Serious Security Problem!!!

[Barada Nels]

I know nothing of the plus, I will check out that section on the forums in a minute. I still have over a year, maybe almost 2 years. I planned on using the MagicJack for awhile when I made that purchase.

Yep looks pretty sweet. If I could bust out my old 2G iPhone and use that around the house wirelessly incoming and outgoing calls . . . that would be amazing. I would definitely be hooked then. Although the plus itself would be great, save much more power per month.

[nailgunner]

I know nothing of the plus, I will check out that section on the forums in a minute. I still have over a year, maybe almost 2 years. I planned on using the MagicJack for awhile when I made that purchase.

Wow, you didn't learn much from your almost 2 years of reading this forum. Just joking. It is never suggested by anyone whose knowledge I trust (including mine of course), to get more than a year at a time on the MJ. Too many variables with the thing, including but not limited to them deciding to block every exchange you happen to want to call.

This post is more for anyone reading this junk and trying to decide to go with the 5 year deal or not. Don't do it. The savings are relatively minor compared to renewing annually.

[Barada Nels]

Wow, you didn't learn much from your almost 2 years of reading this forum. Just joking. It is never suggested by anyone whose knowledge I trust (including mine of course), to get more than a year at a time on the MJ. Too many variables with the thing, including but not limited to them deciding to block every exchange you happen to want to call.

This post is more for anyone reading this junk and trying to decide to go with the 5 year deal or not. Don't do it. The savings are relatively minor compared to renewing annually.

Yeah, I only frequented the Tech forum and the linux forum to see if anyone found some progress on that part.

As for the multi year thing . . . blame the girlfriend. Shes cheaper than I am and that is saying a lot! If I continue the MagicJack once I expire . . . it will be annually only. I agree with you 100%.

[ConcernedOne]

Chief Security Analyst of PC Magazine wrote me back and told me he agreed with me and that it was, to quote "very, very bad". Because he is on the other side of the country from their Labs, he told me he was forwarding the info. to the editor at their Labs with a note from himself.


For the guy who wishes to call me paranoid, there's but one word to describe such people. Fool.

But at least he can be the guinnea pig in this thread, thus allowing others to use him in this thread, and learn from.

People who don't take security seriously, deserve what comes to them.

[nailgunner]

For the guy who wishes to call me paranoid, there's but one word to describe such people. Fool.

No one called you paranoid. The only time the word was used was by me, directed at someone else, in reference to being concerned about MJ spyware and the apparent use of directed ads from the spyware.

For the guy who wishes to think people are talking about him when they aren't, there's but one word to describe such people. Paranoid.

But at least he can be the guinnea pig in this thread, thus allowing others to use him in this thread, and learn from.

"Guinea" pig for what? If my friends want access to my email address (oops they already know it), home address (I assume they already know it since they are in my house violating my computer), MJ password, call list history and "all my private features" (not sure what that even means, that I can enable call forwarding?), they are welcome to it. And if any one is servicing something in my house, I'm with them the whole time, or I'm ON my computer while they are cleaning the air ducts.

People who don't take security seriously, deserve what comes to them.

I do take security seriously, I just don't worry about things that don't need to be worried about.

It sounds like you need to worry less about computer security and worry more about home security, or the friends/guests you are letting into your house. Since you apparently have concerns about them rampaging through your computer while "you need to run outside, or downstairs". This of course would assume that they knew exactly how to get into your account via "mymagicjack" and get your information, which is not an easy site to navigate in to begin with.

And for the record, the complete telephone call list history is also right on the soft-phone. So your house guest doesn't need to "hack" into mymagicjack to see it.

[Barada Nels]

This thread initiates too much anger. It needs to be locked IMHO.

[VaHam]

And for the record, the complete telephone call list history is also right on the soft-phone. So your house guest doesn't need to "hack" into mymagicjack to see it.

The difference here is that from any MJ on an account a user can gain access thru MyMagicJack website to the contact list, call history of all MJs on the account; and even can order additional services.

I have one MJ setup on a thinclient in our guest bedroom. If passwords were required then guests only have access to the contact list and call history on that specific MJ.

The way it is they have access to everything; so your statement is wrong; the call list and call history information as well as access to ordering is greatly increased due to the poor security practice.

