Mr.Yuck

Agreed! If it's been found recently, that's the BIG clue and reading logs helps. Oh, and bring a small shovel! :D:D Have fun and try searching for the regular on up sizes. :D:D I thought you were hibernating. One of the first prolific cache placers in my area, who hid about 40 caches in 2002 and 2003 (that was a crapload for one owner in those days) always made it a point to make his caches "winter accessable", and state so on the cache page. Usually this meant off the ground, although that doesn't mean it couldn't still be buried in a foot of snow in the crotch of a multi-trunked tree. But that did rub off on other people, including myself, for quite a few years. Ultimately, I'd say look for the accessable in winter attribute, or whatever it's official name is. The people who use it are going out of their way to use it, so they SHOULD know what they're talking about.

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"? This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view. I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way. Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind. I know a few older cachers who just aren't that comfortable typing on a computer, so their online logs have always leaned toward brevity, even in the early days. My husband takes a long time to log caches because he tries to write something for each one he finds, and he ends up with a backlog. So of course, there are these ridiculous people who think there should be time limits on cache logging. It's just not possible to keep up with everyone's arbitrary standards and expectations. I appreciate a detailed log note as much as the next person, but "yay" or "tftc" or "trouve en solo" isn't that big a deal. Ya' know, I've been ranting about this for like 4 years now. No one, and I mean no one, was thumbing out acronym, or two word logs in the old days. Defend lame logging, deny that it's 99.9% from smartphones logging from the cache site in the field, or whatever. Hey, do you get any MPLC logs up there? That's the French equivalent for TFTC, for those who don't know. I just don't think lame logging is worth the energy it takes to be annoyed by it. The people who are really bad about it will never know any better, but there is a risk that a good cacher, brief logger will feel discouraged by the complaints. We certainly do get MPLC and PAT (premier à trouvé) logs and other French acronyms around here, since our region straddles Ontario and Quebec. Figuring out what they mean is kind of fun. These aren't caching specific, but I'm particularly delighted by "FDS" and "TBK" (though that one doesn't show up in logs too much unless your cache is a real bugger). I guess it's my pet peeve, lame logging. Yes, I'm afraid I'm annoyed. Maybe if it wasn't a relatively recent development. Like if people were dropping "yay" and "found it" on a regular basis before the end of 2000. I have looked at a few caches in Quebec over the years, especially in Montreal (thought about going there a couple years ago, but it never happened). I have seen "MPLC" logs, and I thought it was cute. Not familiar with PAT. I would associate that with Point After Touchdown.

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"? This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view. I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way. Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind. I know a few older cachers who just aren't that comfortable typing on a computer, so their online logs have always leaned toward brevity, even in the early days. My husband takes a long time to log caches because he tries to write something for each one he finds, and he ends up with a backlog. So of course, there are these ridiculous people who think there should be time limits on cache logging. It's just not possible to keep up with everyone's arbitrary standards and expectations. I appreciate a detailed log note as much as the next person, but "yay" or "tftc" or "trouve en solo" isn't that big a deal. Ya' know, I've been ranting about this for like 4 years now. No one, and I mean no one, was thumbing out acronym, or two word logs in the old days. Defend lame logging, deny that it's 99.9% from smartphones logging from the cache site in the field, or whatever. Hey, do you get any MPLC logs up there? That's the French equivalent for TFTC, for those who don't know.

Thank you (I wish you had used the word "inconceivable" instead ) Early cachers write long logs, and the rest of you feel the peer pressure to do so? With a much smaller community then, there may be more tendency to conform. Fewer caches to log means you can devote more time to logging them? Different type of players then? I'm not a sociologist, and I don't play one on TV. I'm just an anonymous Internet ranter What am I supposed to go all Princess Bride on you? I think not. I'd love to go all sociologist on lame logs. Except Sociology doesn't really exist, other than in College. And then people who get like their masters or PHD's in sociology go on to teach it in college, and perpetuate the whole thing.

Why does someone who hiked 4 miles over rugged terrain to a beautiful overlook have to write anything more than "Found it"? This is geocaching. It's not creative writing. It's not about how eloquently you can spin words. I can do that from my computer chair (aside : who the heck uses a computer from an armchair? Terrible posture) without leaving my house. Or I can do that from my laptop in a Starbucks. That guy had a great hike. He enjoyed a wonderful view. He found a cache while he's at it. He logged it as "Found it" online. Maybe he has a personal journal. Maybe he has really good memory and feels no need to write anything down. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable posting something in public, which for many of the forum regulars here may be something hard to comprehend Some people are in it for the numbers. Some people are in it for the hike. Some are in it for the interesting places it brings you. Some are in it for the fun of finding objects hidden by other people. Almost everyone is in it for a combination of these reasons, and probably many more I left out. Writing a long log has nothing to do with enjoying a good hike with a fabulous view. I write logs because I enjoy writing logs, and it is a journal of my experience for me to read some day. And I certainly appreciate seeing interesting logs written by others, but they most certainly do not owe me anything. If they don't feel like logging anything, it is entirely up to them. Cut and paste logs for every single cache that day? Go right ahead. I hope you had fun either way. Allright, 4 paragraph rant acknowledged. You can't tell me Geocaching logging has not fundamentally changed. The idea of me going home to a computer and logging "yay" for such a cache in 2004 would be preposterous. And yes, I did in fact have "mobile access" to the website back then. I had this HUGE Palm powered "smartphone", that I could get on the internet with via it's built in 19,200 bps modem. The thought of logging caches from the cache site with "yay" never crossed my mind.

