Too Much Media Acquires Equity Stake in Segregated Payments Ltd.

Just to make sure I understand this correctly. Kathy was a VP with iBill before
she accepted promotion to CEO and she had no idea what she would get into?
She's accepted an executive function in a company without knowing too much
about the company? That sounds like promoting the mail guy to President just
for catching the punches.

On a positive note....John it seems like you're getting better at biting the
bullet and are able to keep your calm a lot better than a few months ago...

Good Luck on the acquisition I hope you will suprise us in a positive way with
it......time will tell

Well, John, it's no secret that I help site owners acquire merchant accounts. Hasn't been for the last 3 years. Or that before that I helped market ePassporte. Or that before that, I was at SIC briefly. Or that I was with CCBill before that, as a VP for 2 years. Or Webquest prior to that. I also occasionally consult for people that want to pay for advice. So there's my 9 years in the business. As for what other people have done without really telling anyone, I could write a book that would rival Gone with the Wind in page count, so what I know and don't know about things isn't my issue here.

The only vested interest I would have here is in protecting the integrity of my clients data, and their compliance with the card associations.

You're entitled to your opinion, and I respect that. We can agree to disagree on opinions in this case.

I don't see why you're getting so defensive. No one was referring to you.

And you keep saying you want to "agree to disagree" yet you keep popping up and saying the same thing over and over again. If you want to agree to disagree, then do that

Can someone please tell me who Cathy Mallaney is in regards to ibill please.....

Clearly not as big of player as you with all those posts under your belt. I mean shit you must have made a few million already with that much to say.

How do you know what I did Or did not do?

Why are you getting nasty I asked you a question. I dont know what you did and dont do I can only tell by what you posted here. Im not a big player, I was the loyal smuck who trusted ibill. If you were on the board at that time , I was their biggest defender. They fucked me out of 13 grand and a bunch more when processing would go up and down. I had to cancel 330 rebills and get a second on my house to stay solvent while we rebuilt from the ground.I couldnt retire and leave adult I was just fucked.

intersting bump. i hope this turns out a little better than handling the security issues of NATS. but since you guys claim to be experienced in handling companies no matter what the biz is i have full trust of course.

After many MANY emails and VM's I will post what OC3 Networks discovered back in October after routine audit of 2 of our clients security.

We know this issue exist since mid Aug 2007, secured our customers and blocked the intruder IP’s from any access to our network.

We posted the thread http://www.gfy.com/showthread.php?t=779742 and got some lawsuit treat to sue us that we could have care less… BUT when our customers that we tracked the breach on their servers got treats as well and requested us to NOT come out public with it, we honored their request.


I've been involved with a high number of NATS clients and have found the following to be true:
*) Changing all admin level account passwords stops the intruder. He still attempts to login, but in vain.
*) As soon as TMM has admin access to NATS the intruder is back. Sometimes the same day.
*) Intruder is using an automation script that dumps the NATS members list. In some cases he is doing this every hour on the hour.[/color]

*) NATS was vulnerable to SQL injection attacks. I haven't investigated whether it still is.


P.S. Im hearing that there is a backdoor that TMM can use to get into your NATS, but I havent investigated so its speculation. Only reason I even mention this is because NATS is encrypted and you dont know. Im not interested in decrypting NATS just to find out. There are other ways. I hope this isn’t true.

If you cannot see how owning a company that collects data for clients, and also owning a company that uses the same data that you are collecting for clients using a competing processor is a conflict of interest, then you need to have your eyes checked, in my opinion.

What is to stop some rogue employee from either SEGPAY or NATS from figuring out a way to misuse the information that you potentially have access to from these clients?

Trust you, you say. That is fine. No one is saying that you are untrustworthy. As I told you in icq, this is not personal and has no bearing (on my part) as to whether or not I like you and Charlie. This is a simple matter that a Business Ethics 101 class would dispose of in a single sitting.

If CCBill or Epoch were to start running websites tomorrow, I would be the first person to say it was a conflict. If they decided to start a NATS type program that they were offering to sites not using them for processing, I would find that to be a conflict as well, and would have no problem saying so publicly.

One last time, nothing personal, just an evaluation of the situation as I see it from my chair.

you see this?