Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 09:15:35 -0400 Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:03:01 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 08:45:29 -0400 Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. Out of Office replies, sieve rejects, anti-spam challenges etc Yes, an incorrectly configured MTA or one of its milters. Not especially There are ways to deal with these assholes. Only some of it, and there's no general way of dealing with the out-of-list component. Allowing a blanket open-door policy is like setting file permissions on everything to 0777 just because you are to lazy to find a correct solution to a problem. Actually requiring subscription is pretty much like setting 0777, it's really only a protection against accidental list spamming. If a spammer actually wanted to spam lists he could harvest subscribed addresses, or simply subscribe. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Thu, 16 May 2013 23:05:33 +0100 Bruce Cran articulated: There have been some discussions about this in the past. freebsd-questions doesn't require subscribing to avoid people who may be unfamiliar with mailing lists being put off posting to it. Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:18:18PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: I'm a big fan of _not_ having to subscribe to a list to get a quick hand with a one off problem (obviously not this one!)- otherwise too many lists get subscribed to, oodles of messages come in which you can't do anything about and so forth (so its not simply just a matter of subscribe, unsubscribe as noted). I concur with you, which is why point #2 in my message (which I've elided for brevity here) comes into play: if the list-owners set the subscribers only flag in Mailman, then messages from nonsubscribers will be held for their attention. I don't think it's unreasonable or particularly burdensome to request that they check that queue once a day or so, and decide how to dispose of those messages. I should also expand on that to mention that Mailman offers a number of choices on how that disposition is handled: list-owners can choose, for example, to add the address in question to a list of non-subscribers permitted to post, so that subsequent traffic from the same person won't be held up and require attention. I've found this quite useful for cases where interested individuals send traffic sporadically. I've also found it quite useful to note the email addresses of obvious spammers and block them at the MTA, because they'll often step through *all* the mailing lists sequentially and it becomes tedious to discard the same spam over and over. Blocking at the MTA alleviates this problem. Another way to put it is that while using this method involves a small initial effort, it has the significant advantage of not requiring any action on the part of legitimate message senders, and the effort required by list-owners diminishes over time. It also doesn't require any coding effort or external plumbing. Aside from all that, the last suggestion (4) should be possible using some simple filtering without the need to change the subscription parameters. It could be possible to even do it automatically saving further work on a list-owner. I urge caution on that: oh, it's a fine idea, but introducing automation into that process has its issues/risks. In practice, I've found (having run many mailing lists over many years) that the manual workload is so small that it's not worth automating. Since I've now opened my big mouth on this topic twice: if the list-owners are paying attention and wish assistance with this, I'm certainly willing to help out. ---rsk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On 17/05/2013 11:42, Jerry wrote: Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: On 17/05/2013 11:42, Jerry wrote: Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. It seems to me that the level of spam in list is pretty much negligible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: On 17/05/2013 11:42, Jerry wrote: Seriously? If some potential poster were so brain dead that he/she could not comprehend how to subscribe to the mailing list then I would seriously doubt that they would possess the necessary skills to install and run FreeBSD to begin with. Lets be honest here. All that the present system does is act as an enabler for Spam merchants and Trolls. Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. It seems to me that the level of spam in list is pretty much negligible. That would be a subjective statement. It is like asking how many times you have to slap your wife before you are considered a wife beater. Interestingly enough, the FBI won't classify you as a serial killer until you have killed a minimum of three people. