Re: Phew!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Adam On 21 July 2002 at 19:12:29 +0100 (which was 19:12 where I live) Adam Rykala graced us with these comments ... ...electronic mail sent to a large number of recipients define [a large number of recipients] Is it 10, 100, 1000. They have put a number to it for a good reason. - -- BFN, ___ David | SecureBat! 1.61 | E-mailaholics | _| Win 2K Server 5.0.2195 SP2 | International | | If your attack is going well, you're in an ambush | ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt Build 09 Beta 03 iQA/AwUBPTsCEvmK8eZlD0U0EQJhZwCgghiOhsQrvZj06hi/5yk1DPMHktAAn2Lt smvg+WIbeKNnlas0+aR71G9z =ihvc -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: Phew!
Hi David, On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, at 19:48:49 [GMT +0100] (19:48 where I live) you wrote: DE Hi Adam DE On 21 July 2002 at 19:12:29 +0100 (which was 19:12 where I live) Adam Rykala DE graced us with these comments DE ... ...electronic mail sent to a large number of recipients DE define [a large number of recipients] DE Is it 10, 100, 1000. They have put a number to it for a good reason. Point taken. I run my own servers and I know how paranoid I am over it. Just recently upgraded my server and yesterday it had its first smtp probe. Yahoo.com email adress as well. My servers all grown up now ;-) All goes to show just how difficult to define spam. The famous comment relating to pornography folds I cannot define spam, but I know it when I see it! A -- 21 July 2002, 20:07 [ Adam Rykala : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [ www.new-wales.net ] [ Private key : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Under Worked, Over Paid... So who's complaining?? All messages both into and out of this account have been scanned with AntiVir's Antivirus Mail Gateway for Linux. However, all attachments should be scanned also with a virus checker at the receiver's end to ensure that the files are clean and free of virus infection. All messages are for the attention of the recipient only. Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: Selective Downloads - Kill Filter
On Sunday, July 21, 2002, 7:21:29 PM, Douglas Hinds wrote: Use the Mail Dispatcher. Any message containing the string and string location you indicated for selective download will have the Receive box unchecked and (if you've set delete from server immediately) will have the Delete box checked. Yes, I use the Mail Dispatcher in this way, as I have a filter to hold mail on the server as well as the one to delete mail, so I review the server list once a day. Not many spam messages get though, and those that do go to SpamCop and I amend the filters as necessary. That is the way selective download filters work. And very effectively, too. What I would like is an addition in the log file for the account to say that x messages were deleted without downloading - at the moment, it only tells me the number of messages on the server, the number of new ones, and the number downloaded. It does not say how many were deleted by the Kill filter. Julian -- Using The Bat! v1.60q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
The problem seems to be bigger than I supposed. Some of the italian user are looking around to finde any indication abut filteringg TheBat! For the moment one of them find this: http://www.kr.freebsd.org/internal/spam/header_checks If I understood exactly this is the spam filter policy of a korean user group. -- Ciao Al pgp public key: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/8338/key.html Fingerprint: 23A0 44F1 8D3B 5C78 0054 4E25 8D0A D73E 4664 8E0F Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Hi Alberto, On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, at 23:12:34 [GMT +0200] (22:12 where I live) you wrote: AA The problem seems to be bigger than I supposed. AA Some of the italian user are looking around to finde any indication AA abut filteringg TheBat! AA For the moment one of them find this: AA http://www.kr.freebsd.org/internal/spam/header_checks AA If I understood exactly this is the spam filter policy of a korean AA user group. Oh the irony.. -- 21 July 2002, 22:17 [ Adam Rykala : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [ www.new-wales.net ] [ Private key : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Peaceful Coexistence my Fantail! Phasers on Maximum! All messages both into and out of this account have been scanned with AntiVir's Antivirus Mail Gateway for Linux. However, all attachments should be scanned also with a virus checker at the receiver's end to ensure that the files are clean and free of virus infection. All messages are for the attention of the recipient only. Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, 22 July 2002 at 9:12 a.m. Alberto wrote: AA The problem seems to be bigger than I supposed. AA Some of the italian user are looking around to finde any AA indication abut filteringg TheBat! For the moment one of them find AA this: AA http://www.kr.freebsd.org/internal/spam/header_checks AA If I understood exactly this is the spam filter policy of a korean AA user group. I can't believe this! This kind of filtering on email client is ridiculous. Geez even those of us who think OE is the pits, don't stoop to these levels! I have never received *any* spam from anyone using TB! and I can't imagine that anyone using it would use it for spamming purposes. I guess there is nothing much that can be done about it, but it is obviously more widespread than originally indicated. It's a worry :-( - -- Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (MingW32) - GPGshell v2.30 Comment: As long as one keeps searching the answers come Comment: ... but sometimes they are a long time coming! :-) iEYEARECAAYFAj07JF4ACgkQyogQhPvf03OP8QCgpBPObB6TjMb3avP/0jZ9bGiz CjEAoNwJOaXZbx75esfutndYmYq4Xj4H =heLf -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Hi Carren, On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, at 09:15:27 [GMT +1200] (22:15 where I live) you wrote: CS I can't believe this! This kind of filtering on email client is CS ridiculous. Geez even those of us who think OE is the pits, don't CS stoop to these levels! CS I have never received *any* spam from anyone using TB! and I can't CS imagine that anyone using it would use it for spamming purposes. CS I guess there is nothing much that can be done about it, but it is CS obviously more widespread than originally indicated. CS It's a worry :-( Well I haven't had a single message bounced or refused yet while using the Bat and I've got a few thousand under my belt. The fact that the rest of us haven't noticed before is proof enough of the limit of this. All we need to do is publicise when we find an ISP that does this so we can inform them of the stupidity of filtering email by client. -- 21 July 2002, 22:23 [ Adam Rykala : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [ www.new-wales.net ] [ Private key : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] And in the news: Check out the next message. All messages both into and out of this account have been scanned with AntiVir's Antivirus Mail Gateway for Linux. However, all attachments should be scanned also with a virus checker at the receiver's end to ensure that the files are clean and free of virus infection. All messages are for the attention of the recipient only. Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:17:47 +0100GMT (21/07/2002, 23.17 +0100GMT), Adam Rykala wrote: AA If I understood exactly this is the spam filter policy of a korean AA user group. Oh the irony.. :-) The only good think is that if we know the problem we can solve: is not possible to contact every ISP and ML service to avoid TheBat! filtering but as we know that some of them use this stupid policy we can understand why one our mail doesn't reach the address Ciao Al pgp public key: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/8338/key.html Fingerprint: 23A0 44F1 8D3B 5C78 0054 4E25 8D0A D73E 4664 8E0F Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:24:56 +0100GMT (21/07/2002, 23.24 +0100GMT), Adam Rykala wrote: Well I haven't had a single message bounced or refused yet while using the Bat and I've got a few thousand under my belt. The fact that the rest of us haven't noticed before is proof enough of the limit of this. All we need to do is publicise when we find an ISP that does this so we can inform them of the stupidity of filtering email by client. Absolutely Right! May is a good idea if we can contact some magazine to inform them about this policy: not only for TheBat!. As an informatic journalist I think is right and good to inform everyone that there are some provider so stupid. Ciao Al pgp public key: http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Louvre/8338/key.html Fingerprint: 23A0 44F1 8D3B 5C78 0054 4E25 8D0A D73E 4664 8E0F Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Douglas, @21 July 2002, 16:59 -0500 (22:59 UK time) Douglas Hinds [DH] in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Carren Stuart: CS I have never received *any* spam from anyone using TB! DH I have. You should all (not just Douglas) be made aware that Advanced Mass Sender (AMS) by Max Terentiev (a spamming tool) will allow you to choose one of four fake X-Mailer headers to obfuscate, confound and incriminate: Advanced Mass Sender Outlook Express 4.72 X-Mailer The Bat! (v1.52f) Business Check that spam, if you still have it. I'll bet that's what sent it. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.1.90-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE9OzHCOeQkq5KdzaARApocAJ41VcFOhBV9XDDtQidKR7DzNtqWnwCeJJht LO/JykcR8PBz3mUZOoS/L58= =CLIN -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Hello Carren Stuart, In Reference to your Posting on Sunday, July 21 2002 at 02:15 PM PDT, I can't believe this! This kind of filtering on email client is ridiculous. Geez even those of us who think OE is the pits, don't stoop to these levels! It is probably because TB has the Mass Mailing feature, and this is enough for some ISP's to filter on the Client for that very reason. -- Nick Andriash Courtenay, B.C. Canada Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[3]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, 22 July 2002 at 9:59 a.m. Douglas wrote: CS I have never received *any* spam from anyone using TB! DH I have. CS and I can't imagine that anyone using it would use it for CS spamming purposes. DH A better class of spammer, no doubt. :-) Well then, I guess we should give them credit for recognising a superior email client ... but I really don't think that TB! is going to be the email client of choice for your average spammer. My guess is that these ISP's who are filtering TB! are simply adding any *weird looking* email clients into their filters without bothering to learn anything about them. I think they probably look at the names of some of these clients and decide that they don't *look normal* - therefore they dump them into their filters *just in case*. - -- Carren PGP public key: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=PGP_Key_Body=Please%20send%20key -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (MingW32) - GPGshell v2.30 Comment: As long as one keeps searching the answers come Comment: ... but sometimes they are a long time coming! :-) iEYEARECAAYFAj07MiEACgkQyogQhPvf03MSOgCgvUxc3vVCYSKsR2AZdgiNs8t3 yswAoPHNUSySqMn93zrUKMosDuMW6VHC =+TdP -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[2]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Sunday, July 21, 2002, 3:38:03 PM, Alberto wrote: AA :-) AA The only good think is that if we know the problem we can solve: is AA not possible to contact every ISP and ML service to avoid TheBat! AA filtering but as we know that some of them use this stupid policy we AA can understand why one our mail doesn't reach the address Since we can't eliminate all of the stupid people, this just means we need a new feature from The Bat!...X-Mailer header modification... :) -- Sean T. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[3]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
On Sunday, July 21, 2002, 5:10:59 PM, N. Sean Timm wrote: NST Since we can't eliminate all of the stupid people, this just means we NST need a new feature from The Bat!...X-Mailer header modification... :) No... just a good hex editor?;-) Artmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[2]: Selective Downloads - Kill Filter
Hello Julian, On Sunday, July 21, 2002, 2:49:11 PM, you wrote: JBL What I would like is an addition in the log file for the JBL account to say that x messages were deleted without downloading JBL - at the moment, it only tells me the number of messages on the JBL server, the number of new ones, and the number downloaded. It JBL does not say how many were deleted by the Kill filter. On JBL Sunday, July 21, 2002, 7:21:29 PM, Douglas Hinds wrote: In that case, you need to make your wish list known to the TB! developers. DH Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[2]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Hello Carren, On Sunday, July 21, 2002, 4:15:27 PM, you wrote: CS I have never received *any* spam from anyone using TB! I have. CS and I can't imagine that anyone using it would use it for CS spamming purposes. A better class of spammer, no doubt. DH Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[2]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Hello Marck, Marck wrote: MDP ... I've seen spam come through with The Bat! (1.52f) MDP Business as the X-Mailer and an X-MS-Priority header. *Is* there a TB! Business version? I DO recall seeing that on the spam I saw with TB! mentioned as the mailer in the header. MDP Advanced Mass Sender (AMS) by Max Terentiev (a spamming tool) MDP will allow you to choose one of four fake X-Mailer headers to MDP obfuscate, confound and incriminate: MDP Advanced Mass Sender MDP Outlook Express 4.72 MDP X-Mailer MDP The Bat! (v1.52f) Business I changed computers and haven't integrated the old message base yet, which makes it harder to find. Furthermore, I probably eliminated the message since it was spam and I was chronically low on disk space. OTOH, I was so low I stopped downloading from some accounts and when I finally did