On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 06:10, Paul Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:39:06AM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
There is usually a one-line description of a newsgroup which is
displayed beside one's personal list of subscribed newsgroups. It
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 04:05:17 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:28:03PM -0500, Scott C. Linnenbringer wrote:
The USENET is a different story, and I'm willing to bet that he's not
aware of munging policies of mailing lists vs. the USENET.
But they're the
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Aug 5 12:33:25 2003
I don't ever see the mail and the whole process is user-transparent.
At the risk of being picky if the user doesn't see any of what is going
on, it is not user-transparent but opaque ;)
Semantics:-)
As a disinterested observer (who
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 08:02:00 2003
It is estimated that half of all the emails sent daily are spam.
99.9% of that does nothing but waste bandwidth, routing resources, and
server space, as well as energy and people's valuable time.
Connection slow? Can't access a favorite site?
Here's a sample from today's mail log. Someone has been sending me
mails, over and over, with MY address on the From: line.
Bet they didn't know I have a packet sniffer running at all times.
When I find out who it is, they are going to be in for a surprise.
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 06:40:55AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
on Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 01:50:26AM +0100, Pigeon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 05:48:42PM -0400, ScruLoose wrote:
A properly designed program *even if it doesn't know PGP* will just
display the message
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:39:23AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 09:33:53 2003
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 08:10:30 -0500 John Hasler wrote:
Carlos Sousa writes:
Do you also have an account at my service provider? Or is it that
you're just incapable of
u:Undel s:Save m:Mail r:Reply g:Group ?:Help
--- alancRe: Challenge-response mail filters considered harmful
(was Re: Look at
Subject: Re: Challenge-response mail filters considered harmful (was Re: Look at
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-CR: C
I hate to have
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 11:19, Steve Lamb wrote:
On 05 Aug 2003 10:59:52 -0400
Mark Roach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do care if someone else pretends to be you and makes you look bad
though, don't you? It's really not hard to do.
He does. In fact he perports that C-R is a better
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:52:19AM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 10:33:25PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
Newsgroup descriptions are the proper repository for this information.
Are you referring to those very short
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 21:33, Lance Simmons wrote:
[...]
My spam box is full of plausible sounding subjects from familiar
sounding names.
You're unlucky. Mine is full of things like Improve your life w
eokglo ruu fhrcf from Jed Wray [EMAIL PROTECTED]. I have thousands
of them - with
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the widespread use of CR systems would eliminate spam from the face of
the earth.
What do you do about spam that goes to mailing list?
--
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - I am the rocks.
The one good thing about repeating your mistakes is that you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 11:23:15AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Game, set, and match.
I gather this is a sports analogy. But I don't seem to be familiar
with the sport. Could you tell me what Game, set, and match means?
A call in a tennis
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 01:50:26 +0100
Pigeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a script that looks at the sigs in incoming mail as it's
delivered, and automatically pulls from a keyserver any that I don't
have. Very convenient.
Why when two entries in your .gnupg/gpg.conf file will do it just
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 14:54:32 2003
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:10:03AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Spammers DO send false CRs, but they are EASY to spot.
I suppose they are easy to spot _if_ you remember all the Subject
headers and addresses to which you send mail.
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:07:57 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was one of the last straws that made me to start serving myself. I
signed up for Yahoo and they sold me up the river. Now I'm not so
concerned about it because I have better methods and report.
We'll just have to
On (05/08/03 13:17), Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Aug 5 12:33:25 2003
As a disinterested observer (who currently has yet to get grips with
filtering spam - I do it manually at present) this argument seems to be
somewhat circular and repetitive or maybe I'm missing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 05:47:02PM -0500, Alan Shutko wrote:
Why people think that a fake From: but a valid Reply-To: is any use
is beyond me.
Address munging is considered harmful anyway, especially so in email.
So why do it at all? It's less
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 07:33:40PM -0500, Scott C. Linnenbringer wrote:
Munging has always traditionally been okay in news. Typically, one would
munge his or her email address as [EMAIL PROTECTED], in a form which makes
it stand-out as being munged slightly easier.
