Today I found the following in my logs.

Host: 61.19.194.20 /user/soapCaller.bs
Http Code: 302 Date: Nov 08 21:50:33 Http Version: HTTP/1.1 Size in Bytes: 710
Referer: -
Agent: Morfeus f*c*ing Scanner

Seems clear that this particular agent means my website no good ( http://ekle.us/index.php/2007/05/upd...*c*ing_scanner ; http://stateofsecurity.com/?p=467)

1. I blocked it in .htaccess using RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} ^Morfeus [OR]. Is using just the word Morfeus sufficient to block ANY agents who use a name starting with Morfeus? In other words, when I block Morfeus am I blocking Morfeus f*c*ing Scanner, Morfeus Dirty Rotten Scoundrel Scanner, etcetera, or do I need to specifically block those agents by full name?
   
2. Morfeus f*c*ing Scanner was looking for httc://sub.mysite.com/user/soapCaller.bs
   
3. Since /user/soapCaller.bs does not exist on this particular website is there anything wrong with me 302? redirecting httc://sub.mysite.com/user/soapCaller.bs to, say, interpol.int or maybe even the US's NSA website?

interpol.int is the website of INTERPOL, the world's largest cop organization.

My presumption is that a simple redirect to INTERPOL should certainly get whoever is using Morfeus to abuse my site detected and, hopefully, punished severely since INTERPOL obviously has vast and sophisticated resources.

Hello!
What did that do on your web site and what is threatening?

interpol, nothing less ....
What do you think they will do?
Investigate to find where the robot operated, and then what ?

Beside, as Travis asked, what damage did this request have done to you ?

I still suggest that you not have a website at all.

Being security concious is one thing, being paranoid about every scraper is something else.

If you ask me, I would issue a report on his ip, if they come back, issue another, their isp will eventually get tired of the reports...Make sure after the first report to the isp, you make your message clear that you want his account terminated..What can you do without internet access to a website? Absolutely nothing >> Nada!

Oh come on guys, "cut me some slack".

I consider you guys my highly respected "peers".

I thought I made it clear in my post that I had researched "Morfeus f*c*ing Scanner" BEFORE I made the post. That is why, despite the fact that I almost always do not intentionally include live links in my posts on this forum, a fact you can feel free to confirm for yourself, I DID include the live links to "some" good information I found during the course of the research I did on agent "Morfeus..."

I wanted you guys to be able to easily see what I found out and, maybe more importantly, I actually was hoping that the webmasters of those websites, which seem to have only a very small user base currently, would see the referring URL in their site logs and come provide more information by joining the discussion on this forum. The http://stateofsecurity.com/?p=467 page about this "Morfeus..." issue is dated Monday 22 September 2008 so this issue is a very current one as far as that site is concerned.

Here is the vital point in the form of more than a couple of analogies. If I open the door of my home and I go out to my snailmail box and find a post card addressed from "Acme F*c*ing Post Card Senders" then that immediately gets my attention AND I will instantly, as time permits, start researching who they are and how I can report them. If I answer my telephone and the person on the other end says "This is Acme F*c*ing Telemarketers" then I am going to report them and, if it is easy for me to do, I am going to see that they get punished. If I drive into an automobile parking lot and the car I am about to park next to has licensing plates that say "100CRASHES-F*C*-U" then I will go and park somewhere else, even if the parking lot is at a st*** club. If some guy shows up at my FORMAL dinner in a T-shirt that says "I am going to F*c* your daughter", then, he has easily won my attention and the right to, possibly, be forcibly removed, by the appropriate authorities, from my property. If my boy is out in the yard playing with his friends and calls out, by nickname, to one of his friends by saying "Hey Arsonist throw me the ball", then, my boys list of people he can not play with just increased by one. If I open my BUSINESS email inbox and find an email from "Acme F*c*ing" anything at all then that sender goes on my spam list AND, maybe, gets reported if I can easily find who to report to.

"In the vast majority of cases I do not find ANY humour in being mailed, or scanned, or emailed, or telephoned, or anything by anyone or any entity with the word ...F*c*ing..., or similar obscenity or insult, in their name." It is extraordinarily difficult enough NOW as it is to discern the bad guys from the good guys, at least for me it is; especially when it comes to trying to discern who is looking for a potential weakness on your website to exploit.

