From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Mar 2 08:13:29 2003 Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B246C1959E2 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 08:13:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0HB400LC1QFFEP@eListX.com> for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 02 Mar 2003 11:14:04 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 11:13:35 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: James M Galvin Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-reply-to: <3E5D2327.14296.4665DEC@localhost> To: "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII References: <3E5D2327.14296.4665DEC@localhost> X-Archive-Number: 200303/1 X-Sequence-Number: 1319 On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote: 3. If you could sit down, face to face, with the CEO of $BIGISP, what are the three things you would most like to impress upon them in terms of how they handle incoming mailing list mail from a list such as yours? I've got just one. Do RFC3464 right! There is no longer any excuse for not using DSNs. If sites would use them (and use them correctly) we wouldn't need VERPs, which kill performance unnecessarily. And we wouldn't need probes to find bad email addresses. My two biggest pet peeves about DSN implementations: 1. Syntax errors - The number of ways that MTAs incorrectly implement what is clearly specified in the standard is beyond me. 2. Not using original-recipient - Although the use of the Original-Recipient information is optional, not using it when the final and original do not match is a waste of bits. It's worse than not using DSNs at all. There is something bad to say about every major ISP on the issue of RFC3464 compliance. Jim From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Sun Mar 2 08:50:36 2003 Received: from celery.tssi.com (celery.tssi.com [198.147.197.6]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 18BF5195F33 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 08:50:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 31606 invoked by uid 1000); 2 Mar 2003 16:50:32 -0000 Message-ID: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> From: nolan@celery.tssi.com Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 10:50:32 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/2 X-Sequence-Number: 1320 > I've got just one. Do RFC3464 right! > > There is no longer any excuse for not using DSNs. If sites would use > them (and use them correctly) we wouldn't need VERPs, which kill > performance unnecessarily. And we wouldn't need probes to find bad > email addresses. > > There is something bad to say about every major ISP on the issue of > RFC3464 compliance. And that doesn't suggest problems with RFC 3464 to you? As most of us have never worked for a major ISP, and are unlikely to do so, perhaps someone could analyze what concerns or problems large ISP's may have with RFC 3464 compliance. I really doubt they're all being non-compliant just out of spite. -- Mike Nolan From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 08:20:48 2003 Received: from yertle.kcilink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [216.194.193.105]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0BB196070 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 08:20:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from onceler.int.kciLink.com (onceler.int.kcilink.com [192.168.7.2]) by yertle.kcilink.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E978217B7 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:20:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by onceler.int.kciLink.com (Postfix, from userid 100) id 837A73D17; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:20:35 -0500 (EST) From: Vivek Khera MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:20:35 -0500 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-Reply-To: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> References: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.4 (patch 12) "Portable Code" XEmacs Lucid X-Archive-Number: 200303/3 X-Sequence-Number: 1321 >>>>> "n" == nolan writes: >> There is no longer any excuse for not using DSNs. If sites would >> use them (and use them correctly) we wouldn't need VERPs, which >> kill performance unnecessarily. And we wouldn't need probes to >> find bad email addresses. I disagree. DSN's report the final recipient, not necessarily the address that is in your mailing list. n> As most of us have never worked for a major ISP, and are unlikely n> to do so, perhaps someone could analyze what concerns or problems n> large ISP's may have with RFC 3464 compliance. I added some DSN processing to my bounce processor the other day. Today I'm scanning the logs from it and I see that there are a fair number of "Action: failed" but "Status: 2.0.0" coming from netscape.net (and even one from aol.com). Who in their right mind would generate such a contradictory DSN? Or am I misreading the codes and their meanings? I think it is more programmer laziness/incompetence than spite that they don't comply with the DSN RFCs (or *any* random RFC). -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc. Internet: khera@kciLink.com Rockville, MD +1-240-453-8497 AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 08:43:21 2003 Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [64.244.111.110]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B90196044 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 08:43:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (toshiba.squawk.com [199.74.151.118]) by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0028525B184 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:43:14 -0500 (EST) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030303113123.22416b90@199.74.151.1> X-Sender: njs@199.74.151.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 11:32:53 -0500 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this In-Reply-To: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-1EE47D27; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/4 X-Sequence-Number: 1322 At 10:50 AM 2003-03-02 -0600, nolan@celery.tssi.com wrote: > > I've got just one. Do RFC3464 right! > > > > There is no longer any excuse for not using DSNs. If sites would use > > them (and use them correctly) we wouldn't need VERPs, which kill > > performance unnecessarily. And we wouldn't need probes to find bad > > email addresses. > > > > There is something bad to say about every major ISP on the issue of > > RFC3464 compliance. > >And that doesn't suggest problems with RFC 3464 to you? > >As most of us have never worked for a major ISP, and are unlikely to >do so, perhaps someone could analyze what concerns or problems large ISP's >may have with RFC 3464 compliance. > >I really doubt they're all being non-compliant just out of spite. At one point, the author of Postfix estimated that DSN would more than double the size of Postfix. The problem may actually be worse than the disease. -- SPAM: Trademark for spiced, chopped ham manufactured by Hormel. spam: Unsolicited, Bulk E-mail, where e-mail can be interpreted generally to mean electronic messages designed to be read by an individual, and it can include Usenet, SMS, AIM, etc. But if it is not all three of Unsolicited, Bulk, and E-mail, it simply is not spam. Misusing the term plays into the hands of the spammers, since it causes confusion, and spammers thrive on confusion. Spam is not speech, it is an action, like theft, or vandalism. If you were not confused, would you patronize a spammer? Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com - http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html Stop by and light up the world! From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 08:58:15 2003 Received: from mx1.liv.ac.uk (mx1.liv.ac.uk [138.253.100.179]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3428E195AB4 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 08:58:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailhub5.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.100.157]) by mx1.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18ptGJ-0003XZ-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:57:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=mailhub5.liv.ac.uk) by mailhub5.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18ptGJ-0003mv-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:57:59 +0000 Received: from ajtpc.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.253.66]) by mailhub5.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18ptGJ-0003ms-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:57:59 +0000 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:57:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Alan Thew X-X-Sender: qq11@ajtpc.liv.ac.uk To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030303113123.22416b90@199.74.151.1> Message-ID: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030303113123.22416b90@199.74.151.1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Scanner: exiscan for exim4 (http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/) *18ptGJ-0003XZ-00*65P9nQIWk8.* X-Archive-Number: 200303/5 X-Sequence-Number: 1323 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:32 , Nick Simicich said: > At 10:50 AM 2003-03-02 -0600, nolan@celery.tssi.com wrote: > > > > I've got just one. Do RFC3464 right! > > > > > > There is no longer any excuse for not using DSNs. If sites would use > > > them (and use them correctly) we wouldn't need VERPs, which kill > > > performance unnecessarily. And we wouldn't need probes to find bad > > > email addresses. > > > > > > There is something bad to say about every major ISP on the issue of > > > RFC3464 compliance. > > > >And that doesn't suggest problems with RFC 3464 to you? > > > >As most of us have never worked for a major ISP, and are unlikely to > >do so, perhaps someone could analyze what concerns or problems large ISP's > >may have with RFC 3464 compliance. > > > >I really doubt they're all being non-compliant just out of spite. > > At one point, the author of Postfix estimated that DSN would more than > double the size of Postfix. The problem may actually be worse than the > disease. > The exim author has said similar things (more on the complexity front rather than size). I don't speak for him tho' -- Alan Thew alan.thew@liverpool.ac.uk Computing Services,University of Liverpool Fax: +44 151 794-4442 From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 09:01:08 2003 Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF4F196044 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h23H15Yv028976 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:01:01 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h23H10Q29461; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:01:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:01:01 -0800 Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com (List Managers) To: Vivek Khera From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/6 X-Sequence-Number: 1324 On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 08:20 AM, Vivek Khera wrote: > I disagree. DSN's report the final recipient, not necessarily the > address that is in your mailing list. Very true. But with the improved personalization of list servers like Mailman 2.1, verp might not be the only option we have these days, too. But just because it's not in the "right" format doesn't mean it's useful. > I think it is more programmer laziness/incompetence than spite that > they don't comply with the DSN RFCs (or *any* random RFC). > I or some of my staff have talked to some of the companies who write the mail servers about this. The reactions range all over the map, from having to be wary about breaking compatibility with previous releases (understandable, especially if customers have written code using the old formats) to being unaware of some of the RFCs involved (what, writing mail servers and not knowing about the mail server RFCs? yeah, go figure) to simply not caring what happens anywhere but on their own software. There's one server we've just given up on, and attempts to talk with the company who writes and sells it haven't been terribly encouraging. I don't want to mention their name, but they're definitely not a first class piece of software, so instead, when I get questions from users about what server to buy, I recommend away from this firm.... -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ But I can hear the sound Of slamming doors and folding chairs And that's a sound they'll never know From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 09:16:53 2003 Received: from charlie.rea-alp.com (ns1.rea-alp.com [65.165.161.2]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A5621960E1 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:16:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from 018f90.rea-alp.com (public209.rea-alp.com [63.175.64.209]) by charlie.rea-alp.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h23HGnhu188546 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:16:49 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030303111636.01a4b188@mailin.rea-alp.com> X-Sender: jay@mailin.rea-alp.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 11:16:48 -0600 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Jay Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-Reply-To: <20030227114452.12101.qmail@houston.wolf.com> References: <3E5D2327.14296.4665DEC@localhost> <3E5D2327.14296.4665DEC@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/7 X-Sequence-Number: 1325 remove From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 09:34:19 2003 Received: from play.gamerz.net (www.gamerz.net [216.181.159.135]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9194196113 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:34:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from play.gamerz.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by play.gamerz.net (Switch-3.0.3/Switch-3.0.0) with ESMTP id h23HYGXR031007 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified NO) for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:34:16 -0500 Received: (from rrognlie@localhost) by play.gamerz.net (Switch-3.0.3/Switch-3.0.0/Submit) id h23HYGUZ031006 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:34:16 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:34:16 -0500 From: Richard Rognlie To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Sendmail Security Announcement Message-ID: <20030303173416.GD17136@gamerz.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Archive-Number: 200303/8 X-Sequence-Number: 1326 I know this is not list specific, but I also know many of you are running your lists on sendmail MTAs. http://www.sendmail.com/security/ SECURITY ALERT Today Internet Security Systems and the Sendmail Consortium announced the discovery of a security vulnerability in the sendmail mail transfer agent. This vulnerability is serious, and Sendmail, Inc. urges customers to apply the supplied security patch as soon as possible. The vulnerability derives from a potential buffer overflow in sendmail's header handling code. In a worst-case scenario, the vulnerability provides the ability for an attacker to remotely gain root access to the targeted system. While there have been no known exploits of this vulnerability to this point, we believe that unpatched systems could become exploitable very soon. -- / \__ | Richard Rognlie / Sendmail Ninja / Gamerz.NET Lackey \__/ \ | http://www.gamerz.net/rrognlie/ / \__/ | Today is the first day of the rest of your life. Of course, \__/ | so was yesterday, and look how you screwed *that* up... From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 10:05:03 2003 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (ocker.kanga.nu [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89EF41960DE for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:05:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=kanga.nu) by dingo.home.kanga.nu with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18puJ4-0004ng-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 10:04:54 -0800 To: Vivek Khera Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-Reply-To: Message from Vivek Khera of "Mon, 03 Mar 2003 11:20:35 EST." <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> References: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 10:04:54 -0800 Message-ID: <18455.1046714694@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200303/9 X-Sequence-Number: 1327 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:20:35 -0500 Vivek Khera wrote: > I disagree. DSN's report the final recipient, not necessarily the > address that is in your mailing list. Quite. Many things would be far more useful if alias translations were reported in the Received: headers. (I do it here under Exim, which makes filtering mail from multiple sources (eg root, webmaster, postmaster, newsmaster, listmaster, etc) far easier. