Am 2005-11-22 18:49:12, schrieb Steve Lamb:
> Now, sending it back to their sales account, that would be something else
> entirely. :)
:-)
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
Am 2005-11-23 00:08:28, schrieb Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
> This is probably pointless. I am not sure if they read the abuse address at
> all, but supposing they do, they are machine-filtering it (and I bet they
> discard any AntiSPAM UOL emails ;-) ).
OK, now I have configured my ISP's spamf
On Tuesday 22 November 2005 21:49, Steve Lamb wrote:
>Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> This is probably pointless. I am not sure if they read the abuse
>> address at all, but supposing they do, they are machine-filtering it
>> (and I bet they discard any AntiSPAM UOL emails ;-) ).
>
>Now,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> This is probably pointless. I am not sure if they read the abuse address at
> all, but supposing they do, they are machine-filtering it (and I bet they
> discard any AntiSPAM UOL emails ;-) ).
Now, sending it back to their sales account, that would be some
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > Besides that they are one of the largest and most popular ISP here.
>
> And curently I am forwarding all those SPAM's to there abuse address.
This is probably pointless. I am not sure if they read the abuse address at
all, but supposing they do, t
Am 2005-11-19 00:24:40, schrieb loos:
> Em Qui, 2005-11-17 às 20:32 -0800, David Kirchner escreveu:
> > On 11/17/05, Rogério Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I don't know if that's exactly a black hole, but you can also try to
> > > address
> > > your messages to, at least, two other address
Am 2005-11-18 21:06:44, schrieb Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
> Not to mention that you should have received only one message per post you
> made to mailing lists the loser with AntispamUOL is part of.
>
> Maybe you are seeing the results of a spammer forging your address?
Right. My E-Mail <[EMA
Am 2005-11-18 13:19:28, schrieb Ron Johnson:
> Can't you just filter them into the Trash or use a killfile?
I have UOL as
:0
* ^From:.*([EMAIL PROTECTED])
.ATTENTION.UOL_cr/
in my promailfilter ad in the last month around 56.000 C/R
collected. This C/R SPAMer was not the first one.
On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 20:47 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 20 November 2005 20:23, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:46:12AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> wrote:
> >> > Not again this crap. Unsubbing everyone
On Sunday 20 November 2005 20:23, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:46:12AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
wrote:
>> > Not again this crap. Unsubbing everyone from UOL is the lazy way
>> > out, there are better methods to tr
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:46:12AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>
> > Not again this crap. Unsubbing everyone from UOL is the lazy way out, there
> > are better methods to track down the exact mail address causing trouble.
>
> Use one. Yoursel
> -Original Message-
> From: Carl Fink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 2:55 PM
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: "Antispam UOL" spam from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 01:48:28PM -0600,
Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
I posted a message about failure while loggin back in to Gnome (esd
problem?) and just got a whole bunch of the UOL replies. I think I am
still getting them in my gma
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 01:48:28PM -0600, Seth Goodman wrote:
> Losing a large part of their email connectivity might be the event
> necessary to encourage a competitor with more clue to come along and eat
> their lunch.
Anyone else remember the Usenet Death Penalty? Or when backbone provider
> From: loos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 8:25 PM
<...>
> Unfortunately, most of their clients are very happy with this
> system: It is very effective for SPAM protection.
>
> In fact for non-list mail it is really a good idea: all you
> correspondents have to respo
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 10:46:12AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Not again this crap. Unsubbing everyone from UOL is the lazy way out, there
> are better methods to track down the exact mail address causing trouble.
Use one. Yourself. Now. Who is the problem?
--
Carl Fink
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, David Kirchner wrote:
> I received over 20 (I stopped counting at 20) immediately after
> posting on the list. I doubt it's because of a spammer, unless someone
Weird. I get only one. Although I *always* get one or two spam mails just
after posting to some Debian MLs, so who
loos wrote:
Em Qui, 2005-11-17 às 20:32 -0800, David Kirchner escreveu:
On 11/17/05, Rogério Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't know if that's exactly a black hole, but you can also try to address
your messages to, at least, two other addresses:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTE
loos writes:
> Unfortunately, most of their clients are very happy with this system: It
> is very effective for SPAM protection.
It's also very effective for spam production.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Em Sex, 2005-11-18 às 15:45 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh escreveu:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > I beg to differ about incompetent. And I doubt if its anything like
>
> Read my reply to my own post.
>
> > 10 linux users just from that one ISP. OTOH, if those users who
Em Qui, 2005-11-17 às 20:32 -0800, David Kirchner escreveu:
> On 11/17/05, Rogério Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't know if that's exactly a black hole, but you can also try to address
> > your messages to, at least, two other addresses:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 21:06 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > Currently I have around 4.000 Messages gotten
> >
> > Can't you just filter them into the Trash or use a killfile?
>
> Not to mention that you should have received only one messag
On 11/18/05, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not to mention that you should have received only one message per post you
> made to mailing lists the loser with AntispamUOL is part of.
>
> Maybe you are seeing the results of a spammer forging your address?
