Pop-quiz, hot shot: you want to take down ED, but you don't have Visual Basic so you can't backtrace their DNS numbers. What do you do? You call this man - Daniel Leslie Brandt is a master at the art of doxing people who use their real name on the internet. Similar in look and personality to Sherrod DeGrippo, he has excelled in the fine art of being able to dish it out, but not take it. The resident e-detective of The Wikipedia Review, Brandt has a wide range of experience in internet stalking and e-psychiatry. According to rumors on the internets, Wikipedia plans to file a lawsuit against Brandt for violating the privacy of Wikipedia admins by unearthing private information posted by those admins through the simple means of a scroogle search, and re-publishing it on other websites. Brandt's goal in life before he dies (any day now, as he is well into his 60's) is to see Encyclopædia Dramatica shut down. This so-called free speech activist is in fact so hypocritically pro-censorship that even Jimbo Wales thinks he is a crack-pot.
Stance on Wikipedia
Daniel Brandt really, really hated his Wikipedia article, and invested OVER 9000 hours in getting it deleted, although he had only limited success until early 2007, when the page was deleted in a tortuous process. As a lame excuse for keeping it, wikipedoes frantically argue that Daniel Brandt is a notable figure, even though nobody really knows who the fuck he is. His exploits have included wondering how Essjay could really be who he claimed to be, wondering why Slim Virgin had magical abilities like round-the-clock editing for days on end, showing that wikipedians shamelessly cuntpaste shit from all over the place, and trying to get them to remove his article.
Daniel Brandt has been, in a way, trolled. Not by us, but by the ruthless hivemind of teenaged aspies at Wikipedia. Some comments from the hivemind include "[at Brandt] Stop whining you fucking baby". Noone cared about Brandt's reputation, instead they pelted his name with unfunny bullshit. Various versions of his article are still available on Wikipedia to this day.
Stance on Google
Brandt also hates Google, another Cthulhu of the Internet. Long before he set up Wikipedia Watch, he made this nice site about Google's nefarious activities. Even better, he has set up this Google proxy, which stops them from feeding your computer cookies and keeping secret records of your IP address and searches. It used to do even better things, like comparing rankings from Yahoo and Google, but the Yahoo bit vanished in mid-2007. In his typical hypocritical fashion, all of his blogs are hosted on Blogspot, a website owned by Google.
Joseph Evers Blog
JosephEvers.blogspot.com is a blog dedicated to exposing the fat nerds behind Encyclopedia Dramatica throughout its various incarnations. Written by Daniel Brandt and only Daniel Brandt, the purpose of the blog is to expose supposed criminal activity or whatever, but credibility is sketch at best considering it commonly (estimated at 80% of the time) gets dox wrong even with users who use their real name as their username. The blog is considered comical at best.
Sherrod DeGrippo was known to be scared shitless of this blog to the point where nobody was allowed to talk about it on any of her websites or IRC (and even further) on pain of e-death. If you did happen to mention the site or its author and were not immediately pwnt from the server, her faggot stool pigeon admin staff would go crying to her on the super secret mailing list. In under a minute the hambeast would be in the channel, spamming your PMs talking about the upcoming lawlsuits she has in the works and other lies to get you to just shut up about it. Being the Internets, this of course caused a Streisand effect of tsunami-like proportions, putting Girlvinyl's dox in the hands of all those whom she had been cyberbullying for the previous 7 years. The backlash led to the eventual downfall of ED.com and the inevitable erecting of the far superior
The Reach Of Encyclopedia Dramatica - AKA Scumbag Daniel Brandt
On April Fool's day 2012, when the rest of the Internets were raging at ED's hilarious prank (saying that we were bought out by the Cheezburger Network), Daniel Brandt posted a blog post saying that ED staff was exaggerating on its Donate page and does not get as much traffic as it actually does. To back up this bullshit theory he posted a screenshot of his blog compared with the barely 2 week old encyclopediadramatica.se domain instead of using the domain that was in use when the page estimate was written. When proof that what he had blogged was bullshit was posted on the page that he had linked to, instead of conceding that he was wrong and moving on with his miserable life, he instead posted a link to a screenshot of the page without the corrected info. One can only assume that this behavior was either an attempt to perpetuate more misinformation against Encyclopedia Dramatica and the upstanding members of its staff, or he was just really embarrassed that he was proven wrong again and felt that covering up with a lie and then pretending it never happened was better than the humiliation that comes with having to delete another blog post. The most likely answer is both.