Yeah. I even implemented a
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 23:57:48 2003
Since these fellows either can't read plain English, or just don't have
any manners, I will get the discussion back on track.
Here's how a decent CR system works:
1) Your focus in on the passlist. Instead of wasting your time trying to
fight
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 08:55:03AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Connection slow? Can't access a favorite site? Mail service down again for
maintenance? Mail didn't arrive? ISP accounts too costly? Having to constantly
update your spam filters or
I don't know why CR programs offend some people so much.
The fact that so many CR opponents are self-styled spamfighters
poses a conundrum of mind-boggling proportions.
After all, they are the ONLY systems that actually defeat spam.
Is it because they will be out of work/hobby when CR
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 17:47:02 -0500, Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scott C. Linnenbringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By using an invalid email address in your headers with a valid
domain, the site's mx is picking up the weight of spam, even though
you are not.
I think
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been catching up on my email for the past few weeks and found this
rather horrible thread.
My sincerest apologies for all of my earlier posts. I had no idea what a
fluster-cluck this had become.
I dunno, its lead me into a detailed
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 16:17:34 2003
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I should have noted that the password would be stripped from the mail
before it was posted. Could do that with SED!
Actually, I meant, what do you do when someone spams debian-user?
You let
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 05:43:58PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Aug 5 17:17:05 2003
On (05/08/03 13:17), Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Aug 5 12:33:25 2003
Anyone who finds pasting a short string on a mail that is otherwise complete
and clicking
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 09:33:53 2003
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 08:10:30 -0500 John Hasler wrote:
Carlos Sousa writes:
Do you also have an account at my service provider? Or is it that
you're just incapable of setting up your mail system to show the
real origin of your emails?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:28:03PM -0500, Scott C. Linnenbringer wrote:
The USENET is a different story, and I'm willing to bet that he's not
aware of munging policies of mailing lists vs. the USENET.
But they're the same: It's equally
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 07:48:56PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 01:34:45PM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
I feel someone should contact Marco d'Itri who runs the bofh.it
gateway, and ask his opinion about automating that small message about
the gateway being Read-Only. I
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 09:27:07 2003
Carlos Sousa writes:
Do you also have an account at my service provider? Or is it that you're
just incapable of setting up your mail system to show the real origin of
your emails? Anyway, you're incurring in mail forgery.
No he isn't.
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:32:25AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 09:27:07 2003
Carlos Sousa writes:
Do you also have an account at my service provider? Or is it that you're
just incapable of setting up your mail system to show the real origin of
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 10:57:21PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:55:11AM +0200, David Fokkema wrote:
Agreed. Although the 'very high' depends on the willingness of people to
answer challenges.
I won't respond to TMDA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 10:51:53PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
That's just it, while a human *can* decode it a harvester cannot. It is a
valid address. Furthermore if you think a human is going to scan the address
list to pick out/decode the
Hallo!
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hallo!
* Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Guess what address is only used on the newsgroups.
So use a 'Reply-To:' with your 'used and read' email address. Spammers
usually get only the 'XOver', which only has the
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:29:23 -0700 Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 16:21:40 2003
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:10:03 -0700, Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
...
For all that you do in trying to fight the spam problem, I find it
ironic that you yourself are
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 09:09:31 +0200
David Fokkema [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me get this straight: NO user intervention after the first
harrassing mail? Isn't this a bit risky (just trying to help you out)?
For example, A sends B the following e-mail:
B!!! You are a empty-minded son of a,
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:26:08PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 12:58:07PM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
I wouldn't mind taking up the cause. What are the newsgroups this is
heard on?
linux.debian.user
Isn't it also in muc.* someplace?
not that I am aware
This procmail recipe would do the trick. No more spam on the list.
