[This may get duplicated if my outgoing work e-mail gets fixed]
On 2003-Oct-16 11:29:36 -0700, Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Earthlink often sucks in terms of customer service. If they would
>just designate a couple of common markers as "known SPAM", the
>problem would have gone away
Max Laier wrote:
> Wednesday, October 15, 2003, 1:29:21 PM, you wrote:
> AC> Due to increased activity of SPAM harvesters what are our plans to hide
> AC> our addresses from public WWW? I mean all browseable mailing lists,
> AC> FreeBSD site, CVS via WWW, PRs, ports and docs.
>
> OT: mail/procmail
Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
> Peter Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > However, since that fateful
> > e-mail I have been viciously attacked by spammers posing as Microsoft
> > security updaters. These spams include attachments making them all
> > around 150KB in size. Maybe others of you have
Hello Andrey,
Wednesday, October 15, 2003, 1:29:21 PM, you wrote:
AC> Due to increased activity of SPAM harvesters what are our plans to hide
AC> our addresses from public WWW? I mean all browseable mailing lists,
AC> FreeBSD site, CVS via WWW, PRs, ports and docs.
AC> As I think, simple form wi
Hi, Peter.
PS> At this point in time it's downright irresponsible not to hide our
PS> addresses.
PS> I've been lurking on this list about a month to get caught up with
PS> -current issues. Friday was both the first mail I sent to the list,
PS> and the first use of this e-mail address. The onl
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 04:43:27AM -0500, Peter Schultz wrote:
> At this point in time it's downright irresponsible not to hide our
> addresses.
>
> I've been lurking on this list about a month to get caught up with
> -current issues. Friday was both the first mail I sent to the list,
> and the
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 04:43:27 -0500
Peter Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, since that fateful
> e-mail I have been viciously attacked by spammers posing as Microsoft
> security updaters. These spams include attachments making them all
> around 150KB in size. Maybe others of you ha
At this point in time it's downright irresponsible not to hide our
addresses.
I've been lurking on this list about a month to get caught up with
-current issues. Friday was both the first mail I sent to the list,
and the first use of this e-mail address. The only incoming mail was
from the Fr
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 03:29:21PM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote:
I fail to see why this is relevant to -current but OK.. I think that
the opportunity to do this has long since passed. Just type your name
in Google and see what happens..
Wilko
> Due to increased activity of SPAM harvesters what a
Due to increased activity of SPAM harvesters what are our plans to hide
our addresses from public WWW? I mean all browseable mailing lists,
FreeBSD site, CVS via WWW, PRs, ports and docs.
As I think, simple form will be enough to stop
them.
--
Andrey Chernov | http://ache.pp.ru/
10 matches
Mail list logo