The important thing to remember is that Daniel Brandt claims the moral high ground in his crusade against ED, yet time and time again can be found taking quotes out of context, manufacturing evidence and just straight lying to push his agenda.
The Correct Information
That barely visible line all the way at the bottom, yeah that's his blog LOL. The only reason it moved up even that little bit at the end is because he redirected all of his domains to it in a fit of buttmad.
Enabling Amorrow to stalk Alison
After Brandt gave out her dox, Amorrow has since been busily stalking her. Amorrow will drive to the city where she lives and visits her place of employment and then he goes to a public library or i-cafe and post from that IP to say to her "hey, I am in the same city as you". In response, she has been removing mention of him on Wikipedia. (WR thread)
—Says the hypocrite who devotes his life to adding people's real life names to his stalker websites
Stalking of other women
It seems that Brandt has issues with women in general, and has no qualms about soliciting others to stalk women on his behalf. Here, Brandt is QQ'ing about admin abuse at the Wikipediocracy when his failed doxing of Mistress Selina Kyle was deleted. The grand plan is to get someone to do his dirty work for him, since doing it himself would involve actually confronting another human being in real life, and likely the targets would be people who have no idea who Wikipedia or Selina is at all, given Brandt's shit dox skillz of late.
Wikipedia Watch's plug pulled
Starting in the middle of December 2011, my servers got DDoSed by what I believe were Friends of Ryan Cleary (FoRC). Cleary himself is electronically tagged, under curfew at his mother's house (he must be accompanied by his mother if he leaves the house outside of curfew), and forbidden from using the Internet. Those are his bail conditions since last June. However, what if his girlfriend came over with a little laptop with a wireless Internet connection, stuffed in a backpack? What if Ryan picked up the telephone or wrote letters? I don't have much more than circumstantial evidence, but I believe it was FoRC that DDoSed my servers. Cleary or some friends of his may have hired someone to attack me.
The DDoS was heavy when it happened. All six servers were attacked at various times, and all were disconnected by my two different service providers when they were attacked. The mode of attack was a SYN flood. I caught thousands of SYN_RECV requests at various times in the TCP process table. Typically, the load would instantly jump from below 0.50 to about 90.0 and the server was out of action. Then after the DDoS subsided within an hour or so, the load would slowly recover and I could get into the box and see all the SYN_RECV I had caught via a cron job that runs once a minute. The IP addresses sending these were either from a botnet or they were spoofed. In other words, they were from all over the world, and there were hundreds of unique IP addresses. This was not one person with LOIC.
My two service providers disconnected my servers when they saw this. In December I was able to beg them to restore connectivity to me within a few days. There was one provider in Arizona with two dedicated servers that I leased, and another in Florida with four servers that I leased. I took wikipedia-watch.org down in December because I thought this was FoRC's target and they would leave me alone if it was gone.
Taking wikipedia-watch.org down did not stop the DDoS efforts. On January 17 the Florida provider disconnected all four servers, because the DDoS that just hit the four was so massive that it took down upstream switches. They had to consider their other customers on those switches who went down due to collateral damage. I tried begging, but they wouldn't reconnect my servers. They never want to hear from me again, and wouldn't refund $200 that was paid in advance on those servers. They were mad as hell.
It was clear by now that I was the target, and not just wikipedia-watch. The SYN_RECV that I captured in December showed that Scroogle IP addresses were targeted, and sometimes any other open port.
For seven years, I have been running Scroogle on those six servers. Now Scroogle is crippled because I have to run it on the two remaining servers. It's probably just a matter of time before those two are taken away from me. The thing about those six servers is that three were blocked in 2007 by Google, and the other three blocked in 2008 by Google. Each time an engineer at Google got them unblocked for me because I was running a nonprofit service and didn't show any ads. The second time he did this, he mentioned that it was getting hard for him to pull this off. (Each of my six servers appears at Google under a single IP address for that server. That's the way it works with dedicated servers for outgoing traffic. For incoming traffic, you can point them to various IPs assigned to your server.)