(there *might* be one or two, occassionally, but that password would
be promptly killed. )
Anyone subscribing to the list would have to validate their address
by answering a CR, which is *standard* pracice on the vast majority
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:10:02PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:38:48AM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
It turns out that the References: and Message-ID: headers are
rewritten by the news gateway. I have since discovered that threading
can (hopefully) be preserved by
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 12:00:11AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
on Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:37:49PM +0200, David Fokkema ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 05:13:26AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
Spam is a growing, heck, exploding problem. No doubt.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 01:34:45PM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
I wonder if using gmane to post back to mail munges headers _at all_,
since that would presumably bork PGP signed mails/articles?
Things are only borked if it touches anything between
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:50:34AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 09:18:05PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 01:50:26 +0100
Pigeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a script that looks at the sigs in incoming mail as it's
delivered, and automatically pulls
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:32:50AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
The traditional spamfighting strategies just don't work. Period.
Please define: don't work.
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hallo!
* Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Guess what address is only used on the newsgroups.
So use a 'Reply-To:' with your 'used and read' email address. Spammers
usually get only the 'XOver', which only has the From: in it, so they
won't see your Reply-To:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:07:09PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
I don't know why CR programs offend some people so much.
The fact that so many CR opponents are self-styled spamfighters
poses a conundrum of mind-boggling proportions.
Because CR
On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 16:04:11 -0500, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
alanconnor writes:
Still doesn't make sense to me and I am seriously considering
writing a stanza in my newsreaders filters that will dump any posts
with PGP sigs.
I think maybe I will start signing everything.
I
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:26:36AM -0400, ScruLoose wrote:
Game, set, and match.
I gather this is a sports analogy. But I don't seem to be familiar
with the sport. Could you tell me what Game, set, and match means?
-- hendrik
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 08:55:49PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Facts are facts, and the fact is that traditional spam-blocking strategies
don't work, and CR programs do.
Please define: traditional ... strategies don't work. And, since you say
it is a _fact_, please show us the _facts_.
Now I
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 10:41:23 -0500
Kirk Strauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 2003-08-05T14:20:02Z, Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please fix your mail headers ^^
Anyone else find it mildly ironic that Alan here bitches about mangled
headers and then
On 05 Aug 2003 14:29:34 -0400
Mark Roach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
how does challenge response help if I post on debian-user and set my
From: header to say Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] and rant and rave
against debian in general and other users in particular? Obviously you
can't prove a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 10:33:25PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
Newsgroup descriptions are the proper repository for this information.
I'm not sure the group description lets people know that it's read-only.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson [EMAIL
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 12:22:35 2003
OT material snipped
I just worked the last bugs out of the expire script for MSP.
It goes in cron.daily and checks all the password/address combos for
Challenge-Responses that were issued more than 48 hours in the past, and
for which a reply
What we NEED are advertising servers that check the legality and
trustworthiness of any advertising they offer.
THEN you can put that server on your passlist. You'd register a password
with that server, which could be changed at will. All the spam they sent
you would include that password in a
Earlier, someone said that I was wrong because so many people disagreed
with me.
That's a foolish statement, and I should have called him on it at the
time.
Facts are facts, and the fact is that traditional spam-blocking strategies
don't work, and CR programs do.
Those people may not LIKE
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 07:20:02 -0700
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Aug 5 07:07:40 2003
On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 16:04:11 -0500, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
alanconnor writes:
Still doesn't make sense to me and I am seriously considering
writing a
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:44:50AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
First off, you're responding to two different people as if they were one.
Secondly David Fokkema has been on the pro-C-R side of the fence. I do not
recall him ever complaining about bandwidth (unlike one Mr. Connor who
I hate to have to do this, but I own an apology to Paul Johnson.
(Having received a mail from a list member with an example of a false CR. Talk
about FAST.)
Spammers DO send false CRs, but they are EASY to spot.
A real one will have:
Subject: Re: The_Subject_of_Your_Original_Message
AND
Carlos Sousa writes:
Do you also have an account at my service provider? Or is it that you're
just incapable of setting up your mail system to show the real origin of
your emails? Anyway, you're incurring in mail forgery.
No he isn't. His From: line reads From: alanc. As it contains no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:31:12PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the proper way to report spam?