I received over 20
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Currently I have around 4.000 Messages gotten
>
> Can't you just filter them into the Trash or use a killfile?
Not to mention that you should have received only one message per post you
made to mailing lists the loser with AntispamUOL is part of.
Maybe
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Mike McCarty wrote:
> So, I don't call any more. I just wait an hour or so,
Call the *billing* department (they always answer the phone, and they are
trained to be nice and patient on adverse conditions). Explain to them that
you need to contact the ombudsman about a serious
Gene Heskett wrote:
On Friday 18 November 2005 00:40, Carl Fink wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 11:25:16PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Let's find the cause, find the reason for the challenges, and then
act.
Let's ask the listmasters why this account wasn't unsubscribed within
hours of this st
Gene Heskett wrote:
[snip]
I beg to differ about incompetent. And I doubt if its anything like
10 linux users just from that one ISP. OTOH, if those users who do
get tossed figure out why, they WILL take a cluebat to the ISP's
offices and get it fixed. 10 pissed users showing up at the of
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote:
[snip]
You see, the C/R responder this clueless twit has setup, is also
expunging all traces of the source user from the headers of the
messages, therefore we have no recourse against that user as an
NOW, THAT is
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 19:04 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2005-11-16 10:07:38, schrieb Steve Block:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:19:04AM -0500, Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> > >Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> > >related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Yes and I
Am 2005-11-17 00:35:13, schrieb Rogério Brito:
> On Nov 16 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
> > I'm tempted to report them to the US authorities AS as spammer.
>
> If the Debian lists start blocking everything from UOL, then I won't be
> able to post anymore.
It is not possibel for Debian to block it, beca
Am 2005-11-17 01:07:24, schrieb Antony Gelberg:
> Carl Fink wrote:
> > I'm tempted to report them to the US authorities AS as spammer.
>
> I'm so angry but the extent of my anger was to ask listmaster to kick
> the offender off. Grr times a thousand.
:-)
me too!
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-U
Am 2005-11-16 10:07:38, schrieb Steve Block:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:19:04AM -0500, Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> >Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> >related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Yes and I am probably going to blacklist the sender.
I have done this too.
And
You too ?
On 16/17 November I have gotten around 4000.
I have already mailed the Abuse contact...
Am 2005-11-16 10:19:04, schrieb Mitch Wiedemann:
> Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- END OF REPLYED MESSAGE
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I beg to differ about incompetent. And I doubt if its anything like
Read my reply to my own post.
> 10 linux users just from that one ISP. OTOH, if those users who do
We are not talking about a pint-sized-country's ISP here, they should exceed
10k
On Friday 18 November 2005 07:36, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
>> >since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
>>
>> And "open" relays should be banned. Period.
>
>UOL may
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 05:40:12PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> In /etc/exim4/local_host_blacklist:
> 200.211.4.98/32
> 200.211.4.99/32
Are these supposed to be addresses or ranges? It's possible exim is
treating them as neither (although that's a guess)
--
Jon Dowland
http://jon.dowland.name/
-
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 12:35:13AM -0200, Rogério Brito wrote:
> On Nov 16 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
> > I'm tempted to report them to the US authorities AS as spammer.
>
> If the Debian lists start blocking everything from UOL, then I won't be
> able to post anymore.
>
> That's the ISP that I use a
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > The Fedora list has simply expunged all users from this ISP from the
> > subscription lists, a self defense brought on by a C/R response from
> > this twerp for every message posted, doubling the load on the servers.
>
> Incompetent listm
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Mike McCarty wrote:
> (2) UOL is stripping the information necessary to find out who did
> this, so the listmaster *can't* know which account to scrub.
How? The only always reliable information a listmaster can use to know
which account to scrub is a VERPified FROM header and
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
> >since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
>
> And "open" relays should be banned. Period.
UOL may be a lot of crap, but open relays they are not AFAIK.
> I'm forwarding al
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Mike McCarty wrote:
> One possiblity is to send (the list manager would have to do this)
> 1 one 1 e-mail to each subscriber with a unique identifier
This is already done everywhere the listmasters aren't sleeping on their
feet or incompetent.
Debian does it.
--
"One disk
On Friday 18 November 2005 00:40, Carl Fink wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 11:25:16PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
>> Let's find the cause, find the reason for the challenges, and then
>> act.
>
>Let's ask the listmasters why this account wasn't unsubscribed within
> hours of this stupid misconfigur
Rogério Brito wrote:
> They don't have the best practices around (actually, I could, myself,
> administer
> an ISP much better than they can---and, in fact, had done so for some years,
> when I was beginning my M.Sc. degree), but the guilty part here is just an
> stupid user using the (stupid) cha
Carl Fink wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 11:25:16PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
Let's find the cause, find the reason for the challenges, and then
act.
Let's ask the listmasters why this account wasn't unsubscribed within hours
of this stupid misconfiguration.
I manage multiple mailing list
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 11:25:16PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Let's find the cause, find the reason for the challenges, and then
> act.
Let's ask the listmasters why this account wasn't unsubscribed within hours
of this stupid misconfiguration.
