Re: [ql-users]Decent ISPs

2004-06-01 Thread Robert Newson
Dr Colin F Parsons wrote:
+50% of my Spam recieved came from Hotmail, that's why the generic
hotmail.com and all its international variants is in my killfile, So your
mail may not  get through to it's intended recepients!!
I think you probably mean 50% of your Spam received allegedly came from 
Hotmail?

My current spam pot contains:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 179.0.47.72 by 24.188.249.242
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 198.117.88.59 (HELO sorrel) (envelope-from
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by quarkmail-2.8.0)
 [65.26.69.40]
 [Result of whois 198.117.88.59:
  OrgID:  NASA
  NetRange:   198.116.0.0 - 198.123.255.255]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 236.157.242.208 by 61.254.122.78
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 80.64.223.56 by law3-hb09.law6.hotmail.com
  [Core a real spam from hotmail!]
  [Why does the whois entry for bash.sh Ltd
(inetnum: 80.64.208.0 - 80.64.223.255) have a mobile
phone number?]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 106.1.28.112 by 65.24.41.155 [rr.com]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 200.208.27.53 [CREDICARD.COM.BR]
by 221.164.46.31 [Korea Telecom]
   [Message for Viagra...links url to
   24meds.net == www.directi.com]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from 173.236.166.204 by 68.75.49.179
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from remnant ([34.120.32.100])
  by zmf30-mail.joshua.normalcy.hungry.cable.rogers.com
etc.
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.quanta.org.uk/mailing.htm


Re: [ql-users]Decent ISPs

2004-06-01 Thread Malcolm Cadman
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Newson 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Malcolm Cadman wrote:
...
I have found it worthwhile to have a :-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( address )
Mine's [now] called [EMAIL PROTECTED].  The only problem is that there is 
no filter available for my mail reader to filter on Envelope-to: - it 
would cut down the number of rules in my spam filter to 1.
OK ... you have already got it :-)
I use SMTP for mail/news not POP.
This is at my software end via the ISP's PoP.
You have your own mail server for inbound mail?
I intend, when I get the time, to set up fetchmail (or alternative) to 
get my inbound mail from my ISP's POP server which would then be 
filtered (auto-delete/redirect spam on Envelope-to:) before being 
sent by SMTP to deliver across my LAN.

I could write a pre-fetchmail filter to process my POP to download the 
headers and delete spam before running fetchmail to download and 
distribute the rest [of my email].
With SMTP you get the 'lot', and can then apply filtering to it if you 
are able within the software, or write your own.

With POP you get the email for that particular address - which for many 
users is their only address anyway, so they don't really notice any 
difference.  Many 'low cost' ISP's just provide the one email address, 
which is always via POP, and they even 'borrow' anothers' server through 
which they provide the service.

I experimented with 'SpamKiller' recently ... and that needs to be set 
up as receiving inbound mail by POP.  Which caught me out for a while 
until I realised that I needed to change the setting from SMTP to POP.

However, the problem with POP is that it has to go through every address 
that you hold, one by one.  I found this more time consuming with a 
dial-up account.  So I abandoned 'SpamKiller'.

Although, the software itself is fine, and does what is says 'on the 
tin' :-) ... and no doubt it will evolve even further.

Very useful if you have only one or a few email addresses with a dial-up 
account, or if you have 'always-on' ADSL or similar, ( then you again 
will not notice ) ... and it is fun to set up filters to stop 'spam' 
getting through.

No doubt when there is good direct access from QDOS/SMSQ software to the 
Net all these things will come into play.

--
Malcolm Cadman
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.quanta.org.uk/mailing.htm


Re: [ql-users]Decent ISPs

2004-06-01 Thread Dave P


On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, gwicks wrote:

 My point is that I have to have an email contact on websites. This is how
 the spammers gain many email addresses. I use hotmail for this contact
 detail because there is less of a spam problem. I then ask bona fide mailers
 to use my beeb.net address.

You, Sir, are in need of this link...

http://www.wbwip.com/wbw/emailencoder.html

Helpfully yours,

Dave


___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.quanta.org.uk/mailing.htm