Essentially, trace headers back to the originator, forward copies of
the spam including headers to the originating ISP and any webhosting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 10:52:41PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
However, it generates less spam than signing up for Yahoo, even when
used over years.
How can you be so sure?
It was one of the last straws that made me to start serving myself.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:21:52AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
What we NEED are advertising servers that check the legality and
trustworthiness of any advertising they offer.
Licenses to advertise. Rght. Go read
nntp://news.spamcop.net/spamcop
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 11:32:50 -0700
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 11:30:45 2003
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the widespread use of CR systems would eliminate spam from the face
of the earth.
What do you do about spam that goes to
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 22:33:58 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, it generates less spam than signing up for Yahoo, even when
used over years.
How can you be so sure?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 03:10:21PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
No offense intended, Lance, but you are just the sort of person that my
CR system is designed to filter out.
Or you're just another person on the net wanting to ask an off-topic
question
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:43:56PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
USENET was designed as a replacement to listservs. Given the origin,
lost functionality, and it's about as effective as C-R for reducing
spam, munging is considered harmful.
No
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:10:03 -0700, Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hate to have to do this, but I own an apology to Paul Johnson.
(Having received a mail from a list member with an example of a false
CR. Talk about FAST.)
For all that you do in trying to fight the spam problem, I
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 16:45, Steve Lamb wrote:
[...]
So Game, set, match means He won the game which won him the set
and as a result won the match.
As long we are all clear _who_ won...
--
richard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
It seems that Mr. Connor never paid attention to Sesame St. when the Count
was on.
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 08:54:03 -0700
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
= 1. First level of quoting.
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 08:41:46 2003
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:10:14AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:39:06AM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
There is usually a one-line description of a newsgroup which is
displayed beside one's personal list of subscribed newsgroups. It
gives a very short summary of what
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 08:23:29PM -0500, Michael D. Schleif wrote:
So, basically, *ALL* mail from those domains will pass -- UN-challenged
-- by your C-R system? And, _none_ of those emails can possibly contain
spam?
Yeah. He's in for a wakeup
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 12:32:53PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Right. A properly designed CR requires the recipient of the CR to hit Reply
and paste a string on the subject line. ONCE. Only one time EVER.
Wrong. I want to communicate with lots of people. I have to do that
for every CR system
Refinement: If the domain isn't one of the major isps, then run whois
on it and grep out the name of the hosting ISP.
Send the complaint to THAT abuse dept.
Easy.
Alan
--
For Linux/Bash users: Eliminate spam with the Mailbox-Sentry-Program.
See: http://tinyurl.com/inpd for
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:50:31PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 14:39:27 -0700
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In fact he perports that C-R is a better defense than PGP.
No. I didn't ever say anything like that.
Alan, there's one thing I absolutely cannot
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 08:41:46 2003
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 10:57:21PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 09:55:11AM +0200, David Fokkema wrote:
Agreed. Although the 'very high' depends on the willingness
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 05:03:57PM +0200, Jan Schulz wrote:
Just as a sidenote: I usually don't bother to read a mailaddress or
sigs, when I reply to a mail, but just hit 'reply'. And I usually try
only once to contact someone. So if a mail bounces
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:10:03AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
I hate to have to do this, but I own an apology to Paul Johnson.
Apology accepted. Sorry if I laid in kind of hard on my last response
to you.
(Having received a mail from a list member
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:39:23AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
The problem has been fixed since yesterday, which makes this post of yours
libelous. Which is the greater crime? An inadvertantly misconfigured MUA
or libel?
Woohoo! A cartooney!
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:01:05 -0400 (EDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Correctly configuring your mail server can go a long ways to reducing
the spam that you recieve.
I'm sure that's true. The problem is there are three kinds of people:
experts, people who more or less know what they're doing, and
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:05:10 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
USENET was designed as a replacement to listservs. Given the origin,
lost functionality, and it's about as effective as C-R for reducing
spam, munging is considered harmful.
No functionality is lost, I get protection
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:23:15 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:26:36AM -0400, ScruLoose wrote:
Game, set, and match.
