Well, if you require "FreeBSD" somewhere in the letter with exception of
"To" field it would be quite enough. You only have to announce that the
"FreeBSD" keyword should be included. "Linux" is optional.
Spammers have no idea what FreeBSD is.
On 5/26/21 1:34 PM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
On Ma
On 2021-05-26 22:50:57 (+0800), Julian H. Stacey wrote:
Kurt Jaeger wrote:
Hi!
On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote:
I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently
sent via
this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula;
Your
phone has a virus, Ads
from Kurt Jaeger:
> Hi!
> > > On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote:
> > > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via
> > > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your
> > > phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and s
Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Hi!
> > > On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote:
> > > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via
> > > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your
> > > phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so forth.
Hi!
> > On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote:
> > I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via
> > this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your
> > phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so forth.
> > Has anyone else notice
> On May 25, 2021, at 8:53 PM, jake h wrote:
>
> I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via
> this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your
> phone has a virus, Ads, Fake blackmail, so on and so forth.
> Has anyone else noticed these spam
I got one this morning
Blackmail stuff - just delete it.
> On May 25, 2021, at 4:52 PM, jake h wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
> I have recently received several pieces of spam mail, apparently sent via
> this mailing list. These pieces of mail are the usual spam formula; Your
> phone has a virus, Ads,
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 22:24 +0200, Marek Salwerowicz wrote:
> W dniu 2012-10-04 20:51, Lev Serebryakov pisze:
> > Hello, Marek.
> > You wrote 3 октября 2012 г., 23:17:35:
> >
> >>> atrtc0: port 0x70-0x71 on acpi0
> > MS> still the same in my environment, running FreeBSD 9.1 under ESXi5.1 host
> >
W dniu 2012-10-04 20:51, Lev Serebryakov pisze:
Hello, Marek.
You wrote 3 октября 2012 г., 23:17:35:
atrtc0: port 0x70-0x71 on acpi0
MS> still the same in my environment, running FreeBSD 9.1 under ESXi5.1 host
MS> Do you have any solution?
In my case it was local patch for exotic embedded c
--Best Regards,Littlecho
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content and is
believed to be clean.
> Original Message
>From: freebsd-current-requ...@freebsd.org
>To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
>Sent: Thu, Oct 28, 2010, 20:01 PM
>Subject: [SPAM] freebsd-current Diges
Niclas Zeising wrote:
On 2010-09-23 14:02, Bartosz Stec wrote:
On 2010-09-23 13:36, Niclas Zeising wrote:
On 2010-09-23 13:21, Ralph Ellis wrote:
Niclas Zeising wrote:
On 2010-09-23 04:29, Ralph Ellis wrote:
Hi,
I recently upgraded my FreeBSD 8.1 installation to FreeBSD 9
current via
buildwo
On 2010-09-23 13:36, Niclas Zeising wrote:
On 2010-09-23 13:21, Ralph Ellis wrote:
Niclas Zeising wrote:
On 2010-09-23 04:29, Ralph Ellis wrote:
Hi,
I recently upgraded my FreeBSD 8.1 installation to FreeBSD 9
current via
buildworld and buildkernel. I was able to one general ports, src
and
* mikem ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I don't think the effort is worth the reward. If the frequency
> increases, then the issue should be revisited.
>
> If we do decide this problem merits action...
How about filtering list messages through spamassassin? Anything that
matches can get bounced so
I meant anyone who is subscribed as a starting point,
and going forwards, anyone referenced in an email and not explicitly
NACK'd
On Sun, 23 Dec 2001, Riccardo Torrini wrote:
> On 22-Dec-2001 (22:23:24/GMT) aaron wrote:
>
> [...removed CC: because I suppose all subscribed this list...]
>
>
>
my 2 cents worth,
I don't think the effort is worth the reward. If the frequency increases, then
the issue should be revisited.
If we do decide this problem merits action...