I manage multiple mailing lists myself, and I pro
Rogério Brito wrote:
On Nov 17 2005, Realos wrote:
Maybe, I need to take time to report'm on the blacklist server lists.
This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
Agreed.
And, yet, you don't get such stupid mes
On 11/17/05, Rogério Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know if that's exactly a black hole, but you can also try to address
> your messages to, at least, two other addresses:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
whois also suggests sending complaints to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . It
would p
Gene,
On 11/18/05 01:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 17 November 2005 21:30, Rogério Brito wrote:
>
>>This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
>>since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
>
> And "open" relays should be banned. Period.
I'm not using the
On Thursday 17 November 2005 21:30, Rogério Brito wrote:
>On Nov 17 2005, Realos wrote:
>> Maybe, I need to take time to report'm on the blacklist server lists.
>
>This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
>since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
And "open" rel
On Nov 17 2005, Realos wrote:
> Maybe, I need to take time to report'm on the blacklist server lists.
This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
And, yet, you don't get such stupid messages from me. The fact is that a
stu
On Nov 17 2005, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Rogério Brito:
> > If anybody knows of anything similar to what news.individual.net were,
> > please let me know.
>
> What have they been that they aren't anymore? Ok, they are charging
> for their service now, but I think 10 Euro per year is something even
>
Carl Fink wrote:
I'm tempted to report them to the US authorities AS as spammer.
The same thing is going on over on the Fedora list, which I
also subscribe to, so I'm getting 2x the SPAM :-(
Fedora has at least temporarily forcibly suspended uol.com.br
subscriptions.
One possiblity is to send
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 03:34:13PM +0100, Realos wrote:
Steve Block wanted us to know:
Yes and I am probably going to blacklist the sender.
did you report that sender to the (online) blacklist servers?
I am still receiving spam from that user. It is being sorted out to
/dev/null but the best
> Steve Block wanted us to know:
>Yes and I am probably going to blacklist the sender.
did you report that sender to the (online) blacklist servers?
I am still receiving spam from that user. It is being sorted out to
/dev/null but the best solution would be if emails from that sender are
blacklis
Rogério Brito:
>
> If anybody knows of anything similar to what news.individual.net were,
> please let me know.
What have they been that they aren't anymore? Ok, they are charging for
their service now, but I think 10 Euro per year is something even most
pupils or students can afford.
J.
--
Whe
Carl Fink wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 12:35:13AM -0200, Rog?rio Brito wrote:
If anybody knows of anything similar to what news.individual.net were,
please let me know.
Can you pay $10/month US? I like newsguy.com.
For $100/year US, you could get a shell account at one of my ISP's, Pani
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 09:59:53PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> Carl Fink writes:
> > Can you pay $10/month US? I like newsguy.com.
>
> I'm paying Newsguy $40/year.
Um, yeah. I inexplicably quoted the price for dialup via Newsguy. Oops.
--
Carl Fink [EMA
Carl Fink writes:
> Can you pay $10/month US? I like newsguy.com.
I'm paying Newsguy $40/year.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 12:35:13AM -0200, Rog?rio Brito wrote:
> If anybody knows of anything similar to what news.individual.net were,
> please let me know.
Can you pay $10/month US? I like newsguy.com.
For $100/year US, you could get a shell account at one of my ISP's, Panix.
They provide unl
On Nov 16 2005, Carl Fink wrote:
> I'm tempted to report them to the US authorities AS as spammer.
If the Debian lists start blocking everything from UOL, then I won't be
able to post anymore.
That's the ISP that I use and just because there is one asshole
subscribed to a mailing list with a chal
Antony Gelberg wrote:
> I'm so angry but the extent of my anger was to ask listmaster to kick
> the offender off. Grr times a thousand.
Pft, I'd just be happy if I could block 'em at SMTP time. For some reason
the following in exim isn't working.
In ACLs:
deny message = IP: $sender_host_a
I'm tempted to report them to the US authorities AS as spammer.
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you attempt to fix something that isn't broken, it will be.
-Bruce Tognazzini
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsub
> Mitch Wiedemann wanted us to know:
>Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
>related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
yes, I got 5 bounces of that crap in the last 5 minutes. It belongs to
blacklist.
--
Realos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Steve Lamb wrote:
Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yup. Challenge/Response at it's finest!
Indeed. Just blackhole any and eve
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> > Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> > related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Yup. Challenge/Response at it's finest!
Indeed. Just blackhole any and everything that replies with an AntiSpam UOL
mess
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:19:04AM -0500, Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes and I am probably going to blacklist the sender.
--
Steve Block
http://ev-15.com/
http://steveblock.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
T
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:19:04AM -0500, Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*checks spamfolder*
yes.
--
Jon Dowland
http://jon.dowland.name/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Mitch Wiedemann wrote:
> Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
> related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yup. Challenge/Response at it's finest!
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection
Is anyone else suddenly getting spammed by "Antispam UOL" messages
related to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Mitch Wiedemann
Webmaster - Ithaca Free Software Association
http://ithacafreesoftware.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [E
69 matches
Mail list logo