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 08:45:29 -0400 Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. Out of Office replies, sieve rejects, anti-spam challenges etc ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:03:01 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 08:45:29 -0400 Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 RW articulated: On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:54:29 +0100 Bruce Cran wrote: Yes, seriously. Have you seen the number of people who post messages PLEASE REMOVE ME FROM THIS MAILING LIST!!, apparently not understanding how to manage their subscription? There's also the likelyhood that reluctant subscribers are less likely to take care about avoiding various types of backscatter. Well, unless the reluctant subscriber is running an incorrectly configured MTA, I don't see a problem with backscatter. Now, if they do have a maladjusted MTA, they have more problems then just subscribing to a list. Out of Office replies, sieve rejects, anti-spam challenges etc Yes, an incorrectly configured MTA or one of its milters. There are ways to deal with these assholes. Allowing a blanket open-door policy is like setting file permissions on everything to 0777 just because you are to lazy to find a correct solution to a problem. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On 05/17/2013 05:45, Jerry wrote: On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:19:32 +0100 It seems to me that the level of spam in list is pretty much negligible. That would be a subjective statement. It is like asking how many times you have to slap your wife before you are considered a wife beater. Interestingly enough, the FBI won't classify you as a serial killer until you have killed a minimum of three people. This has gotten to the point of the ridiculous now. Comparing a few spam to wife beating and serial killers? That's just patently offensive, quite frankly. All this bike shedding and crosstalk has produced far more pointless email than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the last month. Capitalism: we brought you the pop-up ad. -- Dave Robison Sales Solution Architect II FIS Banking Solutions 510/621-2089 (w) 530/518-5194 (c) 510/621-2020 (f) da...@vicor.com david.robi...@fisglobal.com _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 10:53 -0700, Robison, Dave wrote: All this bike shedding and crosstalk has produced far more pointless email than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the last month. I don't know if those mails where pointless, but there were much mails and I only read two or three mails including this, IOW there was at least much traffic caused by this discussion, that has less to do with questions about FreeBSD, IMO this is ok, I like OT talk myself, even if I wasn't interested in this discussion. I'm subscribed to trillions of mailing lists, perhaps a few less than trillions and several open mailing lists, including this one. I don't get much spam and it's easy to filter the few junk mails I receive. The few spam I get can't be eliminated by any method. The internet is the Wilde West, it makes me wonder that I get that less spam. It's said, that for all long discussions in the Internet, soon or later somebody will mention the Nazis and if somebody mentions the Nazis, an Internet discussion has reached it's end. The Nazis where some kind of serial killers, so perhaps this is the reason to stop this discussion. I hope there wasn't a flame war, I really didn't read this thread. Please stay peacefully folks ;). We can't get rid of all junk mail and seriously, we can't get rid of all evil on this planet. Some people really do very bad crimes, so we shouldn't waste much time in thinking about spam. Polemical comparison does hurt some people, but I guess it should be ok, if somebody makes an inappropriate comparison. We should be allowed to write without keeping political correctness 24/7 in mind. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:53:39AM -0700, Robison, Dave wrote: This has gotten to the point of the ridiculous now. Comparing a few spam to wife beating and serial killers? That's just patently offensive, quite frankly. All this bike shedding and crosstalk has produced far more pointless email than all the spam I've gotten from this list in the last month. What he said, +infinity. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On 11/05/2013 02:34, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Good question. I don't know why. I wish all were, it would keep spam out. There have been some discussions about this in the past. freebsd-questions doesn't require subscribing to avoid people who may be unfamiliar with mailing lists being put off posting to it. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Bruce Cran wrote: On 11/05/2013 02:34, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Good question. I don't know why. I wish all were, it would keep spam out. There have been some discussions about this in the past. freebsd-questions doesn't require subscribing to avoid people who may be unfamiliar with mailing lists being put off posting to it. That burdens FreeBSD lists with clueless, lazy non subscribers, spammers. Web forums exist for those too lame to subscribe forums can have Captcha. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with . Send plain text. No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Hi, On Thu, 16 May 2013 23:05:33 +0100 Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote: On 11/05/2013 02:34, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Good question. I don't know why. I wish all were, it would keep spam out. There have been some discussions about this in the past. freebsd-questions doesn't require subscribing to avoid people who may be unfamiliar with mailing lists being put off posting to it. we running in a circle here. I noticed that on other FreeBSD lists, a moderator enables later mails which are sent from an unregistered address. Why can't this be done here? Get a group of volunteers in different time zones to handle this and off we go. Of course, I could be one of them in the Eastern World. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On May 14, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Da Rock freebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote: I'm a big fan of _not_ having to subscribe to a list to get a quick hand with a one off problem (obviously not this one!)- otherwise too many lists get subscribed to, oodles of messages come in which you can't do anything about and so forth (so its not simply just a matter of subscribe, unsubscribe as noted). Unfortunately, many see it as a spam filter and thereby abuse it. How often do you need help with an issue with libreoffice, mozilla whatever, or other application? And yet subscription is compulsory and a ton of messages (devs convs mostly) come flooding in within minutes. Other lists I have been on had both a list and a forum that accessed the same content. While I see that FreeBSD has both, I do not think they share content. A forum gateway to the list would permit folks to sign up for the forum and NOT get a ton of email. If the forum were publicly readable that would also provide a way to look through (if not search) the archives. I am not trying to make work for people, just suggesting another way to address the competing issues of SPAM reduction and ease of access. -- Paul Kraus Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3 Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On 05/12/13 22:04, Rich Kulawiec wrote: 1. Restricting mailing lists to subscribers only has been a best practice since the last century. It's a very good anti-spam tactic. 2. However, doing so -- for a list run via Mailman, like this one -- does not pose a significant impediment for non-subscribers. By default, Mailman will hold traffic from non-subscribers for list-owner approval. Provided the list-owners check that queue periodically and have reasonable spam-spotting abilities, this works beautifully. 3. Note that Mailman, as part of that same mechanism, allows list-owners to add non-subscribers to a list of those permitted to send traffic to the list without approval. This feature is probably more often used to allow traffic from alternative addresses for subscribers, e.g., someone is subscribed as f...@example.com but sends occasionally from f...@example.net. But it can just as easily be used for non-subscribers if the list-owners so choose. 4. List-owners may also find it useful to keep track of which spammers repeatedly attempt to abuse the list and block them at the MTA -- which has the desirable side effect of blocking them from ALL lists. I do this on a user/host/domain/network basis, and it's proven itself to be worth the effort. So: setting the subscribers-only flag on Mailman has major advantages, at the cost of additional work on the part of list-owners -- which can be mitigated in part across all lists by making changes to the MTA. I'm a big fan of _not_ having to subscribe to a list to get a quick hand with a one off problem (obviously not this one!)- otherwise too many lists get subscribed to, oodles of messages come in which you can't do anything about and so forth (so its not simply just a matter of subscribe, unsubscribe as noted). Unfortunately, many see it as a spam filter and thereby abuse it. How often do you need help with an issue with libreoffice, mozilla whatever, or other application? And yet subscription is compulsory and a ton of messages (devs convs mostly) come flooding in within minutes. Aside from all that, the last suggestion (4) should be possible using some simple filtering without the need to change the subscription parameters. It could be possible to even do it automatically saving further work on a list-owner. I admit the spam is getting worse, but there are still many more users sending who would like try before they buy - or subscribe. FreeBSD is an OS, yes, but it does give users options and freedom; and although many are willing to give up their freedom because it is *appears* safer, they tend to have serious regrets in the light of day. Better to find a way to maintain the freedom (and minimise the overheads required for oversight) through other measures. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Excerpt from Rich Kulawiec r...@gsp.org: 3. Note that Mailman, as part of that same mechanism, allows list-owners to add non-subscribers to a list of those permitted to send traffic to the list without approval. This feature is probably more often used to allow traffic from alternative addresses for subscribers, e.g., someone is subscribed as f...