From 2009 to March 2011 I had no problems with Google blocks. It helped that I used up to 9,000 dedicated Google IP addresses on a random basis, spanning as many as 80 Google data centers. During that period Google had no centralized detection and throttling system. In March 2011 this changed, and after a one-minute delay, Google could detect and throttle a single IP address that had been fetching search results, even though I was randomly spreading out the requests from each server using 9,000 Google IP addresses. That throttling was not too severe — it lasted about two minutes. When it happened, I did an instant failover to a different server for those throttled requests.
At the end of last December, I leased a seventh server because I knew Scroogle was in trouble. It turned out that this new IP address was throttled much more severely than the six IP addresses from my six legacy Scroogle servers. Adding more servers is not a solution. While it takes about fifteen minutes to trip, this second form of throttling lasts for 90 minutes after the requests stop instead of just two minutes. The four servers in Florida had "legacy" IP addresses attached to them, and now they're gone forever. The load shifts to the two remaining Arizona servers with legacy IP addresses, which cannot handle the load during daytime hours.
Scroogle has gone from 350,000 searches per day to about 200,000 per day. I blame Friends of Ryan Cleary. For the attempted searches that don't go through, I show a screen blaming Google. After all, if Google hadn't started this "mild" form of throttling in March 2011, I could handle the load on two servers instead of six.
The entire Internet infrastructure is in trouble because the design did not anticipate DDoS attacks. You cannot do anything about a SYN flood attack that is halfway sophisticated, and uses many unique IPs, either from a botnet or spoofed. You need a hardware firewall in front of your server that has a huge amount of bandwidth, just so it can filter out the attack based on some sort of analysis that differentiates the malicious packets. That sort of capability costs a lot more than leasing the server itself.
Daniel Brandt blackmailing Tarc
Leaked WR threads
- Wikipedia Review/Newyorkbrad just posted
- Wikipedia Review/I'm researching Encyclopedia Dramatica/Page 1
- Wikipedia Review/I'm researching Encyclopedia Dramatica/Page 2
- Wikipedia Review/Move the Encyclopedia Dramatica thread back
- Wikipedia Review/Brandt vs. Michael Suarez
- Chip Berlet -- his enemy!
- Cryptome - Has a bitter old person rivalry with
- Hivemind His former site where for 5 years he hypocritically posted Wikipedia administrator's personal information while simultaneously bitching about privacy on the Internet.
- Milgram Experiment
- Taking down ED
- Tom Newton
- Wikipedia Review
His (now dead) Sites
- namebase - aka 15 years of newspaper clippings and usenet spam
- berlet watch
Holding The Accountability Expert Accountable
- There is Daniel Brandt - General information blog
- Daniel Brandt Is A Cyberbully - Interesting blog where Brandt's victim's stories are told
- Doxbin #5 - Brandt Organization
- Dailydot article explaining his e-stalking tendencies in great detail.
- One does not just take down ED
- PAGE REMOVED AT THE REQUEST OF DANIEL BRANDT
- Meet Mr. Anti-Google
- Brandt being called on his own bullshit
- Some Web 1.0 newsgroup postings
- Ham operator docs
- Amazon profile
- United States of America, Appellee, v. Daniel Leslie Brandt, Appellant., 435 F.2d 324 (9th Cir. 1970)
- Best YTMND ever!!!
Wikipedia articles that mention Brandt
Daniel Brandt is part of a series on
Visit the Truth Portal for complete coverage.
Daniel Brandt is part of a series on
Visit the Wikipedia Portal for complete coverage.
|THANKS FOR THE PUBLICITY DANIEL!!!|
|Featured article February 23 and 24, 2012|
JEWS DID WTC
|Daniel Brandt||Succeeded by|
The Wikipedia Review
|Featured article April 21 & 22, 2012|
Taking Down ED
|Daniel Brandt||Succeeded by|
Daniel Brandt is part of a series on
Visit the Sites Portal for complete coverage.