[nailgunner]

And for the record, the complete telephone call list history is also right on the soft-phone. So your house guest doesn't need to "hack" into mymagicjack to see it.

The difference here is that from any MJ on an account a user can gain access thru MyMagicJack website to the contact list, call history of all MJs on the account; and even can order additional services.

I have one MJ setup on a thinclient in our guest bedroom. If passwords were required then guests only have access to the contact list and call history on that specific MJ.

The way it is they have access to everything; so your statement is wrong; the call list and call history information as well as access to ordering is greatly increased due to the poor security practice.

First, where did I say something about access to ordering in my statement?

Second, my statement only addressed his additional concern about a house guest having access to his personal and private information, which includes the call list, if he left the room:

"Likewise, it is also possible that if you have guests at your house and you need to run outside, or downstairs, they can gain access to all your personal and private information too, simply by clicking the My Magicjack selection in the front of the software."

That part has nothing to do with any additional account with Betsy at college.

So, again, if he is concerned about HIS personal information contained in the call list (and contact list), his house guest doesn't need, and has never needed, his password. So my statement is wrong where?

[nailgunner]

This thread initiates too much anger.

Who is angry about anything? Are you not capable of being involved in a lively discussion without getting angry? I am.

[Barada Nels]

This thread initiates too much anger.

Who is angry about anything? Are you not capable of being involved in a lively discussion without getting angry? I am.

Do not pull me into that nonsense again. I merely made the observation that this thread likes drama.

[nailgunner]

This thread initiates too much anger.

Who is angry about anything? Are you not capable of being involved in a lively discussion without getting angry? I am.

Do not pull me into that nonsense again. I merely made the observation that this thread likes drama.

So again, you are able to post whatever you want, without someone else being able to respond. Gotcha.

[Barada Nels]

So again, you are able to post whatever you want, without someone else being able to respond. Gotcha.

I have no clue how you came to this conclusion . . . but if it makes you happy . . .

[nailgunner]

I have no clue how you came to this conclusion

By claiming that me responding to your opinion post is an attempt to pull you into nonsense again.

Me responding is just me responding. I am not trying to get you, or anyone else, to do anything. Whether you respond has nothing to do with me. And stating that someone is attempting to get you to do something by responding to one of your opinion posts is laughable.

[Barada Nels]

By claiming that me responding to your opinion post is an attempt to pull you into nonsense again.

Me responding is just me responding. I am not trying to get you, or anyone else, to do anything. Whether you respond has nothing to do with me. And stating that someone is attempting to get you to do something by responding to one of your opinion posts is laughable.

It is whatever. I care not. If you find it laughable, then I am happy to oblige.

[VaHam]

First, where did I say something about access to ordering in my statement?

You didn't as far as I recall and I did not say you did. I did point out that inadition to the security weakness regarding call history and contact list access; that a guest could also change account information including ordering services.

Second, my statement only addressed his additional concern about a house guest having access to his personal and private information, which includes the call list, if he left the room:

Once more real slow; the difference is the scope of the information available to the guest with and without the security problem. Without the security problem presented by the OP only the call information and call history of that individual MJ would be available rather than the contact list and call history on all MJs on the account.

"Likewise, it is also possible that if you have guests at your house and you need to run outside, or downstairs, they can gain access to all your personal and private information too, simply by clicking the My Magicjack selection in the front of the software."

Wrong, they can only get call history and contact list information from that specific MJ not "all your personal and private information".

That part has nothing to do with any additional account with Betsy at college.

So, again, if he is concerned about HIS personal information contained in the call list (and contact list), his house guest doesn't need, and has never needed, his password. So my statement is wrong where?

Because you assume that one has only a single MJ! Trying to narrow the scope so that "HIS" means only a single magicjack on an account, to lend credence to your misleading statements does not give them more legitimacy. Passwords used to be required to gain account access for good reasons; which was the OP's point.

Being able to view contact list and call history for a specific MJ on the softphone is not even close to the security problem raised by the OP which you attempted to trivialize.

I am sure in your usual argumentative style you will respond with some equally nonsensical response to attempt to get the last word in. But I believe that most folks here have enough sense to see what is going on with your comments.

[Barada Nels]

I am sure in your usual argumentative style you will respond with some equally nonsensical response to attempt to get the last word in. But I believe that most folks here have enough sense to see what is going on with your comments.