@example.com but sends occasionally from f...@example.net. But it can just as easily be used for non-subscribers if the list-owners so choose. I sometimes send using a different SMTP server, which may happen since my @bellsouth.net addresses are from my former ISP, ATT/Yahoo!, but still good under Yahoo! So I might send either from the ATT/Yahoo! SMTP server or from insightbb.com server, and Insight Cable (insightbb.com) customers will be migrated in the next month to Time Warner Cable, and email addresses will be in twc.com domain. But I use the same From: address. I switched my email address on this list because Insight Cable, but I believe not Time Warner Cable, uses synacor.com for spam filtering, and messages are deleted when synacor.com's software flags it as spam, and there were false positives resulting in bounced messages. Insight Cable customers never see the spam-filtered-out messages, and have no way to mitigate those filters. On sending CC to other participants in a thread, sometimes that can be too many, and I might consider it redundant to send CC to a list regular. Once, because of sending CC to other thread participants, I was sending to six email addresses, and the message was held for moderator approval because of being sent to so many recipients: a frequent characteristic of spam. But my message was approved when the moderator saw it was legit, on topic. Tom ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Sat, 11 May 2013 19:44:46 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: Hi, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: - List could silently discard such spam. - Postmaster@ ( webmaster@ weeding web archives) would have less work. - Less individual need to select spam phrases to copy to personal filters ( less time searching WTF dialect American above meant in English ;-). The downside is that it would require people to subscribe in order to ask a question, True. I suggest the up side outweighs the down side though. From the point of view of subscribers perhaps, however from the point of view of users who don't wish to subscribe in order to ask a single question it is the other way round. this is also the reason for the convention of using Reply to all in FreeBSD mailing lists. It's been a convention for a *long* time, at least since FreeBSD 1.1 was shiny and new in 1993. I'm not intending to question or suggest any change re CC behaviour. (Maybe you mis-read or mis-infered what I intended, Not at all, just pointing out that the two things have a common reason in the FreeBSD lists. Personally I doubt that either will change any time soon. or maybe I mis-wrote, or mis-implied, whatever, please forget that bit, though as background I'd observe: Questions@ didn't exist for quite a while after FreeBSD started, Hackers@ some others preceded it. A good many others indeed - but all the user lists have always had the same conventions. Various people prune CC when they get littered with too many CC. ) True enough - and occasionally this loses the unsubscribed OP. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins.|licences available see You lose and Bill collects. |http://www.sohara.org/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Sun, 12 May 2013 07:39:31 +0100 Steve O'Hara-Smith articulated: On Sat, 11 May 2013 19:44:46 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: Hi, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: - List could silently discard such spam. - Postmaster@ ( webmaster@ weeding web archives) would have less work. - Less individual need to select spam phrases to copy to personal filters ( less time searching WTF dialect American above meant in English ;-). The downside is that it would require people to subscribe in order to ask a question, True. I suggest the up side outweighs the down side though. From the point of view of subscribers perhaps, however from the point of view of users who don't wish to subscribe in order to ask a single question it is the other way round. I am not really a big fan of paying for a hunting license since I only hunt once a year; however, they still make me do it. As a POC earlier this year, I subscribed to this list under a different name address, returned to my MUA and the responding message from this list was waiting. I replied to it and was there upon subscribed. Total time, less than 1-1/2 minutes. And that included me taking a sip of coffee. The time to remove myself from the list was similar. Hell, it takes me longer than that to gather all of the info I might need to either ask or respond to a question on this list. this is also the reason for the convention of using Reply to all in FreeBSD mailing lists. It's been a convention for a *long* time, at least since FreeBSD 1.1 was shiny and new in 1993. I'm not intending to question or suggest any change re CC behaviour. (Maybe you mis-read or mis-infered what I intended, Not at all, just pointing out that the two things have a common reason in the FreeBSD lists. Personally I doubt that either will change any time soon. or maybe I mis-wrote, or mis-implied, whatever, please forget that bit, though as background I'd observe: Questions@ didn't exist for quite a while after FreeBSD started, Hackers@ some others preceded it. A good many others indeed - but all the user lists have always had the same conventions. Various people prune CC when they get littered with too many CC. ) I never respond to CC'ers. If they cannot take the time to subscribe, I cannot afford the time to respond. True enough - and occasionally this loses the unsubscribed OP. Perhaps our list should include a disclaimer (I hate them) that states: WARNING: CC ARE YOUR OWN RISK Actually, I think this is kind of funn: From: Steve O'Hara-Smith st...