam. It is the 'letters and spaces' version of the same technique done with HTML where the spammish content is rendered in HTML in 'strips' but viewed in the browser/browser aware email client as a normal spam message.
The suite of antispam tests CF13 uses are not resource intensive like Bayesian Filtering which the spammers poision at every opportunity nowadays.
As an added bonus, CF13 100% prevents system compromise by emailed malware.
How does it do this?
Simple.
It simply decodes all file attachments as 'text files' by adding '.txt' to the file extension of the file. This renders malware inert and makes it safe to scan, handle, and delete.
Right now, I have some unwanted file attachments sent to my iamcf3@hotpop.com email address sitting on my PC's hard drive. These files are likely malware but are so new my antivirus cannot identify it yet--thus necessitating a update of the virus signatures for the antivirus program. Until then, they sit as 'harmless' text files waiting to be properly identified as malware or deemed 'not malware' (not likely).
Give me software which allows me to set my email receiving/reading tools to only receive/read email which I have solicited, all others get bounced back or thrown in the bitbucket. Call it a spam firewall or whatever.
Consider the 'spamblaster' version of the CF13 program when used in 'whitelist only' mode, all other email is (usually) deleted at the server level after the headers are analyzed and further processing is skipped. This speeds up email processing and summarily deletes all other email as spam.
I have CF13 handle all my incoming email. I'm getting unwanted file attachments that are likely brand-spanking-new malware but haven't been detected yet by the antivirus programs as malware (just released into the wild). So these suspect file attachments sit as 'text files' on my hard disk drive waiting to be scanned and identified as malware--a likely possiblility.
I use Outpost Firewall to keep malware out at the Internet data transport level. Using both give me peace of mind after my run-in with Klez a year or so ago....
A friend once mentioned the idea that no auction should close until one hour after the last bid is made. Seems fair to me, give the other bidders time to re-evalutate this new information and react. I'm sure there are downsides to this scheme, but I haven't heard anyone discussing them
If eBay did that, they would go out of business for sure as buyers would leave them in droves.
Sad to say, sniping is the most effective way to buy something off eBay. It protects the buyer against shills who fraudulently bit up an item and prevents 'coattailing' where third parties use your eBay ID to look up stuff you've bid on. This would open you up to an expensive bidding war so why do that.
So, several years ago, the choice was tough for me: avoid doing business with people online, or be able to find great things? So one day I took the plunge, opened a PayPal account and starting bidding on things. Net result: out of 50-so items I won, I never received 4, and PayPal still owes me $150 of *my* money they just don't want to let go of.
So FUCK EBAY!
If you live in the USA, pay extra for postal insurance and pay your eBay purchases with a postal money order. If the USPS screws up and loses your package, you get your money back. If the seller rips you off, file a complaint with the USPS. You may be out of money (I don't think so -- not sure -- anyone knows for sure?) but the seller now has to deal with the Federal Government collecting consumer fraud complaints on them. Enough complaints of fraud and the seller may as well leave the USA and probably never return -- the USPS Postal Inspectors will be after them for sure....
I've used postal money orders with extra postal insurance for all my eBay purchases and never been burned once. However, I had to 'yell' politely but firmly at one seller to make a transaction good (maybe English wasn't the seller's native language....).
How can you afford $0.25/disk?!? Buy your disks on rebate, man! Talk about breaking the bank!
How long did you have to wait to get your rebate check?
How much information did you have to give (up) to get that rebate check?
Get an instant rebate at the time of purchase, pay a higher price, or pass the item up for something else to avoid the rebate-by-mail shenannigans and privacy issues....
The second and "pure mode" will use Shamir's discrete logarithm hash function which will be used with moduli longer than 1024 bit, so that the hash values used in signatures will be that long as well.
Shamir's discrete logarithm hash function (SDLH) The SDLH is base on a simple idea that once the message is converted into a long integer a hash of the message can be computed as follows: hash(x) = g x (mod p*q) given, that both p and q are large primes which are being kept secret so that factoring n = p*q is computationally infeasible. This hash function is provably collision-resistant, I quote the prove Ronald L. Rivest presented in his posting:
Adi Shamir once proposed the following hash function:
Let n = p*q be the product of two large primes, such that
factoring n is believed to be infeasible.