Thanks for the update. I would suppose we'll never hear how they got in, why would he want to release that information? By the way (and this wasn't a malicious sock or anything) I am personally aware of a case where Geocaching.com HQ used IP forensics to identify the username of the owner of a sock puppet account. That should probably remain a secret too. I'm still surprised I used this once. (I haven't created a puzzle cache in at least 5 years). Why did I change from evince? And I am NOT changing my Geocaching.com password. What are they going to do, post something to the forums under my account that will get me a temporary ban? I can do that myself, thank you.

The cacher in question actually found 1100 caches before disappearing. The last cache they found was mine and it was right next to a lake. Maybe they fell in just after logging on their smartphone. 1,100? They'll be back. I've noticed a guy in my region who joined in 2011 I think with 1,600 finds who still drops TFTC on 99% of caches. Record show's he's never attended an event, and no one knows who he is. Just living in his own little isolated TFTC bubble there. And he's generally a "cache in the woods" guy too. He's not dropping them on LPC's at Wal-Mart.

Really reaching to take a shot at the smartphone crowd, huh?! Or maybe I should say "eh?" I'm not sure I'm allowed as I cache exclusively with my smartphone. I sold the other thing. Which makes EXACTLY THE POINT I've been making since I started noticing newbies dropping lame logs on us en masse in 2010. My only problem with the "smartphone crowd" is their strong propensity towards lame logging. What on earth makes these people think "yay" or "woo" is cache log? Do you think I went out in the woods in 2003, came home, went to the cache page, and typed "yay" on my computer?

The rare times lame loggers are confronted (and I've never done this myself, but have heard about it), is in the extremely rare cases where they DO go on to become regular Geocachers with hundreds or more finds, and still drop horrifically lame acronym or two word logs on caches. Then they go and get all offended and do stuff like you say. You can't win, can you?

Yes, Thank you. Hopefully this Norwegian guy has the contents of his /var/log/auth.log file. But we'll leave the whole investigation up to the people who do this full time for a living. Of course they won't be in for a couple days. Oh, and of course thanks to NYPC for giving an overview of the SQL injection thing.

Me too. What's going on here, with all the multi-quotes? Do we know this thing was hacked by German Geocachers, or just your average everyday hackers or what? I still say weak password. Not necessarily "root", being a Linux system, they try other things such as "admin" or "test". Looks like I did use this service once, although I mostly used evince. I'll be on the lookout for any Greetings from Germany logs on that particular puzzle.

Is that that Tucson guy? Not necessarily a Geocaching puzzle person. The website I run gets many o' hack attempts daily, usually from Chinese IP addresses. Today isn't over, so 12 yesterday, for example. What the heck are they trying to do? Gotta create a fake back door and make them believe that they got in. Then monitor them, or give them fake info, or redirect them to a malicious virus. I have no freaking clue. The first 4 are from China, The UK, France, and Russia. Didn't feel like checking the rest. Usually they're mostly from China. Here's some info about Geocheck.org: Linky. 45% of visitors from Norway, 32% from Germany. Looks like it's written in php by the owner himself (as opposed to a wordpress site or something). Ultimately, I'd say not strong enough of a password. Now did Geocachers do it, or no? Hackers aren't totally stupid, you know. They could see that it's a site strongly geared towards Geocaching.com, and spread their hacked data in the right places.

Is that that Tucson guy? Not necessarily a Geocaching puzzle person. The website I run gets many o' hack attempts daily, usually from Chinese IP addresses. Today isn't over, so 12 yesterday, for example.

