--> Monday, February 2, 2004, 1:48:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>> What is the recommended method to deal with this?

> See TMDA FAQ 1.13

Yes I had read that before, but I thought there may be something
useful to receiving mail from "" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as opposed
to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <John Smith>. Maybe I inferred incorrectly.

The FAQ mentions how rare this is, but it's happened to me after
only a few days using TMDA. The end result is, I received spam and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is on my whitelist (confirmation list).

I think the most likely scenario is as follows :

  * spammer hijacks server
  * spammer sends spam
  * spammer software auto-confirms tmda (and more)
  * spam delivered successfully
  * hijacked address whitelisted now
  * realization of server takeover eventually noticed and fixed

The spammer continues this pattern, sending spam from hijacked servers
while additionally auto-authenticating originating addresses from which
he can forge sending spam from in the future. At the same time, the
victim of this hacking spammer is blacklisted by some and still
whitelisted by some. When tagged messaging is more popular and used by
more than just power users, I think the spammer's hijacked address will
stay on many of the whitelists it infiltrated.

I am noting all of this for reference, not for complaint.

Since no one could immediately see what was happening, I think detailing
the most likely scenario could be beneficial for others in the future.

I will have to do something about auto-confirms of course, but the FAQ
seems to lean toward scenarios which do not involve hijacked servers
and their consequences even after the hijacker has been removed. Some
problems and solutions easily dismissed in FAQ 1.13 might be concerns
in the future. At the very least they should perhaps be noted.

In an online world where fraudulent credit card use results in outright
theft you can do absolutely nothing about except contact local authorities,
I imagine receiving spam will result in even less chance of justice.

Eye-candy confirmation as mentioned in the FAQ could fix all of this I
suppose, but that's already annoyance due to overuse by bored developers.

Perhaps there is something else... any ideas not covered in the FAQ?

_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to