So I feel entirely justified in immediately doing my best to block "visits" to my website from agents, or bots, or whatever that call themselves "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner". In most business, and social, contexts, at least the ones I am accustomed to, just throwing such obscenities around is not acceptable anyway so, to me, I can not possibly take them seriously and I can not possibly perceive them as anything other than a potential threat and act accordingly.

There is an old saying that says "If it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, etcetera, then it is probably a duck." "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner" agent at my site walks and quacks like a duck(problem) and, for me, that is a something I would rather, at least, try to stop before it matures(develops further).

I mean "come on". I might have a family and everything and some jack*** sends me a postcard or telephones me or something saying he(they) is(are) "Joe F*c*ing Something". He immediately gets a trip to my "Call the police" list.

My website(s) is(are) my business(es) just as much as my office is my business. My business is serious. It is my livelihood, not a game. If I get a letter to my office from "F*c*ing" something, then, that is a problem. If I get a visit to my website from agent "F*c*ing" something, then, that is a problem. I am sure there are scores of "harmful" visitors to my website that I miss or do not realize are dangerous so when I am lucky enough to find a "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner" in my site logs I am highly motivated not to be derelict in my duties to try and prevent the cre** from returning.

Incidentally, I do not necessarily scrutinize website activity/logs looking for bad guys it is just "how could I possibly miss some jack*** agent called Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner". What might trouble me is that the jack*** who presents that STANDOUT name to my site logs might be arrogant, either, because he/she is just a dumb kid OR because he/she is too smart for me to stop anyway.

There is obviously an increasing and urgent need for webmasters to be able to discern potential threats(bad guys) from good guys. Much of the time, for all but the most brilliant expert webmasters/programmers, trying to determine "who means my website good" vs. "who means my website bad" is very time consuming. Anything visiting my NON-por**graphic website calling itself "f*c*ing" something is, just because of its name, going to get blocked if it is within my power to do so. As far as I am concerned blocking something with an obscene name is quick and easy and I can devote the time saved by quickly blocking it to finding the, probably, really dangerous "visitors" to my site that do not access it with a bot calling itself "Jack The A***ole" or something.

Sorry, but I can find no deficiency in my reasoning with regard to this.

Even these very forums here block the word f*c* and, probably, many other such insults and obscenities. I found that out while ONLY previewing my original post.

I was really only trying to get you guys' input based on the 1 and 3 numbered questions anyway. And I also wanted to know if these forums had any users with knowledge of this, because, when I searched "Morfeus" on these forums, the search returned nothing. I had already made up my mind that, to the extent that it is easy to do, Morfeus' masters should be hun**d down and b***ed from, both, the virtual and the real world anyway.

Incidentally, what also annoys me is that the sub domain "Morfeus" came to my site on is not linked to from the root domain of this particular website. In fact, that subdomain, and the URL to which it redirects, were only listed on SNAILMAIL postcards sent out for marketing purposes to a particular category(industry) of business owners.

Originally Posted by tripy

interpol, nothing less ....
What do you think they will do?
Investigate to find where the robot operated

Yes, hopefully. F*c*ing is not really an appropriate word to be using in many contexts in the English language. I am not sure what it means in French or other languages. I am not trying to imply that INTERPOL or the NSA is the word police, but I am fairly certain that Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner showing up in the website analytics of those agencies would receive further scrutiny from, at least, one of their low level bots. In many cases these are the same agencies that already have huge resources devoted to scouring forums, social websites, etcetera, looking for MERE WORDS( *** httc://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2008/10/28/terrorists-on-twitter ***) claimed to be associated with so called ter****** or other such evil doers. *** httc://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/06/terrorism.books *** So lets not be naive when it comes to the "programs" such organizations actually carry out quite vigorously.["S***** M***k was being prosecuted in effect for a thought crime because she had downloaded some material from the internet which anyone could download."]

Thankyou again tripy for your offer with regard to a previous post of mine. That particular issue, so far, seems resolved and there is lots of work still to be done on the website so I am trying to make a list of people, like yourself, that I may connect with later regarding this site IF it develops into the good thing I am working toward.