Personally, I'd love to know how a "virus", i.e. your typical browser hijacking virus that you'd get from going to your average porn site, for example, is going to make it's way onto a flash drive that contains only 2 .txt files, as outlined in the guidance for placing one of these caches on another site. I've done a puzzle cache or two which used an image with a name such as puzzle.jpg that could be viewed as an image using any image viewing/editing software. If you changed the .jpg file extention from .jpg to .rar (or .zip) it could be opened with an archive extraction tool and you'd find that it contained other files (in one case it was another image of a QR code). A .txt file extension is necessarily indicative that the file only contains text. A few years ago there was a virus going around that was disseminated through flash drives. There were several locations set up around the university (staffed by people that had other things to do) with a linux box with some software that would detect and clean the virus, not only from flash drives but from any removable media. There were over 1700 instances of infected flash drives and even a few camera SD-cards that were found to contain the virus over 1 day and a half of testing. I also remember hearing a story a few years ago from someone from some national electronic security agency that talked about one of those digital picture frames that contained a virus. In that case, they found a digital picture frame produced by some place in China. When the usb cable for the device was plugged into computer it downloaded an application used to display digital photos on the device. The application included a virus that would scan the users system looking for sensitive data and send it to an email address in China. These digital picture frames were brand new, out of the box, purchased at a big box electronics store. Just throwing this one out there... Why the Security of USB Is Fundamentally Broken I knew I'd never get away with saying "how am I going to get a virus from a clean stick that contains only 2 .txt files"? For the record, I have not used any of the dead drops listed on deaddrops.com. But I will say this; I have a teenager and a 20 year old, who was recently a teenager. And I am undefeated versus and and all viruses on any computer that they have ever thrown at me.

Just to prove that yay logs really exist: linky As an added bonus, here's a woo! from the same cache. As far as the "caching career" of the person The Incredible's mentions, allow me to quote myself from post #9.

Personally, I'd love to know how a "virus", i.e. your typical browser hijacking virus that you'd get from going to your average porn site, for example, is going to make it's way onto a flash drive that contains only 2 .txt files, as outlined in the guidance for placing one of these caches on another site. Have a look at this then: http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2014/08/usb-has-a-fundamental-security-flaw-that-you-cant-detect/ Plus you don't know if there is only 2 text files until it is connected to your computer and you've opened it up. Till you open it on your computer it's a bit of a Schrodinger's cat situation. As far as that link, I knew someone would come up with something. Actually, I'd be worried about these things being exposed to the elements and shorting out my device, more than I would some evil virus. Now talking about the public dead drops used for file sharing that contain Gigabytes worth of files. These were invented by a German National living in New York City in 2010. There is a video on their website of him installing the first 5 in NYC. The guy used existing cracks and holes in old buildings. In one of them, he even repairs another crack in the wall, and his partner says "good samaritan". If these things were nano caches, they'd be published on this website in well, a nanosecond. EDIT: P.S. I would think the people that use these things tend to be rather computer savvy, and know how to isolate, and get rid of viruses. I'm going to guess they all have Norton installed.

Personally, I'd love to know how a "virus", i.e. your typical browser hijacking virus that you'd get from going to your average porn site, for example, is going to make it's way onto a flash drive that contains only 2 .txt files, as outlined in the guidance for placing one of these caches on another site.

The one I've found on another site was attached to fishing line, and tucked into the open ended tubular bracing of a picnic table in a public park. Who said they have to be cemented into the side of a building? The only thing on there were two text files, a "read me" file, and another which was the log. I thought it was pretty cool, actually. I have a funny feeling that 1)I'm in a distinct minority, and 2) They'd never be published here in a million years.

I can't prove it, because it disappeared from Project-GC on January 1st, 2015, but new cache placements overall in the UK were down in 2014 vs. 2013, and by about 16-18% if I remember correctly. And by the way, good thing you guys decided to stay.

Note to self. Keep drama to an absolute minimum in my Geocide note, and people won't even realize it's a Geocide.

Busted for responding without reading any of the replies. In at least one case, it appears to have been a joke, and no glitter was ever sent. Trolling the media, so to speak. This whole thing is absurd anyways. Setting off a glitter bomb would be a gross violation of not only Geocaching ethics, but also "leave no trace" principles.

Yeah, you were about 4 1/2 years too late in inventing that other game. Yep, we're all traditional around here, with the paper log, and sign the log, and that kind of stuff. Will it eventually become way too old fashioned and traditional, and be our downfall? It would take several more years, but it's possible.

I'm going to put you down for a no then.

Correct. That (logging into the website with a verified account) is how that evil site scraping opensource app bypasses Groundspeak's closed API. It's not a "newbie app", believe me.

Prompts could help, and could have been implemented early on with the apps. I've told the story before (but I'll tell it again) I once had a conversation in 2010 with a 2002 joiner who owns over 100 caches (maybe 80 back then), which was, in a nutshell, "Why are all these newbies logging our caches with Tftc?" That conversation really happened; and we were perplexed. As someone who joined in 2003, I find it almost impossible to understand the propensity of many newbs to log these things directly from the phone with "Got it", "Nice one", "Yay", "Woohoo", "Found it" (which used to be considered rude and an insult), and of course the poster child of lame logs, "Tftc".