on Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 01:29:06AM -0700, Paul Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:43:00PM -0300, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> > Make the list server PGP-sign the messages, maybe? You install the
> > list server key once, and never worry about it again?
>
> That's self
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:06:50 + (UTC),
"Monique Y. Herman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:33:51 +0200, Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> penned:>
> > ..to swat that last one too: _Nobody_ needs binaries in email.
> > Those without "zip.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 09:36:10AM -0500, Kirk Strauser wrote:
> I disagree. I can't think of any reason why I'd be mailing an executable to
> someone instead of a URL to where they can download it themselves, with the
> exception of development collaboration among people experienced enough to
> u
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:33:51 +0200, Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> penned:
>
> ..to swat that last one too: _Nobody_ needs binaries in email.
> Those without "zip.exe", is best helped with an url, to it.
>
Nobody needs binary *executables*. My dad isn't going to ever produce
an executable
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 09:18:51PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 04:05:39PM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 01:40:27AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > Wow, way too easy. It should require you to type something long and
> > > case sensitive. You know, somet
In linux.debian.user,
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:16:02PM -0500, Ray wrote:
> > it seems to me the easiest solution would be for ISPs to have a
> > policy and software that supported the policy of no
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 04:05:39PM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 01:40:27AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Wow, way too easy. It should require you to type something long and
> > case sensitive. You know, something like, "Yes, I fully understand
> > that what I am asking is rough
At 2003-09-26T00:52:37Z, "Jacob Anawalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If thousands of people were personally emailing me virus laiden emails,
> that's one thing, but that's not the case here. I'm getting thousands of
> emails from copies of a virus that isn't opening O* to send it's mail.
Same h
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:36:01 +1200,
cr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wednesday 24 September 2003 10:30, Kirk Strauser wrote:
>
> > Out of curiosity, are there *any* legitimate reasons at all why
> > you'd want to mail an uncompressed executable to someone?
>
>
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 01:40:27AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Wow, way too easy. It should require you to type something long and
> case sensitive. You know, something like, "Yes, I fully understand
> that what I am asking is roughly as brilliant as drinking bleach."
...sulphuric acid, on the
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 01:26:14AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> > To me the big question is how do I avoid the spam in the first place,
> > besides avoiding email all together?
>
> Become an extremely hostile target. Report all mail
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 10:30, Kirk Strauser wrote:
> Out of curiosity, are there *any* legitimate reasons at all why you'd want
> to mail an uncompressed executable to someone?
I can think of just one ...zip.exe (self-extracting), for someone who
doesn't have zip.
Well, you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 02:41:27AM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> ..another option is "blow up the road": http://www.ordb.org/submit/
bl.spamcop.net is a bit more up to date with less collateral damage.
- --
.''`. Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 03:36:55PM -0500, Rich Puhek wrote:
> 1) Create a "Debian-user only" address, which you'd use for posting to
> debian-user.
> 2) Email to the debian-user only address must come from the debian
> mailing list, or I'm going to S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 06:52:37PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> OE will let you send it w/o a peep, but the default is to block access to
> it on the recieving side. You just have to uncheck a little box to get the
> attachment.
Wow, way too easy. I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:16:02PM -0500, Ray wrote:
> it seems to me the easiest solution would be for ISPs to have a
> policy and software that supported the policy of no .exe .com .src
> .pif .bat (etc...) attachments. any email will either be dro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 05:23:50PM -0300, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> Anyway... Blocking servers wouldn't help in the case of viruses, I think.
> Ordinary people get viruses, and the mail is sent through their (probably
> correctly configured) smart
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:43:00PM -0300, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> Interesting. But managing that would require some energy from you...
And not to mention becoming a pain in the ass for people trying to
correspond with you legitimately. Avoid doi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> To me the big question is how do I avoid the spam in the first place,
> besides avoiding email all together?
Become an extremely hostile target. Report all mail and news abuse
ASAP. ht
Jacob Anawalt said:
[snip]
> One major concern that I've lightly touched on and will bring up again is
> What if I want to have other people contact me off list? You wouldn't
> want to post your non-list-only email to the list, that would be
> counter-productive. There's got to be a convenient w
Kirk Strauser said:
> At 2003-09-23T21:16:02Z, Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> perhaps if someone wrote the "don't f*&$ open me"[1] virus and had it go
>> through a little tutorial about why not to open unknow attachments have
>> message go something like "I was foolish enough to open the att
At 2003-09-23T21:16:02Z, Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> perhaps if someone wrote the "don't f*&$ open me"[1] virus and had it go
> through a little tutorial about why not to open unknow attachments have
> message go something like "I was foolish enough to open the attachment,
> and since you ar
daniel said:
> I found a nice web page which can give postfix mail admins some nice
> tips to block most incoming spam/mail bombs.