Originally Posted by Brian07002

If you ask me, I would issue a report on his ip...

You are the man today. That is consistent with my thoughts.

61.19.194.20

Wow. We just learned the definition of "histrionic personality disorder".

Originally Posted by 052808

Here is the vital point in the form of more than a couple of analogies.

Danger, Will Robinson!! Analogies are a fantastic way to steer yourself away from the truth. All of the mistreatment that has been visited upon a century of psychiatric patients are the result of Freud confusing his analogy that "the human mind is like a steam engine" and forgetting that the human mind might in some ways be like one, but is not a steam engine. Trolling through your server logs is not like walking to your mailbox or answering your phone.

Originally Posted by 052808

If I answer my telephone and the person on the other end says "This is Acme F*c*ing Telemarketers" then I am going to report them and, if it is easy for me to do, I am going to see that they get punished.

While I don't think this would be punished in any area the Taliban doesn't control, I would suggest you not worry about things that didn't happen.

Originally Posted by 052808

"In the vast majority of cases I do not find ANY humour in being mailed, or scanned, or emailed, or telephoned, or anything by anyone or any entity with the word ...F*c*ing..., or similar obscenity or insult, in their name." It is extraordinarily difficult enough NOW as it is to discern the bad guys from the good guys, at least for me it is; especially when it comes to trying to discern who is looking for a potential weakness on your website to exploit.

Which means you'll help yourself more by learning to distinguish these things - even if it means having to understand how computers and networks work - than you will by flying off the handle every time you see a four letter word. Not letting your son play with his friends at dinner, or whatever the convoluted example was, won't protect your web server from being hacked.

Originally Posted by 052808

So I feel entirely justified in immediately doing my best to block "visits" to my website from agents, or bots, or whatever that call themselves "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner". In most business, and social, contexts, at least the ones I am accustomed to, just throwing such obscenities around is not acceptable anyway so, to me, I can not possibly take them seriously and I can not possibly perceive them as anything other than a potential threat and act accordingly.

Do you know about George Carlin's stand up routine, "7 Words You Can't Say on TV"? His jokes weren't potential threats to your web site. You're going to need a more intelligent security system than the one you've got.

Originally Posted by 052808

I mean "come on". I might have a family and everything and some jack*** sends me a postcard or telephones me or something saying he(they) is(are) "Joe F*c*ing Something". He immediately gets a trip to my "Call the police" list.

And if donkeys could fly, we'd be talking about something else. I'm not sure at this point whether you're worried about your web site being hacked, or if you're editing your .htaccess file so that your family won't hear curse words?

Originally Posted by 052808

I am sure there are scores of "harmful" visitors to my website that I miss or do not realize are dangerous so

So you need to learn how these things work, and which types of things can and can't harm a web server.

Originally Posted by 052808

Incidentally, I do not necessarily scrutinize website activity/logs looking for bad guys it is just "how could I possibly miss some jack*** agent called Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner". What might trouble me is that the jack*** who presents that STANDOUT name to my site logs might be arrogant, either, because he/she is just a dumb kid OR because he/she is too smart for me to stop anyway.

If I wanted to hack your web site, I'd visit it with a swear word in the user agent string from a proxy server, and then actually attack your web site while you were too busy chasing the swear down to notice a malicious attack. Obviously, I'm not going to, but you've made it clear that this would be a very successful way to take your site out. I suggest you patch this gaping security hole.

Originally Posted by 052808

There is obviously an increasing and urgent need for webmasters to be able to discern potential threats(bad guys) from good guys.

Knowledge will set you free.

Originally Posted by 052808

Sorry, but I can find no deficiency in my reasoning with regard to this.

Hopefully you can see them now.

Originally Posted by 052808

Yes, hopefully. F*c*ing is not really an appropriate word to be using in many contexts in the English language. I am not sure what it means in French or other languages. I am not trying to imply that INTERPOL or the NSA is the word police

The NSA won't care. Read up on Cohen v California. Interpol is equally civilized.

Many would maintain that the author has an obligation to define some or all of what the author has written as the author's opinion. The author may agree and is hereby doing so.