A simple solution would be to restrict posts to subscribers of the lists
(-questions could be an exception). Another sim
On 22-Dec-2001 (22:23:24/GMT) aaron wrote:
[...removed CC: because I suppose all subscribed this list...]
>> any address found in the archives is automatically subscribed
Any address found N times (where N >> reasonably high number, like
10, because we can not really assume that the archives a
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Julian Elischer wrote:
> I would suggest that we use a 'modified' subscription method,
> where simply being mentionned in the list is enough to subscribe..
>
> Now, before you laugh.. there's a twist..
> any address found in the archives is automatically subscribed
> and tha
I would suggest that we use a 'modified' subscription method,
where simply being mentionned in the list is enough to subscribe..
Now, before you laugh.. there's a twist..
any address found in the archives is automatically subscribed
and that includes in the text.. also any mail not subscribed it
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :I'm starting to get spam since I joined this list, and the spam is
> :coming from freebsd.org. If I'm reading the headers right, it's coming
> :in through a freebsd.org mail server.
>
> Ha. In the last two weeks the amount of personal spam I re
On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Julian Stacey wrote:
> > I can only hope that our illustrious congress has grown as tired of
> > spam as I have and will fix the law to simply ban it.
> > -Matt
>
> That would help, (most SPAM I receive even in Germany is
> I can only hope that our illustrious congress has grown as tired of
> spam as I have and will fix the law to simply ban it.
> -Matt
That would help, (most SPAM I receive even in Germany is from USA), but
spammers would move offshore from USA
:I'm starting to get spam since I joined this list, and the spam is
:coming from freebsd.org. If I'm reading the headers right, it's coming
:in through a freebsd.org mail server.
Ha. In the last two weeks the amount of personal spam I receive has
gone up exponentially. I'm getting aro
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Joe Halpin wrote:
>I'm starting to get spam since I joined this list, and the spam is
>coming from freebsd.org. If I'm reading the headers right, it's coming
>in through a freebsd.org mail server.
>Is this just a normal part of being on the list?
You're not getting the spam
here's an idea..
why not have two addresses for the list.
the first would be the public address, and would be restricted to subscribers.
the second would be a non-published address, which would be unrestricted,
and would feed the published list via a side door.
only the first list would be ope
Chuck Robey writes:
> Garrett's points are why I sugggested that it would not be a useable
> approach for -questions, newbies, and mabye hackers, 'cause they all get
> a fair amount of posts like what Garrett describes. Current and
> committers do NOT get such an audience, and the argument doesn'
Chuck Robey wrote:
>
> Garrett's points are why I sugggested that it would not be a useable
> approach for -questions, newbies, and mabye hackers, 'cause they all get
> a fair amount of posts like what Garrett describes. Current and
> committers do NOT get such an audience, and the argument doesn
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Chuck Robey wrote:
> On Mon, 10 May 1999, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
> > A spammer could simply become a list member and then SPAM. They won't care
> > if they are removed once they have perpetrated their abuse.
>
> The could, but most wouldn't, wouldn't even know how.
<
said:
> a fair amount of posts like what Garrett describes. Current and
> committers do NOT get such an audience, and the argument doesn't hold
> for those lists,
Yes they do.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of t
Chuck Robey scribbled this message on May 10:
> On Mon, 10 May 1999, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
> > A spammer could simply become a list member and then SPAM. They won't care
> > if they are removed once they have perpetrated their abuse.
>
> The could, but most wouldn't, wouldn't even know ho
> Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 13:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "Steven P. Donegan"
>
> I have received more email today related to SPAM than I have actual SPAM
> in the last month+ What has triggered this solution looking for a problem?
>
that is an eloquent statement of the situat
To Unsu
>
> < said:
>
> > Have you ever considered only allowing list members to post, or are
> > there difficulties that make this impossible?
>
> Yes, there are.