Let g be an element of maximum order in Z_n^* (i.e. an
element of order lambda(n) = lcm(p-1,q-1)).
Assume that n and g are fixed and public; p and q are secret.
Let x be an input to be hashed, interpreted as a
non-negative integer. (Of arbitrary length; this may be
considerably larger than n.)
Define hash(x) = g^x (mod n).
Then this hash function is provably collision-resistant, since the ability to find a collision means that you have an x and an x' such that
hash(x) = hash(x')
which implies that
x - x' = k * lambda(n)
for some k. That is a collision implies that you can find a multiple of lambda(n). Being able to find a multiple of lambda(n) means that you can factor n.
I would suggest this meets the specs of your query above.
Cheers,
Ron Rivest
Ronald L. Rivest Room 324, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge MA 02139 Tel 617-253-5880, Fax 617-258-9738, Email rivest@mit.edu
There are a number of issues to be addressed, especially when the SDLH is being used together with the RSA signature scheme and a full analysis of the SDLH's security can be found in the paper "A Discrete Logarithm Hash Function for RSA Signatures". The analysis shows, that SDLH can safely be used together with RSA once certain conditions are met with regard to the selection of the user's key material. For details I like to refer to the paper "A Discrete Logarithm Hash Function for RSA Signatures". about SDLH.
I found this site very helpful!
Incredible!...Crypto doesn't have to be complicated to be effective!
The Bible says: He that is without sin cast the first stone.
and left it at that, I wouldn't have had the parent post modded offtopic.
However, I opted to cite the entire passage as that is what I thought about when reading the 'grandparent' post and to avoid:
A text taken out of context becomes a pretext.
Also, this passage, to me, best shows the fallability of man and the hipocracy of perfectionism--traits that continue to haunt mankind to the present day....
Slashdot Mirror
Only a person's maintaining a complete archive of all the email they've sent and recieved will solve that problem.
To avoid this problem, use a throwaway email address at sites like jetable.org spamgourmet.com or mailinator.com and let the spammers spam those addresses instead. Of course, the smart spammer/marketer will not accept an email address from such places in the first place.
On a related note, here are simple, uncomplicated techniques to stop a lot of spam and keep the existing system intact.
Simple, uncomplicated techniques to stop a lot of spam.
Read about it here.
Aggressive POP3 mail filtering.
Without scrapping SMTP/POP3 for something else that doesn't have the ubiquitous presence and widespread acceptance as an email transport medium as SMTP/POP3, what more can be done?
For the record, below is one 'shining' example of mindless abuse comitted, filtered by CF13, documented, and recently reported to a 'blackhole ip list' site:
(all email addresses and message id's below are 'munged' by replacing @ with 0x40 except for iamcf13@hotpop.com. This way, people who don't have effective spam filtering are spared needless spam.
Also the name of my pc in the message id has been changed to [mypc] for privacy reasons as this is being posted in a public forum.)
--- Draft copy of actual sent email below ---
--- Had to edit the content below ---
--- to get past the lameness filter ---
"The more posts you moderate, the more your moderation points slip through your fingers."
Then the early cloners started using '586' for their Pentium clones. Savvy buyers still were not confused or didn't care.
:D
So the Intel P4 is really an '886' CPU XD
then the remaining meaningful x86 designations: '986' to 'F86'
After that, who knows....
Here you go!
Here you go!
http://soundwavs.trekkieguy.com/2/37/lie.wav
go to
http://soundwavs.trekkieguy.com/
first if 'direct linking' is not allowed.
Above links are not clickable to avoid Slashdotting and possible abuse issues....
That
Mod parent up! (^_^)
Rest In Peace, Mr. Roger C. Carmel (Harry Mudd).... (-_-)
I think Hayden Christansen's worst scene to date was with Natalie Portman and the (in)famous 'fireplace scene' from AOTC.
I was wincing inwardly watching that scene!