I gather this is a sports analogy. But I don't seem to be familiar
with the sport. Could you tell me what Game, set, and match means?
Tennis. A
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I should have noted that the password would be stripped from the mail
before it was posted. Could do that with SED!
Actually, I meant, what do you do when someone spams debian-user?
You let debian-user, through, right?
--
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 08:10:30 -0500 John Hasler wrote:
Carlos Sousa writes:
Do you also have an account at my service provider? Or is it that
you're just incapable of setting up your mail system to show the
real origin of your emails? Anyway, you're incurring in mail
forgery.
No he
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:27:34AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Ignore it. I don't control the server so I can't really do anything about
it.
That's why you need to report, so the people who *can* do something
about it know about it.
I am not going
Thanks very much for the very informative post. We also use
postfix here.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I should note that there are a number of emails that are bounced as
undeliverable from real people because of my UCE controls being so
strict. Generally these are few and can easily be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 10:59:52AM -0400, Mark Roach wrote:
Please point me to the rfc for netiquette. There is no one true
netiquette
You mean RFC 1855, right?
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: :' :proud Debian admin and user
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 14:39:27 -0700
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He does. In fact he perports that C-R is a better defense than PGP.
No. I didn't ever say anything like that.
Alan, there's one thing I absolutely cannot stand and that is a liar.
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:31:12PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 11:00:02PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Because CR hinders legitimate mail almost as effectively as it hinders
spam for about the same false-positive rate as bayesian filtering.
Also, you're part of
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 22:33:06 -0700
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You don't get protection from spam. If humans can decode it, so can
the spammers. If humans can't decode it, you're voiding functionality
needlessly.
That's just it, while a human *can* decode it a harvester cannot.
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:10:03AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Spammers DO send false CRs, but they are EASY to spot.
I suppose they are easy to spot _if_ you remember all the Subject
headers and addresses to which you send mail. Suppose I decided to send
you a private reply about this very
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:38:05PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Here's a sample from today's mail log. Someone has been sending me
mails, over and over, with MY address on the From: line.
See, at least with PGP, you could tell the complainers, Go
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:36:27PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 6 12:22:35 2003
OT material snipped
Please learn to quote if you're going to bother wasting the bandwidth
telling us you snipped
Earlier, someone said that I was wrong because so many people disagreed
with me.
That's a foolish statement, and I should have called him on it at the
time.
Facts are facts, and the fact is that traditional spam-blocking strategies
don't work, and CR programs do.
Interesting comment.
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:41:22AM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Please note that CR systems are actually grossly misnamed. They SHOULD be
called something like:
positive gateway/caller-id mail programs.
Actually, CR is pretty aptly named. What
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:51:33AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
It's arguably a useful (if rude) tactic in news, since, I hypothesize,
it's much faster for spammers to harvest From: addresses because they're
usually in the overview file while
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:38:48AM -0300, Anthony Rowe wrote:
I guess it is non-obvious to some people grazing
Usenet that the gateway is meant to be RO. I am wondering if a post
to the gateway could be automated to go out every week or two just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 05:43:58PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
Now, and if you will read back through the thread, ignoring the huge amount
of misinformation (basically, read only my posts) you will see that
Pardon me, Mr. Connor, but wouldn't
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Aug 7 11:30:45 2003
Alan Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the widespread use of CR systems would eliminate spam from the face of
the earth.
What do you do about spam that goes to mailing list?
--
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - I am the rocks.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:24:23PM -0400, ScruLoose wrote:
www.spamcop.net has a free reporting service that allows you to forward
spam to them (or paste it into a web interface). It then goes through a
bunch of tests (which I know little or
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 09:32:46PM -0700, Alan Connor wrote:
2) The person calls up the MSP main menu and chooses [g] Harassment.
They enter the email address at the prompt provided.
Ah, I see... Never mind my previous question on this, sorry.
6) A recipe is written into the user's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:18:41PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
This doesn't jive with my experience. I munge with a legal
address and just ignore that address. I get tons of spam to it a
day and the only place I ever use it has been one, maybe 2
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