>
> I added most of the checking described in this url plus a 100Kb mail
> limit since nobody sends me more than that.
>
> Before I could be receiving 10 spam and/or m
I found a nice web page which can give postfix mail admins some nice
tips to block most incoming spam/mail bombs.
I added most of the checking described in this url plus a 100Kb mail
limit since nobody sends me more than that.
Before I could be receiving 10 spam and/or mail bombs per 5 min.. no
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:20:09 -0600 (MDT),
"Jacob Anawalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Arnt Karlsen said:
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:06:19 -0600,
> > Jacob Anawalt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > >
>
Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> Doesn't some spam come directly from an individual running SMTP from
> their box to yours? I'm pretty sure this is the case for the
> W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED]'s email spreading methods.
I have exactly this configuration. Our e-mail is hosted off-site on
another server, but I h
Arnt Karlsen said:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:06:19 -0600,
> Jacob Anawalt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:16:38 -0600 (MDT),
>> >"Jacob Anawalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >
>> >
ptember 24, 2003 1:52 PM
> Subject: Re: Anti-Spam ideas for usenet/list harvested email addresses
>
>
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:06:19 -0600,
> > Jacob Anawalt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > Arnt Karlsen
- Original Message -
From: "Arnt Karlsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: Anti-Spam ideas for usenet/list harvested email addresses
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:06:19 -0600,
> Jacob Anawalt
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:06:19 -0600,
Jacob Anawalt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:16:38 -0600 (MDT),
> >"Jacob Anawalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Compare this to th
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:16:38 -0600 (MDT),
"Jacob Anawalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Compare this to the "dog chasing cars" method of inventing a new
filter rule that looks through the MIME data to decide if this is the
latest worm you don't
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:16:38 -0600 (MDT),
"Jacob Anawalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Compare this to the "dog chasing cars" method of inventing a new
> filter rule that looks through the MIME data to decide if this is the
> latest worm you don't want or the kissi
Ray said:
> On Tuesday 23 September 2003 15:12, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
>> Jeronimo Pellegrini said:
>> > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>> The latest churn on debian-user about Spam hasn't been UCE spam.
>> It's been worm spam. I don't know anyone persona
Jeronimo Pellegrini said:
[snip]
>> > Make the list server PGP-sign the messages, maybe? You install the
>> list
>> > server key once, and never worry about it again?
>>
>> If some small PGP/GPG data could be sent as part of a new EHLO syntax
>> command then OK, otherwise I'm in the DATA section a
Rich Puhek said:
> (my reply is a bit disjointed, since I put things inline, and jumped
> around while crafting my response...sorry for the nonlinear thinking
> pattern)
'sOK. I thought you had some good points. Thanks for the input. Inline is
just right for me.
>
> Jacob Anawalt wrote:
>
>> To
Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
Right, I forgot about that.
Anyway... Blocking servers wouldn't help in the case of viruses, I think.
Ordinary people get viruses, and the mail is sent through their (probably
correctly configured) smarthost. Maybe something like Postfix
header_checks? But that would
On Tuesday 23 September 2003 15:12, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> Jeronimo Pellegrini said:
> > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
>
> [snip]
> The latest churn on debian-user about Spam hasn't been UCE spam.
> It's been worm spam. I don't know anyone personally who likes to
>
(my reply is a bit disjointed, since I put things inline, and jumped
around while crafting my response...sorry for the nonlinear thinking
pattern)
Jacob Anawalt wrote:
To me the big question is how do I avoid the spam in the first place,
besides avoiding email all together? I want to participat
> But my goal was to reduce the spam I get that is harvested from mailing
> lists. If someone wants to subscribe to a mailing list that doesn't do
> reverse dns, then there needs to be authentication before DATA on some
> other bit of information. I could still get posts from the guy in Brazil
> or
Jeronimo Pellegrini said:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
>> I've already mentioned the web authorization idea and the rotate your
>> email address on some schedule ideas in another thread. I've even seen a
>> web site go so far as to use a .js file function to put
Jeronimo Pellegrini said:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
[snip]
>> The mail server would need to have access to my personal list of
>> acceptable email addresses so it could give a 550 with the appropriate
>> extended SMTP code for unauthorized/security and an app
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 01:16:38PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> I've already mentioned the web authorization idea and the rotate your
> email address on some schedule ideas in another thread. I've even seen a
> web site go so far as to use a .js file function to put together the email
> address fr
To me the big question is how do I avoid the spam in the first place,
besides avoiding email all together? I want to participate on the web, I
just don't want so much junk email nor do I want to have my mailbox or ISP
suffering from gigabytes of worm attachments or advertising data.
We've all done
43 matches
Mail list logo