AMEN!

Well said.

[nailgunner]

You didn't as far as I recall and I did not say you did.

Your answer to me was:

"so your statement is wrong; the call list and call history information as well as access to ordering is greatly increased due to the poor security practice."

By including ordering in the same sentence after "so your statement is wrong;", it makes that part of why you thought my statement was wrong by default. Or are you totally ignorant of sentence structure?

Once more real slow; the difference is the scope of the information available to the guest with and without the security problem. Without the security problem presented by the OP only the call information and call history of that individual MJ would be available rather than the contact list and call history on all MJs on the account.

Okay, once more real slow. The OP was concerned about HIS personal information being leaked, not the personal information (which would only be call and contact lists of his daughter in college or his granny in Egypt) of others. His concern, as he very well stated, was about all the stuff that would leak out if they had a device on HIS account.

"Likewise, it is also possible that if you have guests at your house and you need to run outside, or downstairs, they can gain access to all your personal and private information too, simply by clicking the My Magicjack selection in the front of the software."

Wrong, they can only get call history and contact list information from that specific MJ not "all your personal and private information".

Seriously? I was quoting the OP, that wasn't my comment, by mentioning what his additional concern was. Notice the "quotes" around the sentence in my original post and your repost. Please try to at least keep the quotes attributed to the correct person.

Besides, YOU are still wrong, because he is right, they can get all the personal info by clicking on the mymagicjack tab.

Being able to view contact list and call history for a specific MJ on the softphone is not even close to the security problem raised by the OP which you attempted to trivialize.

It comes down to 2 security issues. Do you, or the people you put on your account, have control over your/their house and who plays on your/their computer. And if not, what are you at risk for. I pointed out the call list was already at risk to be seen.

I am sure in your usual argumentative style you will respond with some equally nonsensical response to attempt to get the last word in.

It is amazing how a few people on here think that they are not arguing when they engage in back and forth responding, but someone else who does is arguing.

So I will suppose you will feel the desperate need to respond and tell me that by including "ordering" in the sentence about why my post was wrong, you didn't mean "ordering" was part of the reason, and to quit putting words in your mouth.

[VaHam]

I knew you wouldn't let me down

It is amazing how a few people on here think that they are not arguing when they engage in back and forth responding, but someone else who does is arguing.

Yes it is are you lacking mirrors in your house as well as MJs?

More inane semantics to try and defend your nonsense.

[nailgunner]

More inane semantics to try and defend your nonsense.

Which were the inane semantics this time? Pointing out where you did say what you claimed not to? Or point out that you attributed a quote from the OP as a statement made by me?

I'm still not even clear why you injected yourself into this, since my comment was directed to the OP, and you are above us and only post helpful, useful postings.

[nailgunner]

Yes it is are you lacking mirrors in your house as well as MJs?

And not to pick on your apparent confused state of mind, but the phrase "looking into a mirror" is applied to people throwing out accusations, when they are guilty of the same offense they are accusing someone of.

I have never accused someone of "arguing" when involved in a back and forth discussion on here. You however, have, and somehow feel that someone can argue by themselves, so the looking in the mirror reference should be properly referenced to you.

[VaHam]

More inane semantics to try and defend your nonsense.

Which were the inane semantics this time?

And if not, what are you at risk for.

To name one.

I'm still not even clear why you injected yourself into this, since my comment was directed to the OP, and you are above us and only post helpful, useful postings.

Because I and I suspect several others here are tired of your trying to bulldoze anyone who says something you deem negative about MJ. You then attempt to trivialize their concerns and then accuse them being the problem.

All I have heard from you in the way of information is something you regurgitated from the work of others here and have professed no expertise in the field. And sometimes your authoritative info is just garbage like the following gem from another thread:

I particularly dislike that option because apparently there is no option for me to record a personal message instead of the MagicJack spiel.

And your response was :

But you are correct that there is no way to record a personal message within the MJ voicemail system.

I have been participating in this forum since 13 Feb 2008 and have 639 posts. If you go search there you find some of my work in the stickies here as well as offering assistance to many folks.

You have been here since 18 Mar 2010 and have 796 posts so we know you like to talk; but what you have to say is the issue!

You attack and attempt to trivialize good folks who offer observations and have opinions which differ from yours; many of whom are obviously better qualified to hold opinions on the subject than are you.

