** Sometime around 19:39 -0500 3/17/97, Stan Ryckman sent everyone:
>>CASE 1: "*" subscribes user to all lists on any/all servers hit: Major
>>impact on the user, and it's worth alerting the list owners and server
>>managers to this situation.
>
>What I wrote was based under the (possibly incorrect) assumption that
>all the addressed listservs were LISTSERV(TM), and that LISTSERV(TM)
Um, MANY of the addresses said "listserv", yes. You might want to explain
to ISPs like Netcom -- whose *Majordomo*'s address is "listserv@netcom.com"
-- that they are really running ListServ. ;-)
Seriously, I think that "listserv@" has become pretty standard. Once could
hardly conclude that all the addressees were ListServs, just from the
addresses (and, in fact, I know of a few of them that were not).
>Now I think that some went to xxxx-request type addresses, which go to
>the list owners, but how could they miss that monster "To:" header or
Again, xxxx-request does not necessarily fgo to the list owners, In fact,
IME< they typically do NOT go to the list owners.
>Your other note, pointing out that I didn't suggest that, clarified things,
>thanks. I've made similar attribution errors in the past, so I can't
>be very critical about that one, can I? :-)
<sigh> Still hate it when I screw up.
>The problem is that we don't know who did it; we just know the victim's
>email address. When the *smarter* idiot comes back, it will undoubtedly
>be by a different path and a different disguise anyway, and possibly
>with a different victim.
I wouldn't be too sure. These things are usually done with retribution in
mind, not just as random pranks. Once/If he realizes that he didn't
accomplish his goal (*if* he really did not, which as you point out, is
quite likely, since it's unlikely that there are very many MLMs out there
that'd let you gloablly subscribe that way), he will likely try it again,
and it is just as likely that the target would be the same, IMO. Idiots
are, after all, idiots. That's why we call them that. ;-)
>What I'd *hoped* to accomplish with my post was to kill this thread on these
>two lists (but I forgot to mention HITLER and NAZIs! Now I have! :)
Hmmm ... kill a post with a post. Interesting.
>It's probably worth discussing, but over on the SPAM-L list.
I doubt that it applies to SPAM-L, to be honest. I think it is better
discussed over here, since it is really a list-management issue. Roughly
50 hits on the Web server in the 20 minutes after the original post hit
these two lists might underscore that point.
However, I agree that the topic has pretty well been beaten in to the
ground.
- Vince S.
wavelet@colossus.arl.mil
<http://www.humournet.com/HumourNet/>
--
For info on HumourNet--the Internet's moderated mailing list for humor--
send the command INFO HUMORNET (only one U) to listproc@csf.colorado.edu
--
<http://spam.abuse.net/spam/> Because The Only GOOD Spammer is a DEAD Spammer
|
|