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 10:43:29 2003 Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6555819600E for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:43:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0HB6008IHS19C3@eListX.com> for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 13:43:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 13:43:30 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: James M Galvin Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-reply-to: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> To: List Managers Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII References: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> X-Archive-Number: 200303/10 X-Sequence-Number: 1328 On Sun, 2 Mar 2003 nolan@celery.tssi.com wrote: > There is something bad to say about every major ISP on the issue of > RFC3464 compliance. And that doesn't suggest problems with RFC 3464 to you? Not necessarily. There are some syntax issues that could reasonably be "blamed" on lack of clarity or the fact that you need several RFCs in order to get the complete picture. But then again, that is the nature of IETF standards and anyone who is serious about such standards should know this and should do the right thing. Which brings me to my second point. Frankly, in my opinion, a large ISP or an email service provider should not be permitted to use as an excuse the fact that IETF standards may require study to get right. They should be setting an example. Which is the basis for my comment. But then again, there is Microsoft.... For example, my issue with AOL and 3464 is that they do not use it all the time. It seems that the type of DSN you get depends on which part of their system rejects the message. They also don't report the Original-Recipient. With MSN/Hotmail, it is their seemingly random use of "HMOBHMOE" (from memory that may not be exactly right) as the Original-Recipient, which is otherwise always reported as the same as the final. Like AOL, they do not report the Original-Recipient in general. Now, to be fair, the Original-Recipient is an optional component of the report. However, as list managers, I'm sure we all appreciate its intrinsic value. How else are you to track down a subscriber who has had their email forwarded 1, 2, 3, etc., times before it finally fails. (Okay, yes, I know there are other infrastructure issues that are in play here, but the point is still valid.) Yes, there are always VERPs, but then the whole point is with 3464 you don't need them and you get a HUGE performance win for large lists (at the list server and the $BIGISP receiving server). And, if they tell me who the actual subscriber is I will actually remove them from the list; a win for both of us! As most of us have never worked for a major ISP, and are unlikely to do so, perhaps someone could analyze what concerns or problems large ISP's may have with RFC 3464 compliance. I really doubt they're all being non-compliant just out of spite. I don't think they do it out of spite. I think they do it for the money out of ignorance. We wouldn't be a capitalist society if this were not so. Jim From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 10:48:39 2003 Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B9C119636A for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 10:48:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0HB6008KTSA2C3@eListX.com> for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 13:49:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 13:48:47 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: James M Galvin Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-reply-to: <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> To: List Managers Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII References: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> X-Archive-Number: 200303/11 X-Sequence-Number: 1329 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Vivek Khera wrote: >> If sites would >> use them (and use them correctly) we wouldn't need VERPs, which >> kill performance unnecessarily. And we wouldn't need probes to >> find bad email addresses. I disagree. DSN's report the final recipient, not necessarily the address that is in your mailing list. This does not have to be true, which is precisely my point. The Original-Recipient is the place to be carrying around the actual subscriber address. Of course, it requires all the MTAs along the forwarding path to be "playing nice".... Bigfoot is a great example of a forwarding service provider that obfuscates the original delivery address. And the list goes on.... Jim From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 11:00:01 2003 Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE684195AC4 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:00:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0HB6008NNST0C3@eListX.com> for list-managers@GreatCircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:00:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:00:09 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: James M Galvin Subject: Re: Questions for those who have this information In-reply-to: <18455.1046714694@kanga.nu> To: List Managers Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII References: <20030302165032.31605.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <15971.32979.395554.970962@onceler.int.kciLink.com> <18455.1046714694@kanga.nu> X-Archive-Number: 200303/12 X-Sequence-Number: 1330 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, J C Lawrence wrote: On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:20:35 -0500 Vivek Khera wrote: > I disagree. DSN's report the final recipient, not necessarily the > address that is in your mailing list. Quite. Many things would be far more useful if alias translations were reported in the Received: headers. (I do it here under Exim, which makes filtering mail from multiple sources (eg root, webmaster, postmaster, newsmaster, listmaster, etc) far easier. To be fair, since I mentioned Bigfoot in my response to Vivek's message, this is also true of their service. But this misses the point. Automated processing of failures by having to parse Received: headers is unnecessarily complex and doesn't work all the time. Although frequently trivial to do manually that is not a solution that scales well. Further, alias expansions in Received headers only works when their is one recipient. This is true if you are using VERPS (or a moral equivalent) or if you are only delivering to one recipient at a receiving site. So, again, this does not scale and is a HUGE performance lose. In contrast, if DSNs were used automatic processing is almost trivial once you've written the parsing code. Jim From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 11:48:10 2003 Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF9F81959F7 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h23Jm8Yv020161 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:48:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:48:08 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h23Jm7Q13829 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:48:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:48:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists From: Chuq Von Rospach To: List list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/13 X-Sequence-Number: 1331 Word of warning. We had an opt-in list spammed over the weekend someone subscribed to (and confirmed subscription to) one of our lists and then posted an ad for an adult site, using a hotmail address which they then abandoned (it started bouncing shortly thereafter). The subscription came from a dsl line attached to wannadoo.nl. apprpropriate abuse complaints are going out, but admins ought to be aware we've seen someone willing to go through the confirmations to get the spam in. without giving the site too much publicity, you might want to content block any message mentioning happyhug in the com TLD. so far, we've found three lists from two hotmail addresses. it doesn't look like it was scripted, it looks like an individual. chuq -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 12:03:48 2003 Received: from claude.jabberwocky.com (walrus.ne.client2.attbi.com [24.60.130.129]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65282195FB2 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:03:45 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.jabberwocky.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h23K3it06356 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 15:03:44 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 15:03:44 -0500 From: David Shaw To: List list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists Message-ID: <20030303200344.GH29217@jabberwocky.com> Mail-Followup-To: List list References: <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> X-PGP-Key: 99242560 / 7D92 FD31 3AB6 F373 4CC5 9CA1 DB69 8D71 9924 2560 X-Request-PGP: http://www.jabberwocky.com/david/keys.asc X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is New User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i X-Archive-Number: 200303/14 X-Sequence-Number: 1332 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 11:48:09AM -0800, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > > Word of warning. We had an opt-in list spammed over the weekend someone > subscribed to (and confirmed subscription to) one of our lists and then > posted an ad for an adult site, using a hotmail address which they then > abandoned (it started bouncing shortly thereafter). Same thing happened here. All the public lists here are configured to require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber so the message did not go out onto the list. David -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2rc1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://www.jabberwocky.com/david/keys.asc iD8DBQE+Y7Ug4mZch0nhy8kRArlJAJsHo1QrXBTikMN31AYka0Wa/YdlbgCgiget Ic59DwO2z5KpZ2MFKlsLxCY= =0xFz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 12:06:42 2003 Received: from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FC5719629D for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:06:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ord351473 (localhost.panix.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E29A7982C3 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 15:06:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <009301c2e1c0$50db1260$21985742@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: "List list" References: <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:05:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Archive-Number: 200303/15 X-Sequence-Number: 1333 Chuq wrote, | We had an opt-in list spammed over the weekend someone | subscribed to (and confirmed subscription to) one of our lists and then | posted an ad for an adult site, using a hotmail address which they then | abandoned (it started bouncing shortly thereafter). Can a user close a Hotmail address? I was under the impression that the only way was to decline to log into it for long enough that MS cancels it on you. It is possible that the perpetrator deliberately loaded its to quota so that any incoming mail would be bounced for going over quota; Chuq didn't say what reason the bounces gave. | ... we've seen someone willing to go through the confirmations to get | the spam in. Have we seen anyone willing to participate in on-topic discussion before getting the spam in? Maybe moderating new users is still effective. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 12:32:19 2003 Received: from celery.tssi.com (celery.tssi.com [198.147.197.6]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E36FE196070 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:32:17 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 14393 invoked by uid 1000); 3 Mar 2003 20:32:16 -0000 Message-ID: <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> From: nolan@celery.tssi.com Subject: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:32:16 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/16 X-Sequence-Number: 1334 > Word of warning. We had an opt-in list spammed over the weekend someone > subscribed to (and confirmed subscription to) one of our lists and then > posted an ad for an adult site, using a hotmail address which they then > abandoned (it started bouncing shortly thereafter). I have long recommended unlinking subscribing from granting list posting privileges. In my case, some of my ezmlm-idx based lists use a four day waiting period, others (mostly small lists) only have posting privileges granted manually. While it is possible for a spammer to forge around subscriber address checks, I cannot recall a single instance of this happening on my lists in several years, and only one example of a spammer who hung around long enough to get around the waiting period. I have perl scripts which peruse the logs for new subscribers and activate posting privileges, and also perl scripts that I can 'bounce' e-mail to which activate or de-activate posting privileges for the poster. -- Mike Nolan From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 12:39:16 2003 Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024B0196005 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:39:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h23KdEYv003690 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:39:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:39:13 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h23Kd7Q21310; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:39:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 12:39:09 -0800 Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: "List list" To: "David W. Tamkin" From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <009301c2e1c0$50db1260$21985742@ord351473> Message-Id: <2F9983AB-4DB8-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/17 X-Sequence-Number: 1335 On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 12:05 PM, David W. Tamkin wrote: > It is possible that the perpetrator deliberately loaded its to quota > so that > any incoming mail would be bounced for going over quota; Chuq didn't > say what > reason the bounces gave. it was mailbox unavailable, not mailbox full. > Have we seen anyone willing to participate in on-topic discussion > before > getting the spam in? Maybe moderating new users is still effective. yes, but only where the spam was targetted at that list (i.e., quicktime products on a quicktime list) > -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ No! No! Dead girl, OFF the table! -- Shrek From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 13:00:18 2003 Received: from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A752196106 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:00:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from ord351473 (localhost.panix.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D3E0984E8 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:00:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00cc01c2e1c7$cab9a220$21985742@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: "List list" References: <2F9983AB-4DB8-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:56:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Archive-Number: 200303/18 X-Sequence-Number: 1336 I asked, | > Have we seen anyone willing to participate in on-topic discussion | > before getting the spam in? Chuq responded, | yes, but only where the spam was targetted at that list (i.e., | quicktime products on a quicktime list) That type surely was hand-typed, and so were the same spammer's on-topic posts that preceded it, so it won't be coming in huge batches. I don't see how they can possibly be automating the submission of enough on-topic posts to get their moderation flags cleared, but completing a confirmation process *could* be automated and lead to much outpouring of spam. Now to wait a few minutes until some dip on this list decides that my recognizing degrees among spam is a pro-spam position and flames me for it. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 13:01:58 2003 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BAE41963F2 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:01:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from ee-2k.climber.org (12-236-47-35.client.attbi.com[12.236.47.35]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53) with SMTP id <20030303210156053001sgo7e>; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:01:56 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: steveeckert@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 13:01:53 -0800 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: SRE Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists (fwd) In-Reply-To: <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archive-Number: 200303/19 X-Sequence-Number: 1337 At 12:32 PM 3/3/2003, nolan@celery.tssi.com wrote: >I have perl scripts which peruse the logs for new subscribers and >activate posting privileges, and also perl scripts that I can 'bounce' >e-mail to which activate or de-activate posting privileges for the poster. Mj2 (the unreleased-but-done rewrite of Majordomo) and Listserv both can set "new subscriber" flags that moderate individual subscribers until some event clears the flag. I stopped several dedicated spammers with a personal grudge by moderating new subscribers until the list owner clears the flag. At 12:05 PM 3/3/2003, David W. Tamkin wrote: >Have we seen anyone willing to participate in on-topic discussion before >getting the spam in? Maybe moderating new users is still effective. The bad guys can't seem to make more than one useful post in a row! I've found it to be remarkably easy and effective to screen the first post and then turn them loose. It's not too much of a workload to approve 1 or 2 posts for new subscribers, then clear the post blocking flag, especially since most people seem to lurk instead of post actively, and all but one or two people have been grateful to know why the signal-to-noise ratio has stayed so good for so many years. Steve From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 13:14:53 2003 Received: from minneapolis.mnjazz.com (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5254195F82 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:14:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mnjazz.com (localhost.mnjazz.com [127.0.0.1]) by minneapolis.mnjazz.