setting up an email for keylogger

[biggs66]

i read a tutorial for spytector and it said you can't use a yahoo account so i wanted to know what other type of free email can i use for keyloggers?

[Ezekiel]

i read a tutorial for spytector and it said you can't use a yahoo account so i wanted to know what other type of free email can i use for keyloggers?

I know that Hotmail and Gmail allow unrestricted email to be sent on their MX servers, as long as it is to one of their own addresses (i.e. they're not open relays). I'm sure you can send mail through Yahoo's servers - most likely the problem is the programmers are too lazy to add the Yahoo servers' addresses into the program.

[biggs66]

The email feature works with almost all email providers, but not with Hotmail. In the case of few email providers it may happen to receive the logs in the Bulk/Junk folder, depending on your account settings.
-from spytector help section

I'm using ardamax keylogger and i guess the above is true for it too because when I test the email address, a dialogue box states "Failed to connect to SMTP server. Socket is not connected."

[squidderuds]

spytector is the best keylogger availabe it was created by tataye(the creator of beast trojan)he is one of my good friends and his program works very well

[biggs66]

ok but the spytector still states you can't use hotmail. i'm thinking ardamax has the same problem but since I already paid for it I want to use it how I originally planned too. This could be the "newbish" question ever but what other type of e-mail service is there than hotmail?

[squidderuds]

lmao thousands

[Ezekiel]

The email feature works with almost all email providers, but not with Hotmail. In the case of few email providers it may happen to receive the logs in the Bulk/Junk folder, depending on your account settings.
-from spytector help section

I'm using ardamax keylogger and i guess the above is true for it too because when I test the email address, a dialogue box states "Failed to connect to SMTP server. Socket is not connected."

If they can't send emails to Hotmail accounts, they fail at programming. I can spoof emails to Hotmail accounts via mx*.hotmail.com.

[squidderuds]

he has absolutley not failed at programming,i can guarantee that you couldnt code anything near as good as this,this is the best and most advanced keylogger on the net

[Moonbat]

I don't think it's the fact that Spytector can't it's just that it'll probably get marked as containing a 'logger or something, so they won't waste time.

[Ezekiel]

he has absolutley not failed at programming,i can guarantee that you couldnt code anything near as good as this,this is the best and most advanced keylogger on the net

Anyone who uses the "best and most advanced keylogger on the net" is still using a prepackaged tool someone else created, so it is a moot point. If it is the best keylogger on the internet, well done to him.

Just out of interest, why do you keep promoting spytector here - are you getting some sort of cut of the profits?

[squidderuds]

no im absolutley not getting a cut out of it,just trying to help my friend...as any would,and it doesnt work because hotmail blocks those type of emails,it has nothing to do with the program

[Ezekiel]

no im absolutley not getting a cut out of it,just trying to help my friend...as any would,and it doesnt work because hotmail blocks those type of emails,it has nothing to do with the program

Hotmail allows incoming mail to be sent to its SMTP server, like any email service. I have done it before. All emails are the same, sent by the same protocol.

[squidderuds]

Hotmail allows incoming mail to be sent to its SMTP server, like any email service. I have done it before. All emails are the same, sent by the same protocol.

thats absolutely not true at all

[Ezekiel]

thats absolutely not true at all

Yes, it is. You clearly don't know what you're talking about, so I cordially invite you to shut up.

Also, stop saying absolutely.

[squidderuds]

you clearly have no idea what your talking about...

you should absolutley read this

http://www.postcastserver.com/help/Port_25_Blocking.aspx

and port 25 is what spytector tries to send it on.

notice at the bottom it says which providers do this,and then it says msn(which is hotmail)

get your information correct before you flame dumbass,your ABSOLUTLEY retarded

[Ezekiel]

you clearly have no idea what your talking about...

you should absolutley read this

http://www.postcastserver.com/help/Port_25_Blocking.aspx

and port 25 is what spytector tries to send it on.

notice at the bottom it says which providers do this,and then it says msn(which is hotmail)

get your information correct before you flame dumbass,your ABSOLUTLEY retarded

What I said is correct; what you have said is not. I'll try explaining things more slowly this time because you don't seem to be understanding anything.

That article refers to ISPs blocking connections on port 25. This is done on your side of the connection, not the side of the SMTP server, and if your ISP blocks port 25, you can't connect to ANY mail server. Your ISP is not your email service, and the confusion you're experiencing is due to the fact that MSN is listed as an ISP on that list (they provide ISP services as well as webmail), and both are two different things. Here's some ASCII art to explain:

<YOU>------<ISP>-------<EMAIL SERVICE>

If your ISP blocks port 25 connections...

<YOU>------<ISP>---| <- PORT 25 BLOCKED.

In other words, if you can connect to one SMTP server, you can connect to them all. Things are the same. If your ISP blocks port 25 connections, you can't connect to any SMTP server.

Still don't understand? YOUR ISP IS NOT YOUR EMAIL SERVICE.


get your information correct before you flame dumbass

You were the one with incorrect information. You lose.


your ABSOLUTLEY retarded

You, however, do not even know how to say "you're" correctly.

[squidderuds]

your right i didnt read it all the way through and didnt notice it said isp but you are still wrong and when i have more time ill look it up and prove it to you,you are the dumbass,your the one that used to say you cant connect to people behind a router,so quit acting like you know everything when you dont. and dont say you didnt say that cuz ill just find the post and show it to you

[Ezekiel]

your the one that used to say you cant connect to people behind a router,

You can't, unless they choose to expose themself via the router's settings or by running a program which connects out back to you. This argument is like me saying "You can't walk to Japan", and then you turning around and saying "Actually yes you can, if you travel by plane or ***t.". It is beside the point. There are always going to be ways to do something, but *********ly speaking you can't connect to someone behind a router unless they first make arrangements on their end.

[nozf3r4tu]

ok guys,since we're in this matter,maybe somebody can throw some light on this.I tried the remote feature setup for perfect keylogger,now when im finished filling out the blanks,i try the "test" mail feature and the error message says"cannot connect to server"
With the ftp feature,i set up an tripod ftp,and when i tried the test feature,same error.I checked port25 and opened the 587 wich is the new port for AOl,and nothing.Checked all my settings,enabled ftp and nothing.
Any comments on this?

[squidderuds]

yes its called reverse connection but a while back you didnt know what that was when i was talking about it,i clearly stated how it worked and you kept saying it wasnt possible,probably because your not a kiddy and dont play with trojans,which is a good thing but you shouldnt have said it was possible when it was

[Moonbat]

Ok, I think biggs66's question has been answered. This thread is officially useless.

[Ezekiel]

yes its called reverse connection but a while back you didnt know what that was when i was talking about it,i clearly stated how it worked and you kept saying it wasnt possible,probably because your not a kiddy and dont play with trojans,which is a good thing but you shouldnt have said it was possible when it was

No, we had the exact same argument we are having here. I said you can't connect to someone behind a router, you said "yes if you use reverse connection", etc etc. It doesn't mean I don't know about reverse connection; it's that it was outside the scope of the point. This thread is finished, so nobody post any more.