So if I find that your statements are wrong or misleading; I will interject my comments any time I see fit.

So again, you are able to post whatever you want, without someone else being able to respond. Gotcha.

Right Back At Ya

[nailgunner]

Which were the inane semantics this time?

And if not, what are you at risk for.

To name one.

There is a period after my sentence. That means it is a statement, not a question. The statement was giving the second of the two security issues as outlined by the OP. I.E., if there is no control of the computer, the other security issues are what you are at risk for. Or, if you control the first, you don't need to worry about the second. I mixed up the words are and you. My bad.

The other inane sematics are...?

Because I and I suspect several others here are tired of your trying to bulldoze anyone who says something you deem negative about MJ. You then attempt to trivialize their concerns and then accuse them being the problem.

I attempt to bulldoze no one. I state my opinion, and some people apparently get all bent out of shape at their opinions being challenged.

All I have heard from you in the way of information is something you regurgitated from the work of others here and have professed no expertise in the field. And sometimes your authoritative info is just garbage like the following gem from another thread:

I particularly dislike that option because apparently there is no option for me to record a personal message instead of the MagicJack spiel.

And your response was :

But you are correct that there is no way to record a personal message within the MJ voicemail system.

Yup, sometimes advice is wrong. I'm glad you have never given bad advice in the forum.

I have been participating in this forum since 13 Feb 2008 and have 639 posts. If you go search there you find some of my work in the stickies here as well as offering assistance to many folks.

So that somehow makes your opinions immune from being disagreed with, your highness?

You attack and attempt to trivialize good folks who offer observations and have opinions which differ from yours; many of whom are obviously better qualified to hold opinions on the subject than are you.

I post my opinions, based on my usage of MJ and what I have read from others in here and elsewhere. Since when are there qualifications to hold opinions? Maybe the administrator should set up a "special" room for you and your expert qualifications.

That said, the opinion that this security issue is "a horror" and an "atrocity of risk" does beg for trivialization however, in my opinion only.

So if I find that your statements are wrong or misleading; I will interject my comments any time I see fit.

I was referring to your earlier position that you posted NOTHING but helpful advice.

So again, you are able to post whatever you want, without someone else being able to respond. Gotcha.

Right Back At Ya

And? That was in response to someone objecting to me asking a question after a post. Feel free to respond to any of my posts. Just don't whine when I respond back.

[nailgunner]

Interestingly, I just tried to log into mymagicjack via the softphone, and received a "DB Connection Disabled, Retry Later" error message. Perhaps MJ agrees that it is a "serious security risk that is a horror and an atrocity of risk."

Or maybe they are preparing it for a MJPlus inclusion.

Or maybe they just disabled mine in the hope I would stfu. If so, not likely, but not a bad try.

Edit: Bypassing the soft-phone via the actual website:

https://web01.magicjack.com/my

produces a " We're sorry...We are in the process of updating our systems. Please try again later." message when trying to log-on, so they are doing something.

Edit2: It's back up, and with a cursory look, I couldn't tell any difference, so who knows.

[Barada Nels]

And? That was in response to someone objecting to me asking a question after a post. Feel free to respond to any of my posts. Just don't whine when I respond back.

No, you are mistaken . . . yet again. I am sure you are doing this on purpose . . . although you could just have some sort of mental deficiency. I was NOT objecting to you asking a question after a post. I was objecting to your constant want/need to over analyze anything you disagree with to make your point the only one possible, in your own eyes.

I have stated a handful of times during our discussions . . . that you can reply as you wish. I only mentioned, one time that, it would have been easier to just make your point evident without the added nonsense.

So again, you are able to post whatever you want, without someone else being able to respond. Gotcha.

Right Back At Ya

I would say: "Nice Burn" or "Touché" . . . but I think there is something deeper going on here. Nailgunner has demonstrated (on more than one occasion) narcissistic and sociopathic behavior. More and more of these people are showing up on the internet because they cannot get their outlet in today's society. I.E. They get put in their place too quickly in the real world.

He will never understand reason because he obviously has some form of disorder. I see only two ways of dealing with him:

#1. Pity the man and ignore his idiocy.

#2. Point a finger and laugh at the jester on his trike.

Personally, I choose the later. It must be therapeutic for him to feel he is one upping people and showing them the right way to think. For his sake, I only hope he keeps this nonsense on his computer.