However, if Lucas's aim was to convey awkwardness in Anakin toward his relationship to Amidala, he succeeded handily in spades.... Otherwise, that scene is BAD BAD BAD!
Remember the (barely) restrained fury of Anakin when he brought is mother's body to the Skywalker homestead? I thought that was a brilliant bit of acting from Christansen along with John William's (memorable) music playing during that bit: memorable and scary! I think this scene showed Anakin Skywalker becoming Darth Vader better than anything else in AOTC--including 'BOTE' where all he has to do is put on the (in)famous suit of armor/life support system after is 'lava bath'....
Betcha 'Han' goes and sees one of his senior officers played by Harrison Ford himself (in an uncredited cameo -- why bother, the SW crowd knows what he looks like)!
Any chance the 'cameo thing' will be done for Mark Hamil and Carrie Fisher (and possibly Billy Dee Williams and 'unmasked' David Prowse, Peter Mayhew, Kenny Baker, and Anthony Daniels [who had a 'real' cameo in AOTC?])?
Maybe,...maybe not.
If they did, the secrecy needed would make the NSA green with envy....
In this way, the principal cast from Episodes 4, 5, and 6 appear in unrelated, cameo roles in Episode 3, the last film of the second('first'?) trilogy.
PS: Whaddayaknow! Daniels did voiceover work on Ralph Bakshi's LOTR film as Legolas thus (tenuously) linking the Peter Jackson LOTR film trilogy with the Star Wars film series.
Then this means Episode 3 will do less than $300 million USD....Hence the 'proof' of the law of diminishing returns.
But then again, if Episoded 3 is not 'craptacular', I could be wrong....
1. Route all outgoing port 25 traffic through the sender's ISP mailserver NO MATTER WHAT.
2. If 1. is not done then use:
a. POP-BEFORE-SMTP to curtail unauthorized mailserver use. This is the simplest authentication scheme to use.
b. Otherwise only allow connections to bonafide mailservers. All other connections are refused (no more proxy access).
3. The recipient mailserver REFUSES to act as a 3rd party relay to relay email messages for the other two parties. The sender mailserver should look up the recipient's mailserver and directly talk to it instead.
4. The controversial step would be to employ spam filtering at the SMTP/DATA phase of the email transmission. Once the sender mailserver sends the recipient mailserver the email message, it is scanned for 'spamminess' and, if deemed spam, is rejected with a '421 try again' code to disconnect and slow down spammers or outright reject the message with a '570 THIS IS SPAM!' code and wait for the sender mailserver to disconnect. I wouldn't advise this as a rouge mailserver spewing spam could simply keep the connection open and tie up the recipient mailserver's resources.
Let's cut to the chase and stop all the bellyaching....
Consider the existence of an ISP that offers 100% encrypted, 100% unlogged Internet access....
Kiddie porn is the only content not allowed at HavenCo but if everything flowing through such an ISP there is encrypted, they wouldn't be able to tell.
I am not advocating kiddie porn but this issue is the only drawback to my idea.
Chances are someone might take the plunge and set up such an ISP or may have done so already....
The RIAA / MPAA / BSA will be quaking in their boots if this becomes a reality. They would then pressure 'the powers that be' to unplug HavenCo from the Internet permenantly.
It is still 'stealth or bust'.
By returning "I don't accept that kind of traffic!" means that the ruthless / badly written malware knows that particular IP address is a 'live one' ripe for the taking. Responding just opens you up to more abuse like responding to 'opt-outs' in spam email.
My program CF13 makes all those problems go away--making it virtually impossible to receive spam or get your system 0wned by emailed malware.
My program, CF13 catches virtually all spam.
How does it do this?
Simple.
Here is the key test it uses to determine if a email message is spam or not:
If the email message contains anything more than letters and 'spaces', the sender is probably spamming.
Deceptively spelled words (i.e. V.1.4.g.r.@), all HTML text, URL addresses, email addresses, prices, phone numbers, and (almost) all postal mail addresses all violate the above simple rule and would be deemed spam.