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7780410383 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 15:18:15 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3E63C5CB.E5248379@mnjazz.com> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 15:14:51 -0600 From: Al Iverson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List Managers Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists References: <2F9983AB-4DB8-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/20 X-Sequence-Number: 1338 Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > On Monday, March 3, 2003, at 12:05 PM, David W. Tamkin wrote: > > > It is possible that the perpetrator deliberately loaded its to quota > > so that > > any incoming mail would be bounced for going over quota; Chuq didn't > > say what > > reason the bounces gave. > > it was mailbox unavailable, not mailbox full. Eh, maybe the person was spamming elsewhere and the account got nuked. -- Al Iverson -- iverson@mnjazz.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota My pockets hurt. http://www.spamresource.com/ Support Jazz in Minnesota! -- http://www.mnjazz.com/ All opinions are mine alone unless I state otherwise. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 13:49:21 2003 Received: from grouse.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grouse.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.116]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8A0195F20 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:49:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-130-135.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.130.135] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by grouse.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18pxo9-0005vM-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 13:49:13 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303144729.00b9e0e0@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:49:13 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: <20030303200344.GH29217@jabberwocky.com> References: <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/21 X-Sequence-Number: 1339 At 01:03 PM 3/3/2003, David Shaw wrote: > All the public lists here are configured to >require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber How does one configure for moderation of the first 3 posts of a new subscriber? ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 14:03:24 2003 Received: from claude.jabberwocky.com (walrus.ne.client2.attbi.com [24.60.130.129]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44767195F20 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:03:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dshaw@localhost) by claude.jabberwocky.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h23M3GQ07958 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:03:16 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:03:16 -0500 From: David Shaw To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists Message-ID: <20030303220316.GK29217@jabberwocky.com> Mail-Followup-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com References: <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> <0F6712F4-4DB1-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303144729.00b9e0e0@pop.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303144729.00b9e0e0@pop.earthlink.net> X-PGP-Key: 99242560 / 7D92 FD31 3AB6 F373 4CC5 9CA1 DB69 8D71 9924 2560 X-Request-PGP: http://www.jabberwocky.com/david/keys.asc X-Phase-Of-Moon: The Moon is New User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i X-Archive-Number: 200303/22 X-Sequence-Number: 1340 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 02:49:13PM -0700, Bob Bish wrote: > At 01:03 PM 3/3/2003, David Shaw wrote: > > All the public lists here are configured to > >require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber > > How does one configure for moderation of the first 3 posts of a new > subscriber? Manually. I use Mailman, and have it configured to moderate everyone at first. If/when they post enough to convince me they are for real, I remove their moderation. The latest version of Mailman is set up to make this very easy. David -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2rc1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://www.jabberwocky.com/david/keys.asc iD4DBQE+Y9Ek4mZch0nhy8kRAi0VAJiK+YGy7hUJfsUZZ0TtNq5xOevLAJ9uTSzf gzn/fo/8dU0ByWJgCqEV2w== =kkZf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 14:15:37 2003 Received: from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B9F5195A44 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:15:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from ord351473 (localhost.panix.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767AB986A5 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:15:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002501c2e1d2$3dd44b20$21985742@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: "List list" References: <2F9983AB-4DB8-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:09:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Archive-Number: 200303/23 X-Sequence-Number: 1341 When I theorized, | > It is possible that the perpetrator deliberately loaded its to quota | > so that | > any incoming mail would be bounced for going over quota; Chuq didn't | > say what | > reason the bounces gave. Chuq answered, | it was mailbox unavailable, not mailbox full. In a fantasy world, that could mean that Hotmail had shut it off for spamming. Seriously, Hotmail might just coincidentally have been having problems. AFAIK there is no way for a user to cancel a Hotmail account except by several months of disuse. We can rule out forged From: lines pointing to a Hotmail address that never existed, because that address had received the confirmation request and perhaps some posts or digests. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 15:11:20 2003 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CC5519600B for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 15:11:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-130-135.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.130.135] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18pz5a-0006gb-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 15:11:18 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:11:18 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> References: <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/24 X-Sequence-Number: 1342 > All the public lists here are configured to >require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber > How does one configure for moderation of the first 3 posts of a new > subscriber? >Mj2 (the unreleased-but-done rewrite of Majordomo) and Listserv both >can set "new subscriber" flags >Manually. I use Mailman, and have it configured to moderate everyone..... It would be helpful, at least to me, if people could mention the list software being used when making statements about features, etc. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 16:34:45 2003 Received: from host4.ctc.net (host4.mail.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58619195B7E for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from katie.vnet.net ([166.82.1.7]) by host4.ctc.net (InterMail vK.4.03.05.03 201-232-132-103 license 2d687b22c655f23831a2faa19b737467) with ESMTP id <20030304003602.PSGP3575.host4@katie.vnet.net> for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 19:36:02 -0500 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h240Yaj05170 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 19:34:36 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 19:34:36 -0500 (EST) From: murr rhame To: List list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: <00cc01c2e1c7$cab9a220$21985742@ord351473> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/25 X-Sequence-Number: 1343 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, David W. Tamkin wrote: > Now to wait a few minutes until some dip on this list decides > that my recognizing degrees among spam is a pro-spam position > and flames me for it. At the risk of being even more pro-spam that you, I expressly allow limited on-topic commercial posts. We've discussed allowing ads with various restrictions before on listmanagers. I've averaged less than one abuse of comercial posting privileges a year. Most of those abuses have been a matter of degree: excessive length, excessive frequency, off-topic yard-sale type post from a regular participant. I've never had a sex ad, a stock tip or make money fast sort of spam... Had quite a few human propagated viruses (tell everyone you know variants: modem tax, delete file X, watch out for something-or-another, etc.). Haven't seen one of these for a year or two. I set new subscribers to moderate their first two posts using Lyris software... I strongly suspect one approval would catch the vast majority of spammers. Even Chuq's case where a spammer went through the subscribe confirmation process is quite rare. Let's hope it stays that way. - murr - Cc: list deleted From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 16:58:26 2003 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net (scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.49]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E121959F3 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:58:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from 66-215-216-48.riv-eres.charterpipeline.net ([66.215.216.48] helo=lehel.goldmark.private) by scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18q0lD-0006pN-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:58:23 -0800 Received: from betty.goldmark.private ([192.168.1.51]) by lehel.goldmark.private with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 18q0lD-0007UY-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:58:23 -0800 Received: from jeffrey (helo=localhost) by betty.goldmark.private with local-esmtp (Exim 4.10) id HB79DA-0002QM-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:58:22 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:58:22 -0800 (PST) From: Jeffrey Goldberg X-X-Sender: jeffrey@jeffrey-goldbergs-computer.local Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg To: List Managers Mailing list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/26 X-Sequence-Number: 1344 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, murr rhame wrote: > At the risk of being even more pro-spam that you, I expressly > allow limited on-topic commercial posts. Me, too. The vendor (and list participant) asked me first. We worked out a few restrictions, and I agreed. They can make a general announcement once every 3 months. And if a reasonable answer to some query would refer to their product, they should feel free to answer the query (noting who they are). I had a few complaints after the first announcement, and posted my rationale asking people to complain to me if they were unhappy with my decision. It was largely supported. > We've discussed allowing ads with various restrictions before on > listmanagers. I've averaged less than one abuse of comercial posting > privileges a year. Most of those abuses have been a matter of degree: > excessive length, excessive frequency, off-topic yard-sale type post > from a regular participant. Again, that was the bulk of my discussion with the vendor in question. -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice Hate spam? Boycott MCI! http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/anti-spam/mci/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 16:58:50 2003 Received: from celery.tssi.com (celery.tssi.com [198.147.197.6]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 87CAA195F0B for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:58:41 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 18763 invoked by uid 1000); 4 Mar 2003 00:58:40 -0000 Message-ID: <20030304005840.18762.qmail@celery.tssi.com> From: nolan@celery.tssi.com Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:58:40 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/27 X-Sequence-Number: 1345 Forwarded message: > > At the risk of being even more pro-spam that you, I expressly > allow limited on-topic commercial posts. We've discussed > allowing ads with various restrictions before on listmanagers. This just re-emphasizes the point that every list is different, and any global definitions are likely to run into lists that have good reasons to be considered exceptions. Justice Stewart's definition of pornography (I know it when I see it) is quite applicable to spam, and thus equally difficult to legislate. -- MIke Nolan From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 17:21:59 2003 Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDBFA195A8C for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:21:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from ee-2k.climber.org (12-236-47-35.client.attbi.com[12.236.47.35]) by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with SMTP id <20030304012156002008116ve>; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 01:21:57 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: steveeckert@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 17:09:59 -0800 To: Bob Bish From: SRE Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archive-Number: 200303/28 X-Sequence-Number: 1346 At 03:11 PM 3/3/2003, Bob Bish wrote: >> All the public lists here are configured to >>require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber > >> How does one configure for moderation of the first 3 posts of a new subscriber? > >>Mj2 (the unreleased-but-done rewrite of Majordomo) and Listserv both >>can set "new subscriber" flags > >>Manually. I use Mailman, and have it configured to moderate everyone..... > > It would be helpful, at least to me, if people could mention the list software being used when making statements about features, etc. Didn't we all do that? Majordomo 2 (aka "Mj2), Listserv, and Mailman. Those are the names of the software packages involved, no?? From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 17:33:38 2003 Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.84]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63744195A82 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:33:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-130-135.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.130.135] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18q1JE-0004Bz-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 17:33:32 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 18:33:30 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/29 X-Sequence-Number: 1347 > >> All the public lists here are configured to > >>require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber > > > >> How does one configure for moderation of the first 3 posts of a new > subscriber? > > > >>Mj2 (the unreleased-but-done rewrite of Majordomo) and Listserv both > >>can set "new subscriber" flags > > > >>Manually. I use Mailman, and have it configured to moderate everyone..... > > > > It would be helpful, at least to me, if people could mention the list > software being used when making statements about features, etc. > >Didn't we all do that? Majordomo 2 (aka "Mj2), Listserv, and Mailman. >Those are the names of the software packages involved, no?? Look at the original quote (at the top). If I had known that was not something possible with majordomo 1.x, I would not have asked the question (the 2nd quote down from the top). It was the replies to that question which mentioned the list software being used. Since this list is hosted by GreatCircle, I thought it was a majordomo list (and the majority of majordomo users still run version 1.x). Since it apparently covers several different kinds of list software, I just think such confusion could be avoided. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 17:45:28 2003 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F5A195A81 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:45:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h241jJO77955 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 20:45:19 -0500 (EST) X-Envelope-To: Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 20:45:26 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in Message-ID: <76904953.1046724326@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Archive-Number: 200303/30 X-Sequence-Number: 1348 --On Monday, March 03, 2003 5:09 PM -0800 SRE wrote: > At 03:11 PM 3/3/2003, Bob Bish wrote: >>> All the public lists here are configured to >>> require moderation for the first post or three of a new subscriber >> >>> How does one configure for moderation of the first 3 posts of a new >>> subscriber? >> >>> Mj2 (the unreleased-but-done rewrite of Majordomo) and Listserv both >>> can set "new subscriber" flags >> >>> Manually. I use Mailman, and have it configured to moderate everyone..... >> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if people could mention the list >> software being used when making statements about features, etc. > > Didn't we all do that? Majordomo 2 (aka "Mj2), Listserv, and Mailman. > Those are the names of the software packages involved, no?? I think he means their secret or "porn" names. For example: Majordomo 2 ....... Perl Choker Mailman ........... Mistress Python Listserv .......... "The Little General" etc. It's a reasonable request. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 17:52:54 2003 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (ocker.kanga.nu [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF792195F56 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:52:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=kanga.nu) by dingo.home.kanga.nu with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18q1bt-0001ZP-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 17:52:49 -0800 To: Jeffrey Goldberg Cc: List Managers Mailing list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: Message from Jeffrey Goldberg of "Mon, 03 Mar 2003 16:58:22 PST." References: X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 17:52:49 -0800 Message-ID: <6038.1046742769@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200303/31 X-Sequence-Number: 1349 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:58:22 -0800 (PST) Jeffrey Goldberg wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, murr rhame wrote: >> At the risk of being even more pro-spam that you, I expressly allow >> limited on-topic commercial posts. Many of my members have commercial interests in the field, either for their own careers, or companies they own. I explicitly disallow commercial postings, with the relevant text from the list charter being: Note from the List Owner: The list has a number of members who work professionally in the field. Their presence raises certain concerns for intellectual property, trade secrets, copyrights, etc for the list and for list postings. The below should give an overview of this area, what I expect of list members, commercially affiliated or otherwise, as well as the intended character of the list. As list owner I expect all list members to be responsible for what they post. The rules are obvious: If there is something your company or affiliations does not want publicised, then don't post it to the list. If you see one of your commercial or other partners post something to the list that shouldn't have been, then don't bring it up on the list -- take it to direct email. Raising such issues on the list will be used as an excuse for removing membership. Please do not use this as an alibi to start adding disclaimers to your posts. You are the members on this list, not your companies. If it isn't your opinion don't write it. If you are reporting someone else's opinion, state it as such. If a post is written as a representative of your company or affiliation, then identify it as such. Adding a signature which identifies your affiliation is not enough. That can be too easily automated and is not an explicit statement of representation. A leading paragraph identifying the source or representation placed above all the textual body including the attributions, will do (keep it short). Commercial grandstanding, advertisements, chest puffing, or other forms of promotion are not appreciated on the list and will be rewarded with removal of membership. The list is an expressly non-commercial venue. It is intended as an intelligent and free discussion by peers in the field, both hobbyist and professional. Membership of the list is not a right. You are here as my guests. This is a private list run as a personal contribution to the field. I trust the list's membership to behave accordingly. Posting to the list may be considered analagous to having a conversation in my living room using bull horns while the windows are open and everyone has tape recorders. There is no secrecy, or control of the dissemination of data once it is posted. And on a final note: Attempting to invalidate or discourage a discussion or avenue of investigation on the list because it strays too close to a commercial project's field or other such interest will be deemed an intentional personal insult and due cause for permanent removal from the list along with all associates. Thankyou. J C Lawrence > Me, too. The vendor (and list participant) asked me first. We worked > out a few restrictions, and I agreed. They can make a general > announcement once every 3 months. And if a reasonable answer to some > query would refer to their product, they should feel free to answer > the query (noting who they are). I had a few complaints after the > first announcement, and posted my rationale asking people to complain > to me if they were unhappy with my decision. It was largely > supported. I've had off-list toast-wars (not up to the level of flames) for the few members I have who regularly walk the edge of the line in regard to commercial postings. Those members don't exact cross the line (they can't, its a hand moderated list), but they regularly approach the line and I equally regularly trim their posts back from the line (which is obvious to the list membership as I annotate the messages I trim). >> We've discussed allowing ads with various restrictions before on >> listmanagers. I've averaged less than one abuse of comercial posting >> privileges a year. Most of those abuses have been a matter of >> degree: excessive length, excessive frequency, off-topic yard-sale >> type post from a regular participant. > Again, that was the bulk of my discussion with the vendor in question. My main offender is a local company who was instrumental in arranging hosting for the list servers etc. They are young, eager, aggressive, and media hungry. The CEO has stated that my posting requitements (which are more than just the above) are, "prissy", but has not attempted to act or persuade against them. The company sponsors and collects articles and columns in regard to the field for their website and then advertise those texts on my list in less than a subtle self-promoting manner (even after I've castrated their postings down). This has raised hackles with the rest of the list who freely admit that my handling of the scene as moderator is acceptable, but seem to think that I and the list are being abused by said company persistently walking the borders of acceptability. Funny really. I've got list members who flame when they think someone is abusing or wasting their moderator's time. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 18:32:13 2003 Received: from www.lofcom.com (oldradio.net [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2776A195B31 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:32:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-46-251-038.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.46.251.38]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA16939; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:31:27 -0500 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Sender: admin@lofcom.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:30:48 -0500 To: Bob Bish , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in X-Archive-Number: 200303/32 X-Sequence-Number: 1350 At 8:33 PM -0500 3/3/03, Bob Bish is rumored to have typed: > Since this list is hosted by GreatCircle, I thought it was a majordomo > list (and the majority of majordomo users still run version 1.x). Many people seem to make that mistake, resulting in some threads (not this particular one, certainly, but others could be used as examples) which are not relevant to those of us who prefer not using majordomo. The complete description of this list is on the greatcircle.com website, from which I quote: "The List-Managers mailing list is for discussions of issues related to managing Internet mailing lists, including (but not limited to) methods, mechanisms, techniques, policies, and software (in general; questions about specific software packages should be directed to the mailing list dedicated to that particular package). Technical questions regarding particular software packages (for instance, Majordomo, LISTPROC, ListServ, etc.) are not appropriate for the List-Managers mailing list." Seems pretty straightforward, so I'm not sure how anyone could be confused. But it still frequently happens. Charlie From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 18:46:15 2003 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5B8195AD2 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:46:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-130-135.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.130.135] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18q2RX-0005w9-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 18:46:11 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 19:46:10 -0700 To: Charlie Summers , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/33 X-Sequence-Number: 1351 At 07:30 PM 3/3/2003, Charlie Summers wrote: >"The List-Managers mailing list is for discussions of issues related to >managing Internet mailing lists, including (but not limited to) methods, >mechanisms, techniques, policies, and software (in general; questions about >specific software packages should be directed to the mailing list dedicated >to that particular package). > >Technical questions regarding particular software packages (for instance, >Majordomo, LISTPROC, ListServ, etc.) are not appropriate for the >List-Managers mailing list." > > Seems pretty straightforward, so I'm not sure how anyone could be >confused. Not really. This does not say that this list is for discussion of ANY kind of list software. On the contrary, the implication seems to be the opposite (last phrase of first, and entire second paragraph). Again, being hosted by GreatCircle does imply, at least to me, that it would have something to do with Majordomo. It would be like a mailing list hosted by Ford which is about engine maintenance. One would think it would pertain to Fords. BTW, unlike most people who join mailing lists (), I DID read the above before joining. I still got the idea this was a majordomo-oriented group. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 18:55:51 2003 Received: from [10.0.1.22] (ppp29.vic.padsl.internode.on.net [150.101.208.28]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D87195A8C; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:55:48 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: brent@mycroft.greatcircle.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 13:55:46 +1100 To: Bob Bish , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200303/34 X-Sequence-Number: 1352 At 6:33 PM -0700 3/3/03, Bob Bish wrote: > Since this list is hosted by GreatCircle, I thought it was a majordomo list List-Managers is explicitly software-independent; see . If you want Majordomo-specific stuff, that's what our "Majordomo-Users" list is for. >Since it apparently covers several different kinds of list software, >I just think such confusion could be avoided. Agreed. Some folks aren't careful about that, and I too wish they would be. -Brent -- Brent Chapman From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 18:59:35 2003 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C86A9196153 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:58:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h242wjO81854 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:58:46 -0500 (EST) X-Envelope-To: Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 21:58:52 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in Message-ID: <81311265.1046728732@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Archive-Number: 200303/35 X-Sequence-Number: 1353 --On Monday, March 03, 2003 7:46 PM -0700 Bob Bish wrote: > Not really. This does not say that this list is for discussion of ANY > kind of list software. Any PARTICULAR kind of list software. Since lists are managed in software (plus wetware), general software-ish questions are kind of difficult to avoid. A lot of times the answer to a question of the form "How do I accomplish X" is something like: MJ2 does it this way, Mailman does that, Listserv doesn't do it, if you have further specific questions, see the lists for those packages. > ... Again, being > hosted by GreatCircle does imply, at least to me, that it would have > something to do with Majordomo. It would be like a mailing list hosted > by Ford which is about engine maintenance. One would think it would > pertain to Fords. One would be wrong, and a glance at the archives would confirm it. I am studying flying at a Cessna flying school, but they're teaching me general aviation, not Cessna aviation. BTW, unlike most people who join mailing lists > (), I DID read the above before joining. I still got the idea this was > a majordomo-oriented group. Glad that's fixed. Next issue? From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 19:08:18 2003 Received: from host4.ctc.net (host4.mail.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F6E19624B for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 19:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from katie.vnet.net ([166.82.1.7]) by host4.ctc.net (InterMail vK.4.03.05.03 201-232-132-103 license 2d687b22c655f23831a2faa19b737467) with ESMTP id <20030304030936.SJDS3575.host4@katie.vnet.net> for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 22:09:36 -0500 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2438A807382 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 22:08:10 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 22:08:10 -0500 (EST) From: murr rhame To: List Managers Mailing list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: <6038.1046742769@kanga.nu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/36 X-Sequence-Number: 1354 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, J C Lawrence wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, murr rhame wrote: > > > > At the risk of being even more pro-spam than you, I > > > expressly allow limited on-topic commercial posts. > > Many of my members have commercial interests in the field, > either for their own careers, or companies they own. I > explicitly disallow commercial postings, with the relevant > text from the list charter being: I suspect most lists have at least some subscribers who have a commercial interest in the list topic. Allowing ads is definitely risky. I've always been nervous that vendors might get into an ad war or some such. With no direct costs for broadcasting their ads, there's no strong financial incentive not to post big and post often. Fortunately, most of the vendors on my list are members of the community served. They do have a vested interest in not bearing their ass in public. In practice, I haven't had a significant problem. On rare occasion, I've asked someone to ease off a bit. When I polled my subscribers, the consensus was to keep things as they are (a few low-key ads, on-topic). Your mileage _will_ vary. I'm certain there are many lists where it would be appropriate to ban _all_ advertisements. You smithed a couple of nicely phrase paragraphs (below). With a little list-specific tuning, these could make a nice addition to many list charters. > Commercial grandstanding, advertisements, chest puffing, or other > forms of promotion are not appreciated on the list and will be > rewarded with removal of membership. The list is an expressly > non-commercial venue. It is intended as an intelligent and free > discussion by peers in the field, both hobbyist and professional. > Posting to the list may be considered analogous to having a > conversation in my living room using bull horns while the windows are > open and everyone has tape recorders. There is no secrecy, or control > of the dissemination of data once it is posted. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > My main offender is a local company who was instrumental in > arranging hosting for the list servers etc. They are young, > eager, aggressive, and media hungry. The CEO has stated that > my posting requirements (which are more than just the above) > are, "prissy", but has not attempted to act or persuade > against them. Good that you've stuck to your principles. Super gun-ho business folks can be a bother to reign in. > Funny really. I've got list members who flame when they > think someone is abusing or wasting their moderator's time. That's probably not uncommon. If you run a list well and it provides a useful forum, list members can be very protective. - murr - From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 20:05:48 2003 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EEDD196040 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 20:05:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-130-135.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.130.135] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18q3gY-0000BR-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 20:05:46 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303210019.02af1b90@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 21:05:46 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in In-Reply-To: <81311265.1046728732@[192.168.254.79]> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/37 X-Sequence-Number: 1355 Those who manage mailing lists must certainly understand how the written word can be read very differently by different people. OK, I'm clear on the scope of this list. Since it does encompass any and all kinds of list software, my original suggestion (from which we've strayed a bit) becomes even more valid. Many, if not most, day-to-day list maintenance issues are software-specific. If posters would specify the software used, it would avoid irrelevant questions like mine and save a lot of bandwidth from the resulting tangential threads. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 3 21:37:27 2003 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (ocker.kanga.nu [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4813A196038 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 21:37:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=kanga.nu) by dingo.home.kanga.nu with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18q57E-0003Vo-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 21:37:24 -0800 To: murr rhame Cc: List Managers Mailing list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: Message from murr rhame of "Mon, 03 Mar 2003 22:08:10 EST." References: X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 21:37:24 -0800 Message-ID: <13503.1046756244@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200303/38 X-Sequence-Number: 1356 On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 22:08:10 -0500 (EST) murr rhame wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, J C Lawrence wrote: >>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, murr rhame wrote: > I'm certain there are many lists where it would be appropriate to ban > _all_ advertisements. The most common form of advertising I get, and which I expressly encourage and allow is: Oh yeah, and I'm looking for work|have a great product for this|work at a company which does things like this|wrote the best version of this I ever saw|etc. > You smithed a couple of nicely phrase paragraphs (below). With a > little list-specific tuning, these could make a nice addition to many > list charters. Thanks. Please feel free to adapt and use freely. >> Posting to the list may be considered analogous to having a >> conversation in my living room using bull horns while the windows are >> open and everyone has tape recorders. There is no secrecy, or control >> of the dissemination of data once it is posted. That one is particularly popular with my list members. It gets frequently quoted or referred to off-list. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 05:44:27 2003 Received: from mail.wooz.org (dsl093-082-039.wdc1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.82.39]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 366DC196200 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 05:44:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.wooz.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 1B2261BF668; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 08:44:26 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15972.44473.965486.11127@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 08:44:25 -0500 To: Tom Neff Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in References: <76904953.1046724326@[192.168.254.79]> X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.4 (patch 11) "Native Windows TTY Support" XEmacs Lucid From: bwarsaw@python.org (Barry A. Warsaw) X-Attribution: BAW X-Oblique-Strategy: Steer the motion of a roach (taken from H. Lee) X-Url: http://barry.warsaw.us X-Archive-Number: 200303/39 X-Sequence-Number: 1357 >>>>> "TN" == Tom Neff writes: | Majordomo 2 ....... Perl Choker | Mailman ........... Mistress Python | Listserv .......... "The Little General" Ah, you've stumbled on Mailman's secret motto: "Is that a snake in your pants or are you just happy to hack me?" :) -Barry From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 07:31:04 2003 Received: from yertle.kcilink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [216.194.193.105]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6391959DA for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 07:31:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from onceler.int.kciLink.com (onceler.int.kcilink.com [192.168.7.2]) by yertle.kcilink.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2242178C for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:31:01 -0500 (EST) Received: by onceler.int.kciLink.com (Postfix, from userid 100) id 7D0FE3D11; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:31:01 -0500 (EST) From: Vivek Khera MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15972.50868.824360.768676@onceler.int.kciLink.com> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:31:00 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List software (was: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.4 (patch 12) "Portable Code" XEmacs Lucid X-Archive-Number: 200303/40 X-Sequence-Number: 1358 >>>>> "BB" == Bob Bish writes: >> Seems pretty straightforward, so I'm not sure how anyone could be >> confused. BB> Not really. This does not say that this list is for discussion of ANY BB> kind of list software. On the contrary, the implication seems to BB> be the opposite (last phrase of first, and entire second BB> paragraph). Again, being hosted by GreatCircle does imply, at BB> least to me, that it would have something to do with Majordomo. You assume that everyone out there knows that Majordomo has something to do with GreatCircle. If you never installed MD then you most likely don't know this. I see no such implication in the list description. I don't run majordomo, nor do I plan to, but I joined this list because it is about running lists, not about any particular software. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 08:33:19 2003 Received: from host3.ctc.net (host3.mail.vnet.net [166.82.1.68]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12094195A3E for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 08:33:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from katie.vnet.net ([166.82.1.7]) by host3.ctc.net (InterMail vK.4.03.05.03 201-232-132-103 license 2d687b22c655f23831a2faa19b737467) with ESMTP id <20030304163409.DTAC1975.host3@katie.vnet.net> for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:34:09 -0500 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h24GXBG16249 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:33:11 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:33:11 -0500 (EST) From: murr rhame To: Subject: Re: List software In-Reply-To: <15972.50868.824360.768676@onceler.int.kciLink.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/41 X-Sequence-Number: 1359 When this thread started, someone asked that people mention what software they are using when they discuss a software solution to an administrative problem. For example, not all software packages support moderation status on a per-subscriber basis or a waiting period before new subscribers can post. In my humble opinion, it is appropriate to mention the software you're using if you've found a software solution to a list management problem. On the other hand, I hope this forum does not become a software installation and maintenance support list. As an example, I use Lyris software. If I had a specific problem configuring or working with Lyris, I'd take that question to the Lyris tech support mailing list. Majordomo, Listproc, Mailman, Listserv and other software packages all have forums for tech support. These forums are usually mentioned in the manuals or home pages for their respective software packages. - murr - From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 09:11:05 2003 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E07195A3E for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 09:11:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h24HAxO21713 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 12:11:00 -0500 (EST) X-Envelope-To: Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:11:02 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: List software Message-ID: <132441593.1046779862@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Archive-Number: 200303/42 X-Sequence-Number: 1360 --On Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:33 AM -0500 murr rhame wrote: > When this thread started, someone asked that people mention what > software they are using when they discuss a software solution to > an administrative problem. yeah, but the request was attached to a series of messages where people had done *precisely* that, which is why things took a weird turn. People generally do say what software they use here when they discuss software settings or solutions. (one can check the archives.) It's kind of a non-issue. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 10:35:59 2003 Received: from mail.wooz.org (dsl093-082-039.wdc1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.82.39]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5364195F2C for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 10:35:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.wooz.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id DDA931BF668; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 13:35:59 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15972.61967.768280.457898@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 13:35:59 -0500 To: murr rhame Cc: Subject: Re: List software References: X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.4 (patch 11) "Native Windows TTY Support" XEmacs Lucid From: bwarsaw@python.org (Barry A. Warsaw) X-Attribution: BAW X-Oblique-Strategy: Disciplined self-indulgence X-Url: http://barry.warsaw.us X-Archive-Number: 200303/43 X-Sequence-Number: 1361 >>>>> "mr" == murr rhame writes: mr> Majordomo, Listproc, Mailman, Listserv and other software mr> packages all have forums for tech support. These forums are mr> usually mentioned in the manuals or home pages for their mr> respective software packages. Agreed. One of the reasons I'm on this list is to get some cross-pollination and discuss general techniques that are helpful to folks running lists. Any specific Mailman implementations of those techniques or ideas should be (and are) discussed on the Mailman specific lists. -Barry From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 11:02:12 2003 Received: from albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE1A195A4C for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:02:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-135-80.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.135.80] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18qHg2-0003My-01 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 11:02:11 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030304120001.00b6f3a0@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:02:10 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: List software In-Reply-To: <132441593.1046779862@[192.168.254.79]> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/44 X-Sequence-Number: 1362 At 10:11 AM 3/4/2003, Tom Neff wrote: >--On Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:33 AM -0500 murr rhame wrote: > > When this thread started, someone asked that people mention what > > software they are using when they discuss a software solution to > > an administrative problem. > >yeah, but the request was attached to a series of messages where people had >done *precisely* that, which is why things took a weird turn. Wrong. The question was asked first, prompting the responses mentioning the software used. THIS is the non-issue here. The point remains, it would be helpful (I hate repeating myself) if list software could be mentioned when a post is software-specific. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 11:14:02 2003 Received: from albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A54C19625D for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:14:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-135-80.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.135.80] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18qHrT-0007k9-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 11:13:59 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030304121245.00bafa98@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:14:00 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: List software In-Reply-To: <15972.50868.824360.768676@onceler.int.kciLink.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303182412.02af04d8@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303170910.02c497e0@mail.attbi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303160346.00bb4440@pop.earthlink.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030303193728.02b1cd18@pop.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/45 X-Sequence-Number: 1363 At 08:31 AM 3/4/2003, Vivek Khera wrote: >You assume that everyone out there knows that Majordomo has something >to do with GreatCircle. If you never installed MD then you most >likely don't know this. Unless one does a web search for "majordomo". ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 11:35:26 2003 Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.50]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FF0195F97; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:35:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-135-80.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.135.80] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18qIBw-0003cz-00; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 11:35:08 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030304123209.00bb7da8@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 12:35:08 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, majordomo-users@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: List manager position in NYC open Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/46 X-Sequence-Number: 1364 I was contacted by a Bryan Calka about a list manager position which is open in NYC. I do not know any particulars about this, the software being used, the kind of list or company involved, or anything else. If you would like to contact Bryan, his e-mail address is: bcalka@yahoo.com ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 14:42:40 2003 Received: from www.lofcom.com (oldradio.net [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21EDA1965D6 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 14:42:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-46-251-038.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.46.251.38]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA09795; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 17:42:15 -0500 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <2F9983AB-4DB8-11D7-B134-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> References: <009301c2e1c0$50db1260$21985742@ord351473> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 17:36:48 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists X-Archive-Number: 200303/47 X-Sequence-Number: 1365 Re: the "Cheerful Squeeze" spammers... Looks like they're still at it...the procmail mailing list just distributed a copy of the thing; headers point to Hotmail receiving the thing from (as Chuq noted) an aDSL pool IP at wanadoo.nl. Charlie From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 15:34:55 2003 Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net (mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.48]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C5CB1962D3 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 15:34:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from 66-215-216-48.riv-eres.charterpipeline.net ([66.215.216.48] helo=lehel.goldmark.private) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18qLvv-0006SU-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 15:34:51 -0800 Received: from betty.goldmark.private ([192.168.1.51]) by lehel.goldmark.private with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #1) id 18qLvs-0007pT-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 15:34:48 -0800 Received: from jeffrey (helo=localhost) by betty.goldmark.private with local-esmtp (Exim 4.10) id HB9060-0000CT-00 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 15:34:48 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 15:34:47 -0800 (PST) From: Jeffrey Goldberg X-X-Sender: jeffrey@betty.goldmark.private Reply-To: Jeffrey Goldberg To: List Managers Mailing list Subject: Re: warning: spamming confirmed opt-in lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <009301c2e1c0$50db1260$21985742@ord351473> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/48 X-Sequence-Number: 1366 On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Charlie Summers wrote: > Looks like they're still at it...the procmail mailing list just > distributed a copy of the thing; headers point to Hotmail receiving the thing > from (as Chuq noted) an aDSL pool IP at wanadoo.nl. A list I co-manage seems to have had something similar. A confirmed opt-in from a hotmail address, but the address started bouncing immediately. It looks like hotmail nuked it. Unfortunately, I only have limited control over that system, so I never saw the full subscription and confirmation messages. -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice Hate spam? Boycott MCI! http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/anti-spam/mci/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 16:39:47 2003 Received: from grouse.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grouse.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.116]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5E2E196286; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 16:39:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-135-80.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.135.80] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by grouse.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18qMwX-0000OR-00; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 16:39:33 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030304173603.028ba330@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:39:33 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, majordomo-users@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Mail loops Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/49 X-Sequence-Number: 1367 Is anyone else getting a huge number of bounce messages all saying "too many hops", "mail loop detected", etc? I received over 500 of them in a 50-minute period! They started suddenly about 2 hours ago (maybe around 5:30pm EST). I need to know if this is a generalized problem (perhaps a hacking or virus attack on the Internet as a whole) or if there's a problem on our server's end. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 4 17:09:26 2003 Received: from conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net (conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.54]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557CB19643F; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 17:09:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-135-80.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.135.80] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18qNPQ-0004sa-00; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:09:24 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030304175358.00bb4390@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 18:09:23 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com, majordomo-users@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Mail loops - Found the problem Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/50 X-Sequence-Number: 1368 It affected only one of my lists and was tracked down to one particular e-mail address on that list. It was at "princelaw.com" in case any other addresses there are doing the same thing and anyone here has one on a mailing list. The firewall and SMTP server at Prince Law (princelaw.com) are in a retransmission loop. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 07:38:50 2003 Received: from host4.ctc.net (host4.mail.