>
i forgot to mention that such a policy creates a single
"allowed" address per user...not good.
jmb
> -GAWollman
>
>
To Un
> Delivered-To: j...@hub.freebsd.org
> Cc: curr...@freebsd.org
> References: <19990510173115.0aaf815...@hub.freebsd.org>
> Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 22:14:56 +0200
> From: Mark Murray
>
> "Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
> > with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail transfer
> > would be
On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 10:29:16PM +0200, Mark Murray wrote:
> Garrett Wollman wrote:
> > < said:
> >
> > > Have you ever considered only allowing list members to post, or are
> > > there difficulties that make this impossible?
> >
> > Yes, there are.
>
> Content-free answer. Please elaborate?
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > Yes, but is stops the scrape 'n spammers who get the easy-to-reach
> > addresses off the web page.
>
> It also stops perfectly legitimate users who are subscribed to a local
> mailing-list exploder, read the lists through Usenet, or for
Dmitrij Tejblum wrote:
>
> > > "Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
> > > > with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail
> > > > transfer would be slower as we wait for the moderator(s)
> > > > to approve each piece of email. if we use more than one
> > > > moderator per list, the time-seq
< said:
> Yes, but is stops the scrape 'n spammers who get the easy-to-reach
> addresses off the web page.
It also stops perfectly legitimate users who are subscribed to a local
mailing-list exploder, read the lists through Usenet, or for other
reasons are subscribed with a different address from
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> A spammer could simply become a list member and then SPAM. They won't care
> if they are removed once they have perpetrated their abuse.
I think most won't bother. Probably a good number of them are
mailing automatically to a list of mailing li
> > "Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
> > > with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail transfer
> > > would be slower as we wait for the moderator(s) to approve each piece
> > > of email. if we use more than one moderator per list, the
> > > time-sequence of email would be lostwe would
I have received more email today related to SPAM than I have actual SPAM
in the last month+ What has triggered this solution looking for a problem?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Chuck Robey wrote:
> > Have you ever considered only allowing list members to post, or are
> > there difficulties that make this impossible?
>
> There might be some resistance to this for all lists, but how about
> just, say, current and committers? Hackers == maybe?
I can imagine that there cou
; To: Jonathan M. Bresler
> Cc: curr...@freebsd.org
> Date: Monday, May 10, 1999 3:17 PM
> Subject: Re: SPAM
>
>
> >"Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
> >> with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail transfer
> >> would be slower as we wait for t
On Mon, 10 May 1999, Mark Murray wrote:
> "Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
> > with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail transfer
> > would be slower as we wait for the moderator(s) to approve each piece
> > of email. if we use more than one moderator per list, the
> > time-sequence of
Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > Have you ever considered only allowing list members to post, or are
> > there difficulties that make this impossible?
>
> Yes, there are.
Content-free answer. Please elaborate?
M
--
Mark Murray
Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org
To Unsubsc
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
> A spammer could simply become a list member and then SPAM. They won't care
> if they are removed once they have perpetrated their abuse.
Yes, but is stops the scrape 'n spammers who get the easy-to-reach
addresses off the web page. The subscribed spammers at least h
< said:
> Have you ever considered only allowing list members to post, or are
> there difficulties that make this impossible?
Yes, there are.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
17 PM
Subject: Re: SPAM
>"Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
>> with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail transfer
>> would be slower as we wait for the moderator(s) to approve each piece
>> of email. if we use more than one moderator per list, the
>>
"Jonathan M. Bresler" wrote:
> with volunteers, we could moderate the list(s). mail transfer
> would be slower as we wait for the moderator(s) to approve each piece
> of email. if we use more than one moderator per list, the
> time-sequence of email would be lostwe would get some very
>
> From: Seamus Wassman
> Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 20:31:00 -0700
>
> I was quite surprised the First Time I got SPAM through this mailing list, I
> thought for sure there would be someone to moderate it so that no garbage gets
> through, I personally find it quite offensive to get SPAM on a help
On Sun, 9 May 1999, Seamus Wassman wrote:
> I was quite surprised the First Time I got SPAM through this mailing
> list, I thought for sure there would be someone to moderate it so
> that no garbage gets through, I personally find it quite offensive
> to get SPAM on a help based mailing list, I ha
49 matches
Mail list logo