@sohara.org To: Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Technically, I am responding to a CC'er who happens to be the list operator/owner or whatever terminology turns you on. My sieve filters are designed to filter out an CC messages; however, they are also designed to accept any mail from FreeBSD*. Since I was not in the CC address (directly), I ended up getting a CC'd mesage. I really have to rework my filters. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
1. Restricting mailing lists to subscribers only has been a best practice since the last century. It's a very good anti-spam tactic. 2. However, doing so -- for a list run via Mailman, like this one -- does not pose a significant impediment for non-subscribers. By default, Mailman will hold traffic from non-subscribers for list-owner approval. Provided the list-owners check that queue periodically and have reasonable spam-spotting abilities, this works beautifully. 3. Note that Mailman, as part of that same mechanism, allows list-owners to add non-subscribers to a list of those permitted to send traffic to the list without approval. This feature is probably more often used to allow traffic from alternative addresses for subscribers, e.g., someone is subscribed as f...@example.com but sends occasionally from f...@example.net. But it can just as easily be used for non-subscribers if the list-owners so choose. 4. List-owners may also find it useful to keep track of which spammers repeatedly attempt to abuse the list and block them at the MTA -- which has the desirable side effect of blocking them from ALL lists. I do this on a user/host/domain/network basis, and it's proven itself to be worth the effort. So: setting the subscribers-only flag on Mailman has major advantages, at the cost of additional work on the part of list-owners -- which can be mitigated in part across all lists by making changes to the MTA. ---rsk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: - List could silently discard such spam. - Postmaster@ ( webmaster@ weeding web archives) would have less work. - Less individual need to select spam phrases to copy to personal filters ( less time searching WTF dialect American above meant in English ;-). The downside is that it would require people to subscribe in order to ask a question, this is also the reason for the convention of using Reply to all in FreeBSD mailing lists. It's been a convention for a *long* time, at least since FreeBSD 1.1 was shiny and new in 1993. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith st...@sohara.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Hi, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: - List could silently discard such spam. - Postmaster@ ( webmaster@ weeding web archives) would have less work. - Less individual need to select spam phrases to copy to personal filters ( less time searching WTF dialect American above meant in English ;-). The downside is that it would require people to subscribe in order to ask a question, True. I suggest the up side outweighs the down side though. I've always felt when I as a newbie somewhere, wanted to post any other project's mail list to ask a question get free help, then I owed it to those there to subscribe if necessary. However, FreeBSD could always provide a web Captcha anti spam validater for those too lazy/ uncommited to subscribe questions@ ? this is also the reason for the convention of using Reply to all in FreeBSD mailing lists. It's been a convention for a *long* time, at least since FreeBSD 1.1 was shiny and new in 1993. I'm not intending to question or suggest any change re CC behaviour. (Maybe you mis-read or mis-infered what I intended, or maybe I mis-wrote, or mis-implied, whatever, please forget that bit, though as background I'd observe: Questions@ didn't exist for quite a while after FreeBSD started, Hackers@ some others preceded it. Various people prune CC when they get littered with too many CC. ) Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with . Send plain text. No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: Hi questions@ ( spammer not cc'd ) Reference: From: Aaron Seligman aselig...@altitudedigitalpartners.com Reply-to: aselig...@altitudedigitalpartners.com Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 18:59:07 + (UTC) Subject:Re: Display Video Campaigns-Inventory Needed Message-id: 1368039547.0568389241738...