on the new computer, almost 8 thousand messages came in. MDP Check that spam, if you still have it. I'll bet that's what sent it. I search all accounts for v1.52f in the header and found 36 messages with v1.52f, 15 of those were sent to this and other TB! lists and 3 of those were sent using the v1.52f Business edition, so there may have been a business version sold by RITLabs. The other 21 messages were received by 3 accounts and are spam directed to ALL accounts of two ISPs. Most of these are _HTML_ mail, which indicates that they were NOT in fact sent using The Bat!, unless the Business version (if there is one) included (the hated) HTML mail capacity. Most of those were in Trash directories. Is there a way to determine whether AMS was used? Douglas Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Douglas, @22 July 2002, 19:25 -0500 (01:25 UK time) Douglas Hinds [DH] in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck D Pearlstone: MDP ... I've seen spam come through with The Bat! (1.52f) Business MDP as the X-Mailer and an X-MS-Priority header. DH *Is* there a TB! Business version? Yes, there is. DH I DO recall seeing that on the spam I saw with TB! mentioned as DH the mailer in the header. If you get a spam that has this header: X-Mailer: The Bat! (1.52f) Business it, incongruously will also have an X-MS-Priority header. TB only uses X-Priority. The X-Mailer header is a fake. DH I search all accounts for v1.52f in the header and found 36 DH messages with v1.52f, 15 of those were sent to this and other TB! DH lists and 3 of those were sent using the v1.52f Business edition, Yes, it was a bona fide edition. It's just that it isn't used for sending spam. It is far too low capacity. DH so there may have been a business version sold by RITLabs. There were, but not for spamming. DH The other 21 messages were received by 3 accounts and are spam DH directed to ALL accounts of two ISPs. Most of these are _HTML_ DH mail, which indicates that they were NOT in fact sent using The DH Bat!, Correct. You'll probably find the X-MS-Priority header too. DH unless the Business version (if there is one) included (the hated) DH HTML mail capacity. It didn't. Business version is just the Business licence ($45) AOT the Private licence ($35) AOT the Student licence ($25). Nothing special, just a different price for different classes of user. DH Most of those were in Trash directories. I'm not surprised :-). DH Is there a way to determine whether AMS was used? Yes. It was Spam - ergo, it wasn't sent using TB. That's one fairly simplistic maxim. I have found that the X-MS-Priority header tends to appear in the AMS spams too. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.1.90-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE9O1e4OeQkq5KdzaARAvmDAKDA3RFXK6wINhzA8wUroWOkNfglXwCg1Z6k XuV4BW/z8fCgLQLH5p74MWo= =QecO -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[2]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Hello Marck, you wrote: MDP If you get a spam that has this header: MDP X-Mailer: The Bat! (1.52f) Business MDP it, incongruously will also have an X-MS-Priority header. TB only MDP uses X-Priority. Only six of the 21 spam messages lack X-MSMail-Priority and none of them are hard core spam. They're spam for insurance or vacations or something equally innocuous. The nastiest ones all have the X-MSMail-Priority or X-MS-Priority: header and as mentioned, almost all are HTML mail. All the html mail have a X-MS component. MDP I have found that the X-MS-Priority header tends to appear in MDP the AMS spams too. Confirmed. DH Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
Re[3]: TheBat! filtered for spam (again)
Sunday, July 21, 2002, 6:34:34 PM, you wrote: DH Only six of the 21 spam messages lack X-MSMail-Priority and none DH of DH them are hard core spam. They're spam for insurance or vacations DH or DH something equally innocuous. The nastiest ones all have the DH X-MSMail-Priority or X-MS-Priority: header and as mentioned, DH almost DH all are HTML mail. All the html mail have a X-MS component. This stuff may be innocuous in that it's more or less inoffensive, but when it comes purporting to be *from* your own address, it's pretty annoying. Not from TB, though .. don't think I've ever seen spam with TB as the mailer .. yet. In time, no doubt. Most of mine that comes from an actual mail client (as opposed to aol, hotmail, yahoo .. ) seems to come from Outlook, or a spam mail client. I'm with the guy who things they ought to block Outlook :-) Lynn 1.60h on Win2kPro SP2 -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * *Aun Aprendo I'd rather be WARP'ed* * * Team OS/2 http://www.sites.onlinemac.com/hawthorne/ Current Ver: 1.61 FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/