[VaHam]

He will never understand reason because he obviously has some form of disorder. I see only two ways of dealing with him:

#1. Pity the man and ignore his idiocy.

#2. Point a finger and laugh at the jester on his trike.

Personally, I choose the later. It must be therapeutic for him to feel he is one upping people and showing them the right way to think. For his sake, I only hope he keeps this nonsense on his computer.

Yes a Napoleon complex does come to mind

The real pity is that there are so many loud mouths in the world with so little of value to say.
I wish this forum had the filter feature so one could just drop all posts from people they just don't care to hear from. It would increase page loading speed by dropping all the useless comments. But I do find it comical that you can stop responding and watch them post two or three times to themselves afterward.

Jesters are fun to watch but I wouldn't laugh at the white hat with the nic of Jester. That guy has skills and he picks great targets to use them on IMHO. So that is one jester who has my respect.

[nailgunner]

Barada Nels
VaHam

Well you two are certainly an interesting pair.

One, Barada, goes back and forth with me claiming he didn't give any opinions in his original post in this thread, despite being shown his own quotes. But yet I'm the one who will never understand reason because I have some kind of mental disorder.

The other, VaHam, has recently felt the need to proclaim his superior experience and better capability of giving opinions. But yet I'm the one with the Napoleon complex.

[Barada Nels]

Barada Nels
VaHam

Well you two are certainly an interesting pair.

One, Barada, goes back and forth with me claiming he didn't give any opinions in his original post in this thread, despite being shown his own quotes. But yet I'm the one who will never understand reason because I have some kind of mental disorder.

The other, VaHam, has recently felt the need to proclaim his superior experience and better capability of giving opinions. But yet I'm the one with the Napoleon complex.

*Points &* BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

[VaHam]

The other, VaHam, has recently felt the need to proclaim his superior experience and better capability of giving opinions. But yet I'm the one with the Napoleon complex.

Oh there are many here who are more competent than me; you just don't happen to be one of them.
You missed the whole point of citing the number of posts of each of us; not too surprisingly. You post three times as much as I do. Do you have any original technical information of yours you can point to?

[nailgunner]

You post three times as much as I do.

What does that have to do with anything? My point, which you conveniently overlooked, is your need to recently post your superior experience as making your opinions more valid. If you wish I can re-post your posted high opinion of yourself from our recent chat.

Do you have any original technical information of yours you can point to?

Point to for what? So you can keep a scorecard of who has had more "technical" posts? Again which one of us has the Napoleon complex?

[VaHam]

You post three times as much as I do.

What does that have to do with anything?

It means your a typical loud mouth with nothing of value to say!

My point, which you conveniently overlooked, is your need to recently post your superior experience as making your opinions more valid. If you wish I can re-post your posted high opinion of yourself from our recent chat.

Again real slooooooooooow. I am sure there are many here who are more competent than I am.

I equally sure you are not one of them!

Do you have any original technical information of yours you can point to?

Point to for what? So you can keep a scorecard of who has had more "technical" posts? Again which one of us has the Napoleon complex?

What you can't point to a single one? Color me surprised!
I was offering you an opportunity to refute my assertion that you talk too much and yet have nothing of value to offer.

You certainly deserve an award for your contributions.

[nailgunner]

Again real slooooooooooow. I am sure there are many here who are more competent than I am.

Again real slow for you. What does that have to do with what we are talking about? My posts that have so offended you are only the posts I have made countering another opinion. Like your recent, all MJ users have tons of problems, opinion post. I have never criticized your's or anyone's technical post. But yet you feel a need, twice now, to post your resume as the reason why you apparently think your OPINION is more valid than mine. That is the only context in which you have brought it up. You don't like my "bulldozing" conversations, which only occur regarding differing OPINIONS, not technical advice.

What you can't point to a single one? Color me surprised!
I was offering you an opportunity to refute my assertion that you talk too much and yet have nothing of value to offer.

I could point you to dozens of helpful, non-negative posts I have made. I have nothing to prove to you. Again, real slowwwwww, WHO has the Napoleon complex?

[oldtimercurt]

You can tell things are really slow when a gratuious p-ing contest is the bulk of the traffic on the forum.

I once worked for a general who advised not to get in a p-ing contest cause even when you win you get some on you.