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9AC195A7B for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:38:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from katie.vnet.net ([166.82.1.7]) by host4.ctc.net (InterMail vK.4.03.05.03 201-232-132-103 license 2d687b22c655f23831a2faa19b737467) with ESMTP id <20030305154008.CNM3575.host4@katie.vnet.net> for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:40:08 -0500 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h25FchF04019 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:38:43 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:38:43 -0500 (EST) From: murr rhame To: Subject: Off-list Revenge In-Reply-To: <15972.61967.768280.457898@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/51 X-Sequence-Number: 1369 Just got a message from a subscriber who claims that he was fired in part as a result of a dispute from one of my lists. The guy who was fired made a rude remark. The other party complained to the fired guy's employer. Fired guy was subscribed using his work account. That's as much as I know so far... Anyone had a similar situation they are willing to discuss? - murr - From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 10:40:48 2003 Received: from celery.tssi.com (celery.tssi.com [198.147.197.6]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 652A5195F67 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:40:45 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 2399 invoked by uid 1000); 5 Mar 2003 18:40:43 -0000 Message-ID: <20030305184043.2398.qmail@celery.tssi.com> From: nolan@celery.tssi.com Subject: Off-list Revenge (fwd) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 12:40:43 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/52 X-Sequence-Number: 1370 > Just got a message from a subscriber who claims that he was fired > in part as a result of a dispute from one of my lists. The guy > who was fired made a rude remark. The other party complained to > the fired guy's employer. Fired guy was subscribed using his > work account. That's as much as I know so far... Anyone had a > similar situation they are willing to discuss? I know of someone who quit his job over the issue of access to e-mail for non-business purposes, and I've heard of several threatened lawsuits arising from list flame wars, but so far as I know none were filed. (I've been threatened with lawsuits a few times as the List Manager, too.) I know of at least one case of an ISP being notified about a flame war that moved over to private e-mail which resulted in the account being deactivated. Most of the time, though, the ISP does nothing. -- Mike Nolan From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 11:32:44 2003 Received: from pageplanet.com (england.pageplanet.com [4.38.75.30]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853EE195A7C for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:32:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.4.0.14] (199.46.252.85) by pageplanet.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.1.4); Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:32:26 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: tcora1@mail.ibmwr.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:33:46 -0500 To: murr rhame From: Tom Coradeschi Subject: Re: Off-list Revenge Cc: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200303/53 X-Sequence-Number: 1371 At 10:38 AM -0500 03/05/2003, murr rhame wrote: >Just got a message from a subscriber who claims that he was fired >in part as a result of a dispute from one of my lists. The guy >who was fired made a rude remark. The other party complained to >the fired guy's employer. Fired guy was subscribed using his >work account. That's as much as I know so far... Anyone had a >similar situation they are willing to discuss? Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Two of us were attacked in such a manner, neither of us lost our jobs, but we did have plenty of 'splaining to do to our respective employers. This was circa mid-1995, IIRC. I now flame only from my ISP account:-} tom coradeschi <+> tcora@skylands.ibmwr.org Skylands (NJ) BMW Riders <+> From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 11:47:36 2003 Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74F9B195A50 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:47:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h25JlYYv005135 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:47:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:47:30 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h25JlSQ27900; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:47:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:47:29 -0800 Subject: Re: Off-list Revenge Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: murr rhame , To: Tom Coradeschi From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <4C35FCEA-4F43-11D7-8B41-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/54 X-Sequence-Number: 1372 On Wednesday, March 5, 2003, at 11:33 AM, Tom Coradeschi wrote: > Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Two of us were attacked in > such a manner, neither of us lost our jobs, but we did have plenty of > 'splaining to do to our respective employers. This was circa mid-1995, > IIRC. I now flame only from my ISP account:-} > been on both sides. as an admin and user, I've told trolls to cut it out or risk me trying to get them in as much trouble as I can -- and have at times done so, with moderate success. been threatened, and occasionally I've issued a formal apology (because when I calmed down I admitted I was being a jerk), and occasionally my boss has had rude names for the person doing the complaining (because when I calmed down he agreed that other person was being a jerk). And on one occasion, lawyers were threatened, until I pointed out my next email was going directly to his management, since he threatened me on a corporate email address. and suddenly we were best friends again. this ain't new. this stuff happened a lot in the 80's on usenet. -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech, Apple IS&T E-mail systems chuq@apple.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 11:47:53 2003 Received: from houston.wolf.com (houston.wolf.com [216.40.226.30]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465B81962D3 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:47:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 15313 invoked by uid 511); 5 Mar 2003 19:47:51 -0000 Message-ID: <20030305194751.15312.qmail@houston.wolf.com> References: <20030305184043.2398.qmail@celery.tssi.com> In-Reply-To: <20030305184043.2398.qmail@celery.tssi.com> From: "Angel Rivera" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com (List Managers) Subject: Re: Off-list Revenge Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 19:47:51 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/55 X-Sequence-Number: 1373 nolan@celery.tssi.com writes: >> Just got a message from a subscriber who claims that he was fired >> in part as a result of a dispute from one of my lists. The guy >> who was fired made a rude remark. The other party complained to >> the fired guy's employer. Fired guy was subscribed using his >> work account. That's as much as I know so far... Anyone had a >> similar situation they are willing to discuss? > > I know of someone who quit his job over the issue of access to e-mail > for non-business purposes, and I've heard of several threatened lawsuits > arising from list flame wars, but so far as I know none were filed. > (I've been threatened with lawsuits a few times as the List Manager, too.) > > I know of at least one case of an ISP being notified about a flame war > that moved over to private e-mail which resulted in the account being > deactivated. Most of the time, though, the ISP does nothing. But when you do it from a work account, whether you like it or not you can carry and have an effect on the corporate image. We have written e-mail standards we have to comply with. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 12:14:28 2003 Received: from minneapolis.mnjazz.com (circles.radparker.com [209.98.250.78]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1119F195FAF for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 12:09:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mnjazz.com (localhost.mnjazz.com [127.0.0.1]) by minneapolis.mnjazz.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569D010394 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:12:52 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3E66596B.A82A1CB6@mnjazz.com> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 14:09:15 -0600 From: Al Iverson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List Managers Subject: gateway.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/56 X-Sequence-Number: 1374 Does gateway.net still exist? It seems to be owned by AOL now. Are there still any valid email addresses at gateway.net any more? Regards, Al Iverson -- Al Iverson -- iverson@mnjazz.com -- Minneapolis, Minnesota My pockets hurt. http://www.spamresource.com/ Support Jazz in Minnesota! -- http://www.mnjazz.com/ All opinions are mine alone unless I state otherwise. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 5 13:09:38 2003 Received: from host4.ctc.net (host4.mail.vnet.net [166.82.1.69]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F2A1959F0 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 13:09:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from katie.vnet.net ([166.82.1.7]) by host4.ctc.net (InterMail vK.4.03.05.03 201-232-132-103 license 2d687b22c655f23831a2faa19b737467) with ESMTP id <20030305211056.FPYF3575.host4@katie.vnet.net> for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:10:56 -0500 Received: from localhost (murr@localhost) by katie.vnet.net (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h25L9Uq07921 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:09:30 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: katie.vnet.net: murr owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 16:09:30 -0500 (EST) From: murr rhame To: "(List Managers)" Subject: Re: Off-list Revenge In-Reply-To: <20030305194751.15312.qmail@houston.wolf.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/57 X-Sequence-Number: 1375 On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Angel Rivera wrote: > But when you do it from a work account, whether you like it > or not you can carry and have an effect on the corporate > image. We have written e-mail standards we have to comply > with. Yup. I don't have a great deal of sympathy when someone gets busted for using company facilities in an approved manner. I have seen a few other instances where off-list politics and squabbles fell into my admin lap, so to speak. One was an attempt by an organization's leadership to censor the list... Resolved by several minor policy changes. In another case, one list member screwed another during an off-line deal that went sour. A friend of the guy who got screwed asked me to remove the "bad guy" from the list. Turned out both of the combatants had dirty hands. I'm glad that I had declined to get involved. - murr - From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 00:42:00 2003 Received: from shedevil.annepmitchell.com (adsl-64-165-36-235.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.165.36.235]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3876195A5B for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:41:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from annie (windows.annepmitchell.com [192.168.0.8]) by shedevil.annepmitchell.com (8.11.6/8.11.4) with ESMTP id h268dHi00228 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:39:17 -0800 (PST) X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . From: "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." Organization: Habeas - the email you want To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 00:41:56 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Message-ID: <3E669954.23636.88E2625@localhost> In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> References: <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) X-Archive-Number: 200303/58 X-Sequence-Number: 1376 Wow..I just saw it for myself...someone signed up to a confirmed- opt-in group which I moderate (yahoo group) specifically for the purpose of spamming it (pron spam, too). It has been suggested that this can be done by some sort of robot - anybody know how that works? Anne From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 01:39:03 2003 Received: from planet.fef.com (unknown [166.90.172.7]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C170A195FDD for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:39:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from planet.fef.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by planet.fef.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/check_local-5) with ESMTP id h269coim021881; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:38:50 -0800 Received: (from alvin@localhost) by planet.fef.com (8.12.8/8.12.4/Submit) id h269coej021880; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:38:50 -0800 From: Alvin Oga Message-Id: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list To: amitchell@habeas.com (Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:38:49 -0800 (PST) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <3E669954.23636.88E2625@localhost> from "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." at Mar 06, 2003 12:41:56 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/59 X-Sequence-Number: 1377 > Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote: > > Wow..I just saw it for myself...someone signed up to a confirmed- > opt-in group which I moderate (yahoo group) specifically for the > purpose of spamming it (pron spam, too). > > It has been suggested that this can be done by some sort of robot - > anybody know how that works? trivial... see basic psuedo code outline below c ya alvin # # Create a spam-bot # 0th event - someone has to setup up a "spambot" account with an auto-responder on a mail server 1st event - send out initial email to subscribe from spambot acct ( somebody that wants to send spam does something ) echo subscribe | mail -s subscribe list-request@foo.com 2nd event - receive autoreply/confirmation from xx-subscribe ( normally, one expect a human to reply/confirm it ) 3rd event - but for us, the spammer's autoreponder replies ( remember we have an autoresponder setup on "spambot" ) - a good list manager sw will be able to defeat this faked autoconfirmation from a supposed human confirmation 4th event - confirmation received from xx-subscribe ( no reason why it would be denied by the list ) grep list@foo.com /var/log/maillog | wc -l if ( have at least 2 of um ... we're set to go ) 5th event - send spam ( a few minutes later ... send the spam ) mail -s "make $10M today spam" < /tmp/spam-2-send.txt 6th event - unsubscribe ( few minutes later ... after confirming mail was sent ) echo unsubscribe | mail -s unsubscribe list-request@foo.com # # done .. sell script for $100M From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 07:03:50 2003 Received: from cyclone.muddypuppies.com (h-64-105-135-5.LSANCA54.covad.net [64.105.135.5]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403F1195A0E; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 07:03:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (bob@localhost) by cyclone.muddypuppies.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id h26F3lx15136; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 07:03:47 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 07:03:47 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Myers X-X-Sender: bob@cyclone.muddypuppies.com To: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list In-Reply-To: <20030306132007.CB89019609A@mycroft.greatcircle.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/60 X-Sequence-Number: 1378 > Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 01:38:49 -0800 (PST) > From: Alvin Oga > To: amitchell@habeas.com (Anne P. Mitchell, Esq.) > > > Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote: > > > > Wow..I just saw it for myself...someone signed up to a confirmed- > > opt-in group which I moderate (yahoo group) specifically for the > > purpose of spamming it (pron spam, too). > > > > It has been suggested that this can be done by some sort of robot - > > anybody know how that works? > > trivial... see basic psuedo code outline below > This is partly why I hacked up my running copy of Majordomo to require a few approved messages before allowing unrestricted posting privileges. Any new subscriber who tries to post gets their messages bounced to the list-owner until a list-owner-configurable number of messages has been approved - usually 2 or 3. It prevents this kind of problem, as well as other obnoxious newbie problems. I really think newbie filters are a good idea, and hope that other MLMs implement them. I'm pretty sure a few MLMs do, but I'm not sure which ones. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 07:15:59 2003 Received: from one.elistx.com (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5FB5195F1D for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 07:15:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (one.elistx.com [209.116.252.130]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0HBC000JT2FN4R@eListX.com> for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:16:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:16:07 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: James M Galvin Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list In-reply-to: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> To: Alvin Oga Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> X-Archive-Number: 200303/61 X-Sequence-Number: 1379 On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Alvin Oga wrote: 3rd event - but for us, the spammer's autoreponder replies ( remember we have an autoresponder setup on "spambot" ) - a good list manager sw will be able to defeat this faked autoconfirmation from a supposed human confirmation Would you please describe how one could detect that a message came from a human and not an autoresponder? Jim From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 07:40:25 2003 Received: from mail3.panix.com (mail3.panix.com [166.84.1.74]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC101961B1 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 07:40:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ord351473 (localhost.panix.