October 7, 2008 at 7:53 am #29349
I downloaded Buddy Spy yesterday and figured the program out more today. Is there a way to use it to see all the contacts’ display pics at once or a way to see them at all when using Buddy Spy and do a list scan?
Also, is the program 100% safe? For some reason, it makes you log in through the program. I hope it doesn’t send my data and password to the creators of that program.
Also, about the bot settings. Is there a difference in them? I always see the words “online” or “offline” and not “invisible”. Though online can mean invisible.
Also, I find that using the avatar packet scanning method gives you false positives and the web check method seems more accurate. Which one do you guys recommend? Experiment with all of them?October 7, 2008 at 10:53 pm #171530
1. Not sure. I’m not even sure if Buddy Spy even works correctly anymore at all.
2. Yes, it’s safe. It needs to log in because you’re only able to scan the statuses of people on your buddy list only (at least through the way BS uses).
3. Offline means invisible and online means available.
4. I guess the web checkers. Buddy Spy hasn’t been updated in a while as far as I know.October 8, 2008 at 12:27 am #171522
Offline means offline, I would think, since all those people were offline and I scanned a lot and most were offline and only 1 or 2 read as online. If offline is invisible, then what is offline supposed to be?
I also use 3 different online invisible checkers incase one might not see the invisible user.October 14, 2008 at 1:47 am #171521
No, I’m sure offline means they are offline and online can mean they are either invisible or online (that is most logical). Maybe you made a typo.
You know where I can get the lastest update of Buddy Spy? A link? I tried looking on the website but can’t find a link to the actual download for the most recent release, though they say on the forum that there are newer releases. Also, the auto update feature seems to not work correctly and that is why I was trying an alternate way to download the update.
By the way, this is the most reliable Yahoo invisible checker on the net: Yahoo! Invisible Checker. It can now detect invisible users on Yahoo! Webmessenger, Meebo, Pidgin, eBuddy and more. It seems to work everytime. A few times, it read people as invisible and I told them I can see they are still online with that program and they responded immediately. That is evidence. I use other programs to scan too incase it may not be perfect. But that web site seems perfect and has been updated. check it out.October 19, 2008 at 3:16 pm #171527
I don’t really think any of the online checkers work 100% of the time. People have the ability to block so many different things, that the online checkers can’t cover all the options.
If someone is set up in just a normal way, the online checkers work ok, but I wouldn’t use it under the assumption that it will definitely work all the time.
There are about 7 different online checkers that work from a web site, and those seem to work ok.October 21, 2008 at 4:05 am #171529
Typically it’s Yahoo’s own servers that determine the online status of anyone. AFAIK, online checkers are more or less useless on the SP1 and AC4 server hives, while I think detection has a high false positive rate on the MUDs.
Yahoo’s been making some server changes as of late, and within the last 6 months, invisible detection has become more hard to do.
About the ways to block them, it depends on the tactic used. I know several of the used tactics in some online checker programs couldn’t be blocked or prevented. However, I’m aware of at least one way to fool an online checker to think you’re offline.
I really, really hope Yahoo eventually prevents detections altogether, and honor a person’s right to privacy and anonymity.October 21, 2008 at 4:14 am #171523
Fortunately, most people don’t have the knowledge to know about things like turning off your online status in Yahoo websites or even know what that option in Yahoo would do or why they would want to selected it. I know people who don’t even know what ignore means and they don’t know how to block. I can add anyone to my address book in Yahoo Mail who never added me or anything and see them online at any time, even if they never talked to me before.
Even if they do ignore me, they can’t block fake emailer (anonymous mailer), especially if I posed as themselves or one of their contact’s email addresses and name to get them to open the message and it wouldn’t be read as junk mail, unless it was a sophisticated junk filter. But Yahoo’s filter isn’t sophisticated enough to filter junk mail based on its ip address, only by the way the email address appears. I tested it a lot by sending the fake emails to myself. Windows Live seems to have a more sophisticated filter though. In this case, using fake emailer would make it impossible to be blocked.
Just to be funny and get my VN friend’s attention and to get her to read my email soon, I posed as her own name and email address in fake emailer or her sister’s email address and sent it to her and she thought I got her password and got in her account and emailed her by using her account to send an email to her same account. But then I showed her the fake email service I used. Like for example, you go in your account and see what looks like you emailing yourself, though you didn’t do it and you get worried. A good way to scare someone you don’t like though but can be a prank to friends just for fun too. My VN friend thought I got both her password and her sister’s password when I never did.
I never download fake email programs anymore since they can have badware and don’t seem to always send the messages. Instead, I go to web based fake email services that are free. It is hard to find a good one though. deadfake was a good one and you could even make your letters colored and bold, like in MS Word. But the service is currently unavailable.October 21, 2008 at 4:19 am #171531
Turning off the online status really doesn’t make a difference against online detection programs. They rely on certain packets to determine if a person is online or not.