In my opinion if you do not understand my post then ask the person sitting next to you. Chances are he/she is one of the 99.3589+ percent of the population, including the founders of this forum, who have BLOCKED the use of f*c* and similar words, that is not you and, thus, both understands my post and agrees with its essential point and, as I would expect, are suspicious of obscenities being used in MOST contexts, INCLUDING the names of agents that visit their non-pornographic website.

If you do not take issue with "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner" visiting your website, then, hopefully you will publicize that fact and "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner", and all the similarly obscene named agents, etcetera, will visit your website INSTEAD of any of mine.

Incidentally, apparently you are not aware that opinions, precedents, etcetera, that "play out", or are invoked, in court are largely NOT respected in the REAL WORLD, outside of the courts, ESPECIALLY by large multi-national corporations and governments.

1. That is why a certain female US secret agent's life was put in dire jeopardy because her identity was revealed by, the general consensus may be, high placed officials in her own government DESPITE the fact that doing so is not only prohibited, but arguably treason.
   
2. That is why, DESPITE certain US "telecoms/telephone providers" denying it for months, it was ultimately revealed that the US government has a far reaching program in place to, as many have proclaimed, illegally, listen to telephone and other communications on a massive scale.
   
3. That is why, DESPITE a United Nations team on the ground in Ir** continually insisting that what they were doing was working and that there was no evidence of WM*s in that country, the world went to war with that country virtually solely on the basis of WM*s being there AND the US alone continues to spend upwards of $14 billion EVERY MONTH to prosecute a war? that was virtually 100% at odds with the OFFICIAL position of the United Nations and the COURTS at that time. httc://theiraqinsider.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-much-does-iraq-war-cost-per-month.html
   
4. That is why, DESPITE most civilian law("courts") defining the practice as illegal there are hundreds of human beings held in Cuba without even the simple "human right?" to access lawyers/solicitors/courts/etc., OR EVEN THE RED CROSS, that the courts maintain should be available to every human being. DESPITE the courts opposition, in almost all cases, the human beings being held are not even allowed to know what they are being accused of or held for. Many would say that, in a court of law, the right to know what one is being accused of is fundamental to the very foundation of the court of law itself.
   
5. That is why, despite the courts position being that the practice is illegal, we have "extraordina** rendit**n" where, as has been documented, human beings are essentially kidnapped by agents of the so called security entities and governments of which you speak. httc://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7444406.stm ; httc://www.desaparecidos.org/bbs/archives/003984.html
   
6. That is why, DESPITE it being defined as illegal by the "organization(s)/courts" who have authority in such matters, vast numbers of domain name owners continue to INTENTIONALLY falsify whois information for the domains they own.

What I have outlined/asserted is not necessarily intended to state my official opinion on the practices of those entities, governments, etcetera, whether for or against. What I have outlined is simply an attempt to say: "Please do not hold up some court case/ruling as an example of what guidelines/laws/rules MOST governments and their associated agencies(c*a, inter***, f*i) adhere to because many people would just point you to the fact that whether or not the aforementioned FOLLOW THE RULES of the courts has been CONSTANTLY in the "news" with regard to many events, especially since 20*1, AND OVERWHELMINGLY it is demonstrable, and has been documented, that they do not.

Further, those governments and their associated agencies may tell you that they can not do their "job" if they followed the legal rules of the courts. In other words, they must kidnap(rendit**n), despite the courts saying it is illegal, they must put the lives of their own secret agents at risk by revealing the agent's identity to the "enemy", despite that being prohibited, they must hold hundreds, maybe thousands of human beings, in prison and not give them any access to the courts, despite the courts defining such practice as illegal.

So, in my opinion, I implore you not to attempt to hold up some court case as evidence of what actually happens in the real world BECAUSE the REAL WORLD is littered with human beings who have been RUINED by entities(governments, government agencies, multi-national corporations, enron, etc.) who you would expect not to be able to perpetrate such horrors on the people because the law defines carrying out such horrors to be ILLEGAL, BUT the REAL WORLD is still littered with human beings who have been RUINED all the same DESPITE the courts saying that what was done to them is ILLEGAL.