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35B0398AAC for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:40:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 09:39:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Archive-Number: 200303/62 X-Sequence-Number: 1380 When Alvin Oga wrote, > - a good list manager sw will be able to defeat this > faked autoconfirmation from a supposed human confirmation Jim Galvin asked, | Would you please describe how one could detect that a message came from | a human and not an autoresponder? Perhaps to confirm one would have to follow some instructions other than just replying. (Such a requirement would lock out attempted subscriptions by humans who won't read instructions, but that might be a good thing.) For example, autoresponders are likely to quote back (a) none of the received text, (b) all of the received text, or (c) a certain amount from the top of the received text. So if the applicant is sent two confirmation codes and in order to confirm has to return only the lower one without the upper one, a bot is likely to fail. Or if the confirmation code needs to be edited slightly -- say it is twelve characters long, and it has to be sent back with the first five characters moved to the end -- a bot is likely to fail. And of course, so are 98% of human applicants. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 09:39:19 2003 Received: from yancy.pkiclue.com (yancy.pkiclue.com [209.172.115.117]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46B1D195A0E for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 09:39:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from vo.cnchost.com (IDENT:root@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by yancy.pkiclue.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA32736 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 09:44:56 -0800 Message-ID: <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 09:41:40 -0800 From: JC Dill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> In-Reply-To: <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/63 X-Sequence-Number: 1381 David W. Tamkin wrote: > When Alvin Oga wrote, > >> - a good list manager sw will be able to defeat this >> faked autoconfirmation from a supposed human confirmation > > Jim Galvin asked, > > | Would you please describe how one could detect that a message came from > | a human and not an autoresponder? > > Perhaps to confirm one would have to follow some instructions other than just > replying. (Such a requirement would lock out attempted subscriptions by > humans who won't read instructions, but that might be a good thing.) For > example, autoresponders are likely to quote back (a) none of the received > text, (b) all of the received text, or (c) a certain amount from the top of > the received text. So if the applicant is sent two confirmation codes and in > order to confirm has to return only the lower one without the upper one, a bot > is likely to fail. Or if the confirmation code needs to be edited slightly -- > say it is twelve characters long, and it has to be sent back with the first > five characters moved to the end -- a bot is likely to fail. > > And of course, so are 98% of human applicants. Which makes it very odd that you would consider this "good list management software". If list management software could distinguish between a reply-bot and a human, for it to be considered "good" it would have to do it in a way that doesn't foil the normal human subscription confirmation process. IMHO, such a software product doesn't exist, because there is no way (via text email) to make the process both easy for the human and difficult for a reply-bot. That is why many large free sites are using "type in the word you see in the graphic below" to thwart subscribe-bots, but this technique doesn't work in a plain-text email world. Will this be the end for "plain text email for those with no web access" mailing lists? jc From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 10:00:13 2003 Received: from folkserv.net (64.90.176.26.nyinternet.net [64.90.176.26]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 942401959DC for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:00:11 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by folkserv.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) id h26I0Avx027198 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:00:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by folkserv.net (8.12.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h26I0AYW027158 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:00:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from tneff@grassyhill.net) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 13:00:10 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Message-ID: <308187921.1046955610@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 1.0.12.3 - (http://pldaniels.com/inflex/) X-Archive-Number: 200303/64 X-Sequence-Number: 1382 --On Thursday, March 06, 2003 9:41 AM -0800 JC Dill wrote: > Will this be the end for "plain text email for those with no web access" > mailing lists? Maybe one useful approach would be to distinguish between kinds of confirmations. When somebody joins you can offer them a couple of ways to confirm. If they choose a Web based one, like the "word in graphic" test, then they are confirmed 100% and enjoy full privileges. If they choose a text-reply confirm, then manager approval is needed to complete the process, or if the text confirm leads to immediate membership, then all postings from the new member are held for moderator approval at first, like the feature in Mailman 2.1. You could come up with a library of text-based challenges, but it might be counter-engineered. There is also this method: JxIA0KDQo8aHRtb 9uXCBjb2xvXj0iI RybX5nPkRXTidUI MgSUXgSEXTVE9SW NlbnRXcXI+PGZvb wgc2FuXy1zZXJpZ JhdGVXbXJ0Z2FnZ 1heSXiZSXhcyBsb 9vcXBjcmVXaXQgb BnXyB1cCEgXC9mb NpemU9IjIiIGZhY What letter do you see in the above block? From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 10:02:19 2003 Received: from sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01.attbi.com [204.127.202.61]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6934A1965B2 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:02:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from ee-2k.climber.org (12-236-47-35.client.attbi.com[12.236.47.35]) by sccrmhc01.attbi.com (sccrmhc01) with SMTP id <2003030618020600100j88vqe>; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:02:06 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030306095911.02374b20@mail.attbi.com> X-Sender: steveeckert@mail.attbi.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:01:42 -0800 To: JC Dill From: SRE Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> References: <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archive-Number: 200303/65 X-Sequence-Number: 1383 At 09:41 AM 3/6/2003, JC Dill wrote: >Will this be the end for "plain text email for those with no web access" mailing lists? No, I and others have mentioned the option of "initial per-user moderation" for new subscribers. Whether that moderation (list owner approval of posts) is removed automatically or by explicit action of the owner, spammers just don't have the patience or capability to understand each list charter and post something relevant and on-topic. By the second useful post, you can be sure it's not a spammer and remove the posting approval (moderation) flag. I've personally done this (with 100% perfect results if you don't count those who get pissed off about me having to approve their first post) with ListServ and Majordomo2. It's not in Majordomo 1.x as far as I know. SRE mailto:eckert@climber.org | http://www.climber.org/eckert/ Info on peak climbing email lists mailto:info@climber.org Civility suffers much in the name of liberty taken in vain. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 10:32:57 2003 Received: from yancy.pkiclue.com (yancy.pkiclue.com [209.172.115.117]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F00F1959DC for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:32:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from vo.cnchost.com (IDENT:root@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by yancy.pkiclue.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA00485 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:38:41 -0800 Message-ID: <3E6794EC.8090503@vo.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:35:24 -0800 From: JC Dill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> <5.1.0.14.0.20030306095911.02374b20@mail.attbi.com> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030306095911.02374b20@mail.attbi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/66 X-Sequence-Number: 1384 SRE wrote: > At 09:41 AM 3/6/2003, JC Dill wrote: > >> Will this be the end for "plain text email for those with no web >> access" mailing lists? > No, I and others have mentioned the option of "initial per-user > moderation" for new subscribers. Whether that moderation (list owner > approval of posts) is removed automatically or by explicit action of > the owner, spammers just don't have the patience or capability to > understand each list charter and post something relevant and > on-topic. By the second useful post, you can be sure it's not a > spammer and remove the posting approval (moderation) flag. > > I've personally done this (with 100% perfect results if you don't > count those who get pissed off about me having to approve their first > post) This solution doesn't work for high volume lists and especially for lists where being able to post promptly is an important feature of the list (such as a list for users of network infrastructure equipment). The list manager can't be there 24x7 to approve posts, and if the list isn't immediately available to legitimate on-topic posters with an urgent question, then the list will slowly diminish as other lists (that don't suffer from this delay) are created and touted as a better resource. Perhaps it would work to have initial moderation status set only for known "freemail" addresses that are subscribed thru email, and waiving that moderation when the addresses are subscribed with a web graphic challenge process. Hmmm... I know that eBay has a rather substantial list of known freemail domains, and that if you have one of those email addresses you have to supply a credit card before you can use that address (as a buyer or seller) with eBay. Does anyone here know of a canonical list of freemail domains? jc From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 10:49:46 2003 Received: from turkey.mail.pas.earthlink.net (turkey.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.126]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0EC196506 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:49:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-135-34.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.135.34] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by turkey.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18r0R6-0001BQ-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 10:49:44 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030306114613.00b7d320@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:49:45 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list In-Reply-To: <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/67 X-Sequence-Number: 1385 At 08:39 AM 3/6/2003, David W. Tamkin wrote: >autoresponders are likely to quote back (a) none of the received >text, (b) all of the received text, or (c) a certain amount from the top of >the received text. So if the applicant is sent two confirmation codes and in >order to confirm has to return only the lower one without the upper one, a bot >is likely to fail. Or if the confirmation code needs to be edited slightly -- >say it is twelve characters long, and it has to be sent back with the first >five characters moved to the end -- a bot is likely to fail. With majordomo 1.x, replying to the confirmation message doesn't work. It usually puts ">" in front of the text to show it's quoted and that alone will cause majordomo to reject it (unknown command ">"). Also, the confirmation code is not the first line of the quoted text, which would also cause majordomo to reject it. There are plenty of humans who make this mistake. ...Bob From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 10:57:29 2003 Received: from mail-out2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.254.0.51]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6872B19664B for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:57:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out2.apple.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h26IvRnR001923 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:57:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:57:25 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h26IvOQ10772; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:57:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 10:57:23 -0800 Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com To: JC Dill From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <3E6794EC.8090503@vo.cnchost.com> Message-Id: <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/68 X-Sequence-Number: 1386 On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 10:35 AM, JC Dill wrote: > Perhaps it would work to have initial moderation status set only for > known "freemail" addresses that are subscribed thru email, so how do you handle the case where someone sets up a disposable domain, scripts subscriptions to 1000 mailing lists over a period of a few weeks, and then plows out email to those lists from the domain until the lists figure out what's going on and get the domain blackholed or shut down? right now, they're experimenting with hotmail because it's easy. But if a spam haus has decided to target lists through scripted confirms adn the like, there's a big exposure here. Think of the kind of zombie DDOS hacks IRC servers have seen, where weeks of quiet prep work are put into a short period of highly parallel action... -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 11:22:05 2003 Received: from stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net (stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.188]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F87E195AE2 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:22:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from 216-240-38-250.ip.idiom.com ([216.240.38.250] helo=APTITUDE) by stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18r0wL-0001x9-00; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 11:22:01 -0800 From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: "'Tom Neff'" , Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:22:23 -0800 Message-ID: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94F9@sfdc.us.sychron.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 In-Reply-To: <308187921.1046955610@[192.168.254.79]> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-ELNK-Trace: 95a5daa1092a4a38d780f4a490ca69564776905774d2ac4b0e79d3d4f285fa9db360524137592795350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Archive-Number: 200303/69 X-Sequence-Number: 1387 > From: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com > [mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Tom Neff > > Maybe one useful approach would be to distinguish between > kinds of confirmations. When somebody joins you can offer > them a couple of ways to confirm. If they choose a Web based > one, like the "word in graphic" test, then they are confirmed > 100% and enjoy full privileges. Which is perfect, if they're not visually-impaired... > There is also this method: > > JxIA0KDQo8aHRtb > 9uXCBjb2xvXj0iI > RybX5nPkRXTidUI > MgSUXgSEXTVE9SW > NlbnRXcXI+PGZvb > wgc2FuXy1zZXJpZ > JhdGVXbXJ0Z2FnZ > 1heSXiZSXhcyBsb > 9vcXBjcmVXaXQgb > BnXyB1cCEgXC9mb > NpemU9IjIiIGZhY > > What letter do you see in the above block? None. Is this some sort of optiocal trick? Many of us can't see those. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 11:59:56 2003 Received: from smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.61]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E97CD1960FA for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from 209-122-235-227.s2418.apx2.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com ([209.122.235.227] helo=stanley-abysatu.shelltown.net) by smtp02.mrf.mail.rcn.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #4) id 18r1Wx-0000bN-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:59:52 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030306144312.00a97398@pop.rcn.com> X-Sender: sr50@pop.rcn.