Oh, and I know a way to block the address book trick.October 21, 2008 at 6:55 am #171524
But most people aren’t experienced and technical enough to know how, and that could work to our advantage. And it wouldn’t matter because if I can’t see them online in the address book, and I know a few of them like to be invisible, I got to the invisible scanner and I can see them as invisible and it is always accurate, it seems. Just about every time so far it was accurate and consistent. For example, I know someone that sometimes appears invisible in Yahoo when she is online in MSN, and it was being accurate because when she appears online in MSN but not in Yahoo, she is usually invisible in this case, and when I sent a message and told her I could see her, she responded; same with others. Here is the most accurate invisible checker to my knowledge: Yahoo! Invisible Checker. It can now detect invisible users on Yahoo! Webmessenger, Meebo, Pidgin, eBuddy and more
Let me guess; you block the address book by deselecting the option to allow Yahoo websites to show when you are online. I think I deselected that option in to past to test to see what it would and wouldn’t show and I had myself in my address book and I appeared offline in the address book even though I wasn’t; or maybe it was an error with Yahoo websites not being updated with my current status, or both.October 21, 2008 at 3:26 pm #171528
*If* you’re getting accurate results, then you’re lucky. I can’t wait for the day when Yahoo finally closes these holes altogether (I’ve sent several e-mails to Yahoo explaining how invisible scanning works, and ideas to prevent it). I’ve tested the little online scanner you posted, and it is indeed accurate, although I’m still able to trick it easily. If I can deduce how they’re scanning for users, I’ll submit that information to Yahoo too.
Oh, and no, I don’t turn off the online status. There’s a way to trick it even if you got that option checked.October 21, 2008 at 10:57 pm #171525
Yahoo makes patches and the invisible checker updates to find ways around the patches. It is a never ending battle. Same with viruses and antivirus programs trying to create new defs to catch newly created viruses, only for the virus programmers to create new ones, and the battle continues forever. Or one side creating technologies of war and the other side doing the same to counteract that and getting the same technologies to make their side even to the other.
Yahoo can patch things but it won’t matter because the creators of the invisible checkers will just update their software and find other ways. Kind of like Yahoo may have patched some things already but now the invisible checkers work again pretty well.
Seeing if someone is invisible or not isn’t a big deal and shouldn’t be a priority to prevent and isn’t a big breach of privacy. Now being able to read their convos is another story and could be going too far depending on the circumstances. Some people deserve to be spied on and caught for doing bad things. Kind of like what detectives do by spying and gathering info.
Of course I think this website goes too far: http://www.persiangap.com/ and after finding out about it and what they do with Yahoo ids, I stopped using it to see the status of the ones I care about. Now I only use it to sometimes view the people I hate so everyone can see them and get their id because they deserve that. Or I just click the ids that someone has checked and are displayed on the site or their pics that are displayed out of curiousity.
I like invisible checkers and I hope they stay there forever, although Persiangap should be removed because they go too far and store ids on the site. I would only use Persiangap to see enemies for now on; not the ones I care about. Just letting you all know before you make a mistake and check the status of a person you care about on Persiangap. Then when you realize that website (or the host) will keep the ids of the ones you care about, you will feel guilty. But invisible scanner does not display or keep ids on their website and also it is more accurate. So invisible scanner is the best choice.October 22, 2008 at 1:21 am #171532
They only get around them because there’s still little openings here and there. Yahoo can close the holes, it’d just take a little effort on their part. It certainly helps though if you know what you’re looking for, and submit anything you may find to Yahoo to fix.
But then again, with the massive layoffs about to happen to Yahoo, I’m beginning to wonder how long Yahoo can stay afloat without selling to another company (I bet they wish they sold to Microsoft now!).
In my opinion, invisible checkers are a massive breach of privacy and if/when Yahoo closes those said holes, I’ll dance a jig on Jerry Yang’s head… invisibly of course.October 24, 2008 at 3:50 am #171526
Buddy Spy seemed to be working too. I check a person who was invisible (showed up in Invisible scanner) and it also showed up in Buddy Spy as online (invisibles show up as online in Buddy Spy).
Anyone know of a service that can let us see invisibles in MSN or is that still not in existence since MSN is new to the appearing offline option?
Yahoo is a little better than MSN in the appearing offline department when it comes to being able to appear offline to individuals without blocking them. But in MSN, the only way to appear offline to say “1 user” while appearing online to others is to block that user.
Edit: I found an MSN invisible checker (one website claiming it is the only one in existence so far) here: Status Detector – Whitout Admition or Deleted From MSN Messenger? Check it on QuienTeAdmite but it looks like it could be what I read to be an email harvesting program and it is recommended that if you use it to scan users, change your password immediately.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.