OTC

[VaHam]

Again real slooooooooooow. I am sure there are many here who are more competent than I am.

Again real slow for you. What does that have to do with what we are talking about?

Well you conveniently left off the important part.
You certainly are not one of the ones who are more competent.

You don't like my "bulldozing" conversations, which only occur regarding differing OPINIONS, not technical advice.

Bulldozing is bulldozing at least you admit your guilty.

I could point you to dozens of helpful, non-negative posts I have made.

My original question included the term ORIGINAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION

Do you have any original technical information of yours you can point to?

What you can't point to a single one? Color me surprised!
I was offering you an opportunity to refute my assertion that you talk too much and yet have nothing of value to offer.

[VaHam]

You can tell things are really slow when a gratuious p-ing contest is the bulk of the traffic on the forum.

I once worked for a general who advised not to get in a p-ing contest cause even when you win you get some on you.

OTC

I hear ya Curt and your right! I must admit it is nice to give a bully a taste of his own medicine once in a while though.

Checkout this old timer (Buzz Aldrin) dealing with a bully! http://youtu.be/UUFO8AGMwic

[nailgunner]

Do you have any original technical information of yours you can point to?

So you have degrees of useful postings that offer value? It has to be "Original Technical Information".

What does that even mean? Something published in a peer-reviewed Journal? Because with that definition, there is precious little that is "Original" that is posted by anyone in here, even by you, Napoleon.

Or does it mean original to this forum? Because 99% of the useful technical advice posted in here is non-original, even by you, Napoleon.

But I was the first to post in the forum that GoggleVoice had dropped any mention of dates when it came to it's service being free.

And I was the first to mention in the forum that MJ had changed their renewal policy, and would give you a full year of service when you bought a new device and transferred over your number, since their old policy had been to only give you what was left on the old.

But I'm sure that doesn't fit your definition of being technical or original enough.

[nailgunner]

I hear ya Curt and your right! I must admit it is nice to give a bully a taste of his own medicine once in a while though.

How is it being a bully posting an opinion to an opinion, and then spending a day responding to the original opinion poster because they don't like their opinion challenged and/or keep denying they said what they posted?

[nailgunner]

You don't like my "bulldozing" conversations, which only occur regarding differing OPINIONS, not technical advice.

Bulldozing is bulldozing at least you admit your guilty.

Ummm, no Nap, the "quotes" around the word mean that I am "quoting" someone else's word/phrasing, in this case, yours. If I were to admit to "bulldozing" conversations, I would drop the "quotes".

Just giving you some "Original Technical" information so you can properly follow a conversation.

[Barada Nels]

But I do find it comical that you can stop responding and watch them post two or three times to themselves afterward.

ZING!

[nailgunner]

ZING!

For the record, are you claiming that as an "Original Technical" ZING, or a rehashed, copied ZING?

My search shows no one has used it in capitalized form, so it does appear to be open for ownership as being original.

[Barada Nels]

ZING!

For the record, are you claiming that as an "Original Technical" ZING, or a rehashed, copied ZING?

My search shows no one has used it in capitalized form, so it does appear to be open for ownership as being original.

*Points &* hehe . . . hoho . . . HAHA . . . MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!! *pants**pants* HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAA!!! Ride, Jester Ride!

[nailgunner]

*Points &* hehe . . . hoho . . . HAHA . . . MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!! *pants**pants* HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAA!!!

Laugh all you want, but that is the standard being set up to comment on opinions. Racking up original postings will give you the necessary credentials to do so.

Edit: I'm just waiting with baited breath to see what the Emperor has decided regarding the 2 examples I gave him, and whether they qualify as "Original Technical" or not.

[Barada Nels]

Laugh all you want, but that is the standard being set up to comment on opinions. Racking up original postings will give you the necessary credentials to do so.

*Points &* HAHAHAHAHAA!

[VaHam]

But I do find it comical that you can stop responding and watch them post two or three times to themselves afterward.

ZING!

The clowns never let ya down do they

[nailgunner]

My original question included the term ORIGINAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION

Do you have any original technical information of yours you can point to?

What you can't point to a single one? Color me surprised!
I was offering you an opportunity to refute my assertion that you talk too much and yet have nothing of value to offer.

Nap, you haven't proclaimed if my postings met your standards.