@mf7.sendgrid.net Happy hump-day, We have an opportunity with an RTB partner to monetize INT Geo's; UK, CAN, AUS Video: (Pre-roll, mid-roll and post-roll) If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: - List could silently discard such spam. - Postmaster@ ( webmaster@ weeding web archives) would have less work. - Less individual need to select spam phrases to copy to personal filters ( less time searching WTF dialect American above meant in English ;-). Newbies would be told subscribe before posting in all of: /etc/motd http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions Automatic list bounce response. Only clueless, lazy, spammers might be lost. A net gain. Cheers, Julian I'm curious how much spam you get through this list. Just counted, and I have about 2 Spams per week for the last month, that's more than usual. Regards, Michael ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
I'm curious how much spam you get through this list. Just counted, and I have about 2 Spams per week for the last month, that's more than usual. Personaly I'm on ~ 47 freebsd lists or so my MH dirs + procmail filter boxes suggest, so when someone spams multiple lists with the same spam it irritates. I'm on various other lists too, (last I counted it was about 100 in all inc. freebsd) so grateful for each list that is subscribers only. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with . Send plain text. No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Hi, From: Erich Dollansky erichsfreebsdl...@alogt.com Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:33:47 +0700 Erich Dollansky wrote: Hi, On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: some lists are like this anyway. Why are not all like this? Good question. I don't know why. I wish all were, it would keep spam out. To allow a free-er environment for us than that might first give: Taking the syntax of majordomo as an example to illustrate an idea in (I know Freebsd.org moved on to Mailman, but I'm assuming/ hoping Mailman is at least equally as flexible as Majordomo; as I'm an administrator for Majordomo lists, have tried the idea below seen it work, I can quote syntax for it correctly) Given a list eg scsi@freebsd might exist that happended to go from open to restrict_post = scsi ie write only for subscribers, it could easily be made eg restrict_post = scsi questions hackers So others in eg questions who had occasional scsi specific questions could be referred to post there without person needing to subscribe to scsi@ as a regular ( agreed, just hope all respondents CC the OP, if OP is too lazy/ busy to subscribe eg scsi@). Most list config files could do that, so it would be equally possible for eg someone subscribed to hardware@ to answer a question posted to questions@, even if the answering hardware@ person was not personaly subscribed to reading every post to questions@. questions@ could have a questions.config with something like: restrict_post = questions hackers current ports scsi etc Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultant, Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, like a play script. Indent old text with . Send plain text. No quoted-printable, HTML, base64, multipart/alternative. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Most of the spam I've seen get through is actually obvious from the subject line. I've seen more posts by people who weren't subscribed and asked to be cc'd than I've seen spam. Making the list subscribers only would only hinder the the lucky spammers, and stop more people genuinely asking for help. I have seen more spam in the past few weeks, but it's better than google. For some reason, even though I don't speak anything other than English, email with Asian characters is not spam. On 5/8/2013 7:26 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Hi questions@ ( spammer not cc'd ) Reference: From: Aaron Seligman aselig...@altitudedigitalpartners.com Reply-to: aselig...@altitudedigitalpartners.com Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 18:59:07 + (UTC) Subject:Re: Display Video Campaigns-Inventory Needed Message-id: 1368039547.0568389241738...@mf7.sendgrid.net Happy hump-day, We have an opportunity with an RTB partner to monetize INT Geo's; UK, CAN, AUS Video: (Pre-roll, mid-roll and post-roll) If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: - List could silently discard such spam. - Postmaster@ ( webmaster@ weeding web archives) would have less work. - Less individual need to select spam phrases to copy to personal filters ( less time searching WTF dialect American above meant in English ;-). Newbies would be told subscribe before posting in all of: /etc/motd http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions Automatic list bounce response. Only clueless, lazy, spammers might be lost. A net gain. Cheers, Julian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: List Spam Filtering
Hi, On Thu, 09 May 2013 02:26:26 +0200 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: If list write access was changed to Subscribers Only: some lists are like this anyway. Why are not all like this? I notice that my postings get delayed and obviously check when I use by accident my real e-mail address. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