My username is 052808 and I continue to approve and standby my post at: http://www.webmaster-talk.com/website-and-server-administration-forum/159733-should-i-send-him-to-interpol.html#post798138

It has been well documented that I can find no deficiency in my reasoning with regard to the ideas expressed in the aforementioned post.


httc://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2008/10/28/terrorists-on-twitter

httc://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/06/terrorism.books

What on earth does your semilucid ranting on the UN and George Bush's foreign policy have to do with your desire to sick European police on a piece of software that visited your site?

Originally Posted by 052808

If you do not take issue with "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner" visiting your website, then, hopefully you will publicize that fact and "Morfeus F*c*ing Scanner", and all the similarly obscene named agents, etcetera, will visit your website INSTEAD of any of mine.

Although my web site is open to the public, this proves that you should take the advice I gave. Expecting that an automated web crawler would visit one site instead of another, simply because an opinion was expressed in a web forum, proves that you desperately need to understand how these things work. Making emotional statements won't prevent your web site from being visited or hacked.

Many would maintain that the author has an obligation to define some or all of what the author has written as the author's opinion. The author may agree and is hereby doing so. All opinions "expressed" are opinions.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

What on earth does your semilucid ranting...

You stated:

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

The NSA won't care. Read up on Cohen v California.

You are calling it ranting in an attempt to, in my opinion, distort and "spin" what the thread starter posted.

The thread starter's response had everything to do with the demonstrable facts(you know...that list from 1 to 6) that an implication that some court case, referred to as Cohen v California, shows that the NSA's automated processes will not at some point, at least, moderately investigate activity on their Internet property from an obscenely named agent is, in my opinion, FALSE and further that, predominately, the legality(whether the courts agree with it) of the actions of the indicated organizations is LARGELY not a consideration they use to determine whether or not they take those actions, especially where perceived security concerns are involved. httc://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nsa#ECHELON

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

What on earth does your semilucid ranting...

The thread starter's response was a DIRECT answer to the post, in this thread, that raised those questions. Now, in my opinion, the very user that raised those questions did so to "pull" the "direction" of this thread away from the initial concerns expressed and then, that user, the same user that raised the questions to which I replied in the first place, tries to make something of the fact that the "direction" of this thread, based on the thread starter's subsequent posts, appears to have "strayed" compared to the post that started the thread.

Of course, it may have "strayed" BECAUSE that user, in my opinion, intentionally asked questions which "pulled" the thread in that "direction". A "direction" which that same user is now trying to say has little to do with the original post.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

...an automated web crawler would visit one site instead of another...because an opinion was expressed in a web forum...

Additionally, the context in which the thread starter has posted about objections to an obscenely named agent(bot) visiting the thread starter's website fundamentally had nothing to do with opinions in a forum affecting the behavior of the aforementioned bot and the mere assertion is, in my opinion, beyond preposterous. A certain user who has posted in this thread is strenuously, in my opinion, attempting to "spin" or distort the content of post(s) in this thread, I assume, to make it appear they are lacking or otherwise deficient.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

...George Bush's foreign policy...

The thread starter has not specifically said anything about the current American president. You did.

Please do not try to speak for the thread starter. Thread starter has demonstrated ample ability to do that for him or herself.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

...sick European police...

I did not know the European police were sick. You said that and it is the first I have heard of it. What is their affliction?

If you, in my opinion, lack the capacity to or do not want to, understand something that has been written that is, either, in my opinion, your deficiency or, in my opinion, your self imposed limitation. In my opinion there is no need to keep asking questions, which the thread starter will likely answer, if it is within his or her power to do so, in an obvious attempt, in my opinion, to "bait" and distort the facts. But if you want to keep it up, then, that is, of course, your choice.

It seems clear that if you keep asking questions that incrementally "pull" this thread away from the initial concerns expressed and then, once the thread starter answers your questions, try to "imply" that the thread starter is "pulling" away from the initial concerns expressed in an attempt, in my opinion, to distort and spin then I guess we could shortly be discussing whether or not Nemesis is actually located beyond the Oort Cloud.

httc://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2008/10/28/terrorists-on-twitter

httc://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/06/terrorism.books(

And his username is "no delete please" !?
I'd say "Do delete (him) please" !

Gone!