The only form of spam CF13 can't detect is what I call 'striping' spam. It is the 'letters and spaces' version of the same technique done with HTML where the spammish content is rendered in HTML in 'strips' but viewed in the browser/browser aware email client as a normal spam message.
The suite of antispam tests CF13 uses are not resource intensive like Bayesian Filtering which the spammers poision at every opportunity nowadays.
As an added bonus, CF13 100% prevents system compromise by emailed malware.
How does it do this?
Simple.
It simply decodes all file attachments as 'text files' by adding '.txt' to the file extension of the file. This renders malware inert and makes it safe to scan, handle, and delete.
Right now, I have some unwanted file attachments sent to my iamcf3@hotpop.com email address sitting on my PC's hard drive. These files are likely malware but are so new my antivirus cannot identify it yet--thus necessitating a update of the virus signatures for the antivirus program. Until then, they sit as 'harmless' text files waiting to be properly identified as malware or deemed 'not malware' (not likely).
Consider the 'spamblaster' version of the CF13 program when used in 'whitelist only' mode, all other email is (usually) deleted at the server level after the headers are analyzed and further processing is skipped. This speeds up email processing and summarily deletes all other email as spam.
It is aggressive but effective.
I have CF13 handle all my incoming email. I'm getting unwanted file attachments that are likely brand-spanking-new malware but haven't been detected yet by the antivirus programs as malware (just released into the wild). So these suspect file attachments sit as 'text files' on my hard disk drive waiting to be scanned and identified as malware--a likely possiblility.
I use Outpost Firewall to keep malware out at the Internet data transport level. Using both give me peace of mind after my run-in with Klez a year or so ago....
If that is what I think it is, I've blocked it at the HOSTS file.
The mechanism uses a 5KB JavaScript file to display the ads.
When you are on dailup, every byte of bandwith counts.
Make the ads actual text-based HREFs on the webpage and they become unblockable.
Nay, I vaguely remember reading (all?) of them and found only the first one (THHGTTG) to be the best one.
Absurdist fun with a SF slant!
Too bad Mr. Adams's not around to see the big screen version of his famous work....
If eBay did that, they would go out of business for sure as buyers would leave them in droves.
Sad to say, sniping is the most effective way to buy something off eBay. It protects the buyer against shills who fraudulently bit up an item and prevents 'coattailing' where third parties use your eBay ID to look up stuff you've bid on. This would open you up to an expensive bidding war so why do that.
If you live in the USA, pay extra for postal insurance and pay your eBay purchases with a postal money order. If the USPS screws up and loses your package, you get your money back. If the seller rips you off, file a complaint with the USPS. You may be out of money (I don't think so -- not sure -- anyone knows for sure?) but the seller now has to deal with the Federal Government collecting consumer fraud complaints on them. Enough complaints of fraud and the seller may as well leave the USA and probably never return -- the USPS Postal Inspectors will be after them for sure....
I've used postal money orders with extra postal insurance for all my eBay purchases and never been burned once. However, I had to 'yell' politely but firmly at one seller to make a transaction good (maybe English wasn't the seller's native language....).
How long did you have to wait to get your rebate check?
How much information did you have to give (up) to get that rebate check?
Get an instant rebate at the time of purchase, pay a higher price, or pass the item up for something else to avoid the rebate-by-mail shenannigans and privacy issues....
Yes you can.
Use a third-party escrow service (with possible reimburseable shipping fees).
Pass up auctions that don't use one.
Problem solved.
The solution to that may be the Adi Shamir's Discrete Logarithm Hash Function of the Pure Crypto Project
I found this site very helpful!
Incredible!...Crypto doesn't have to be complicated to be effective!
I'll bet if I had just said:
The Bible says: He that is without sin cast the first stone.
and left it at that, I wouldn't have had the parent post modded offtopic.
However, I opted to cite the entire passage as that is what I thought about when reading the 'grandparent' post and to avoid:
A text taken out of context becomes a pretext.
Also, this passage, to me, best shows the fallability of man and the hipocracy of perfectionism--traits that continue to haunt mankind to the present day....