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:59:48 -0500 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Stan Ryckman Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list In-Reply-To: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94F9@sfdc.us.sychron.com > References: <308187921.1046955610@[192.168.254.79]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/70 X-Sequence-Number: 1388 > > There is also this method: > > > > JxIA0KDQo8aHRtb > > 9uXCBjb2xvXj0iI > > RybX5nPkRXTidUI > > MgSUXgSEXTVE9SW > > NlbnRXcXI+PGZvb > > wgc2FuXy1zZXJpZ > > JhdGVXbXJ0Z2FnZ > > 1heSXiZSXhcyBsb > > 9vcXBjcmVXaXQgb > > BnXyB1cCEgXC9mb > > NpemU9IjIiIGZhY > > > > What letter do you see in the above block? > >None. Is this some sort of optiocal trick? Many of us can't see those. I stared, and then I think maybe it's an X because there are a lot of X's going diagonally. But I could be wrong. There are easier text challenges for humans than those proposed so far on this list... * What color is the sky? * What do you get when you add 3 and four? * A valuable friend is said to be "worth his weight" in what? * What is the second letter in your email address? * What animal is said to go "moo?" * List three words that start with the letter T. (Multiple choice is possible, if you think those are too tough. But it's not required to permanently ban someone from the list if they get it wrong. And if some spammer thinks it worth his time to automate guessing of all possible simple questions, I'd be very surprised... much more likely, they'd just verify "by hand" each subscription, which also defeats the graphic JPEG-of-a-word.) Stan From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 12:48:00 2003 Received: from mail-out1.apple.com (mail-out1.apple.com [17.254.0.52]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC955195AB5 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:47:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id h26KlwYv020186 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:47:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv2.apple.com (scv2.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:47:45 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h26KljQ07593; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:47:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:47:44 -0800 Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com To: Stan Ryckman From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030306144312.00a97398@pop.rcn.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/71 X-Sequence-Number: 1389 On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 11:59 AM, Stan Ryckman wrote: > I stared, and then I think maybe it's an X because there are a lot of > X's going diagonally. But I could be wrong. > > There are easier text challenges for humans than those proposed > so far on this list... > > * What color is the sky? and if your user doesn't speak english, or is english limited? and given how these 'fixes' are getting more obscure, baroque and technically suspect, how is all this stuff somehow less intrusive and better for the user than whitelisting role accounts, anyway? -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ Very funny, Scotty. Now beam my clothes down here, will you? From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 12:56:07 2003 Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.1.72]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38A90195B17 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:56:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from ord351473 (localhost.panix.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0802E48F7F for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 15:56:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <009401c2e422$ad72d440$21985742@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 14:55:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Archive-Number: 200303/72 X-Sequence-Number: 1390 JC Dill always seems to think I mean something other than what I wrote: | Which makes it very odd that you would consider this "good list | management software". Who considers it good? I was throwing out possibilities ... both in the sense of lobbing them to the list and in that of discarding them. I stated explicitly that those two examples would prevent most humans from confirming, so obviously I think they're damn lousy. | If list management software could distinguish | between a reply-bot and a human, for it to be considered "good" it would | have to do it in a way that doesn't foil the normal human subscription | confirmation process. Exactly. I never said otherwise. Alvin Oga said "good list management software" could make the distinction, and I was trying to come up with some ways, but the two I had aren't good and aren't worth trying. However, if they help someone else here to think of a way that *is* good, then they were worth mentioning. | IMHO, such a software product doesn't exist, | because there is no way (via text email) to make the process both easy | for the human and difficult for a reply-bot. "There is no way" is going a little too far. There is as yet no way, but it hasn't been proved impossible. The next idea I had right after my earlier post was to ask a simple question, but since then Stan Ryckman has covered that. Tom Neff gave an example of non-HTML graphics: : There is also this method: : : JxIA0KDQo8aHRtb : 9uXCBjb2xvXj0iI : RybX5nPkRXTidUI : MgSUXgSEXTVE9SW : NlbnRXcXI+PGZvb : wgc2FuXy1zZXJpZ : JhdGVXbXJ0Z2FnZ : 1heSXiZSXhcyBsb : 9vcXBjcmVXaXQgb : BnXyB1cCEgXC9mb : NpemU9IjIiIGZhY : : What letter do you see in the above block? I saw nothing at first. Then I switched to a fixed-pitch font and still saw nothing. A second fixed-pitch font, still nothing. There's the catch: to make sure the reader has the right view, you have to sacrifice plain text and instead use some markup to specify a display font. Finally I traced all the capital X's and saw that they form a capital X, but if my earlier examples are too involved for the typical human reader, this one is scarcely any better. Few people would bother, and all told I think this method is no better than those I tossed out earlier. Dill again, on the suggestion of moderating the first few posts from each subscriber: | This solution doesn't work for high volume lists and especially for | lists where being able to post promptly is an important feature of the | list (such as a list for users of network infrastructure equipment). | The list manager can't be there 24x7 to approve posts, and if the list | isn't immediately available to legitimate on-topic posters with an | urgent question, then the list will slowly diminish as other lists (that | don't suffer from this delay) are created and touted as a better resource. On non-urgent lists it works well; if the volume is high, appoint one or two comoderators, ideally spread out over the world's time zones. If the list's nature is such that subscribers must be able to post immediately, you'll remain at risk for manually dispatched spam even if you find a way to stop the bots, but you may decide that it's worth tolerating the occasional incident in order to keep the benefit that that list gets from immediate posting privileges. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 13:19:56 2003 Received: from folkserv.net (64.90.176.26.nyinternet.net [64.90.176.26]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E11D2195ABE for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:19:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by folkserv.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) id h26LJrq4032453 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:19:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by folkserv.net (8.12.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h26LJqYW032414 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:19:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from tneff@grassyhill.net) Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:19:52 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Message-ID: <320169968.1046967592@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <009401c2e422$ad72d440$21985742@ord351473> References: <009401c2e422$ad72d440$21985742@ord351473> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-scanner: scanned by Inflex 1.0.12.3 - (http://pldaniels.com/inflex/) X-Archive-Number: 200303/73 X-Sequence-Number: 1391 --On Thursday, March 06, 2003 2:55 PM -0600 "David W. Tamkin" wrote: > Tom Neff gave an example of non-HTML graphics: > > : There is also this method: > : > : JxIA0KDQo8aHRtb > : 9uXCBjb2xvXj0iI > : RybX5nPkRXTidUI > : MgSUXgSEXTVE9SW > : NlbnRXcXI+PGZvb > : wgc2FuXy1zZXJpZ > : JhdGVXbXJ0Z2FnZ > : 1heSXiZSXhcyBsb > : 9vcXBjcmVXaXQgb > : BnXyB1cCEgXC9mb > : NpemU9IjIiIGZhY > : > : What letter do you see in the above block? > > I saw nothing at first. Then I switched to a fixed-pitch font and still saw > nothing. A second fixed-pitch font, still nothing. There's the catch: to > make sure the reader has the right view, you have to sacrifice plain text > and instead use some markup to specify a display font. > > Finally I traced all the capital X's and saw that they form a capital X, but > if my earlier examples are too involved for the typical human reader, this > one is scarcely any better. Few people would bother, and all told I think > this method is no better than those I tossed out earlier. In my own lame defense :) I just hacked that together - I actually stole a rectangle of random Base64 from some Zip file someone sent me and used it as the palimpsest. I agree the results are pretty bad. I had seen other examples of this kind of multiline pattern recognition that were a lot easier - but they used dots and other low-profile characters for the "background." I thought that might be a bit easy to reverse engineer so I tried the random characters. See if you can read this: .,.._...,_,..,, _,X..,,_,,X,_,. .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. .,..X,..X..._.. .,,,.X,X.+...,, ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. .,,..X,X._._.,. _,,.X,..X,,,.,, _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, .,X,._,..,X._,, .,,,._.,.,...,. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 13:42:58 2003 Received: from stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net (stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.188]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744FD195ABE for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:42:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 216-240-38-250.ip.idiom.com ([216.240.38.250] helo=APTITUDE) by stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18r38c-0005g4-00; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 13:42:50 -0800 From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" To: "'Tom Neff'" , Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:43:11 -0800 Message-ID: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94FF@sfdc.us.sychron.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024 In-Reply-To: <320169968.1046967592@[192.168.254.79]> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-ELNK-Trace: 95a5daa1092a4a38d780f4a490ca69564776905774d2ac4b34aacc9b072b01255e539c2ba61b15ad350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Archive-Number: 200303/74 X-Sequence-Number: 1392 > [mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Tom Neff > See if you can read this: > > .,.._...,_,..,, > _,X..,,_,,X,_,. > .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. > .,..X,..X..._.. > .,,,.X,X.+...,, > ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. > .,,..X,X._._.,. > _,,.X,..X,,,.,, > _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, > .,X,._,..,X._,, > .,,,._.,.,...,. Yes, but members of our lists for blind glbt folk won't... From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 14:02:42 2003 Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.1.72]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6219B195A11 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 14:02:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ord351473 (localhost.panix.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049E548731 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 17:02:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00e001c2e42b$f22da700$21985742@ord351473> From: "David W. Tamkin" To: References: <009401c2e422$ad72d440$21985742@ord351473> <320169968.1046967592@[192.168.254.79]> Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 16:01:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Archive-Number: 200303/75 X-Sequence-Number: 1393 Tom Neff followed up, | See if you can read this: | | .,.._...,_,..,, | _,X..,,_,,X,_,. | .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. | .,..X,..X..._.. | .,,,.X,X.+...,, | ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. | .,,..X,X._._.,. | _,,.X,..X,,,.,, | _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, | .,X,._,..,X._,, | .,,,._.,.,...,. In a fixed-pitch font it's plain as day. In a proportional one, all bets are off. You could restrict your characters to those of almost the same width but varying densities, <_?<_?<_+<_?<_? =_#########<_?_ <_?><_?=_#<_?=_ <_?_+<_?#<_+<_? <_+=_>_#<_?<_?_ <_?<_?#<_?<_+=_ <_?=_#_~<_+<_?_ <_?_#<_+=<_?<_? <_+#<_?=_~<_?=_ =_#########<_?_ <_?<_=<_?<_+<_? and maybe pull that off. It still won't work for Roger's blind subscribers, and neither does the .jpg-of-a-word method. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 14:47:00 2003 Received: from shelley.shelltown.net (shelltown.net [216.143.130.16]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47968195A01 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 14:46:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from shelley.shelltown.net (stanr@localhost.shelltown.net [127.0.0.1]) by shelley.shelltown.net (8.12.4/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h26MkgPq039724; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 17:46:51 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from stanr@shelltown.net) X-Authentication-Warning: shelley.shelltown.net: Host stanr@localhost.shelltown.net [127.0.0.1] claimed to be shelley.shelltown.net Received: (from stanr@localhost) by shelley.shelltown.net (8.12.4/8.12.4/Submit) id h26Mkg3v039723; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 17:46:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from stanr) From: Stan Ryckman Message-Id: <200303062246.h26Mkg3v039723@shelley.shelltown.net> Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 17:46:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "Chuq Von Rospach" at Mar 06, 2003 12:47:44 PM Organization: Amber & Sneakers Fan Club X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL5] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/76 X-Sequence-Number: 1394 Chuq Von Rospach asked: > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 11:59 AM, Stan Ryckman wrote: > > * What color is the sky? > > and if your user doesn't speak english, or is english limited? I don't see how that's a different issue than English-limited subscribers being asked to follow other confirm-this-message instructions. I realize there are problems with this method, but I don't think that's one of them. > and given how these 'fixes' are getting more obscure, baroque and > technically suspect, how is all this stuff somehow less intrusive and > better for the user than whitelisting role accounts, anyway? I must have missed the role of role accounts in this discussion. Stan From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 18:10:12 2003 Received: from yancy.pkiclue.com (yancy.pkiclue.com [209.172.115.117]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABDC2195A02 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:10:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from vo.cnchost.com (IDENT:root@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by yancy.pkiclue.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA02114 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:15:56 -0800 Message-ID: <3E680019.1050801@vo.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 18:12:41 -0800 From: JC Dill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> In-Reply-To: <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/77 X-Sequence-Number: 1395 Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 10:35 AM, JC Dill wrote: > >> Perhaps it would work to have initial moderation status set only for >> known "freemail" addresses that are subscribed thru email, > > so how do you handle the case where someone sets up a disposable domain, A "disposable domain" is TRACEABLE, so we can nail the spammer, and with the increase in anti-spam laws, the cost gets higher as time goes on. jc From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 18:18:56 2003 Received: from yancy.pkiclue.com (yancy.pkiclue.com [209.172.115.117]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33A6195A02 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:18:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from vo.cnchost.com (IDENT:root@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by yancy.pkiclue.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA02142 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:24:40 -0800 Message-ID: <3E680226.8020409@vo.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 18:21:26 -0800 From: JC Dill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <009401c2e422$ad72d440$21985742@ord351473> In-Reply-To: <009401c2e422$ad72d440$21985742@ord351473> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/78 X-Sequence-Number: 1396 David W. Tamkin wrote: > JC Dill always seems to think I mean something other than what I wrote: No, I think you said *exactly* what you wrote. > | Which makes it very odd that you would consider this "good list > | management software". > > Who considers it good? Your previous post on this topic started with: > When Alvin Oga wrote, > > >>> - a good list manager sw will be able to defeat this >>> faked autoconfirmation from a supposed human confirmation > > > Jim Galvin asked, > > | Would you please describe how one could detect that a message came from > | a human and not an autoresponder? > > Perhaps [...] Please reread the quoted text above. Alvin suggested that "good list manager sw" would be able to do something, and Jim asked for someone to describe how it would work. You quoted both Alvin and Jim, thus your post is presumed to be responding to these exact points, and is expected to describe how "good list manager sw" can do what Alvin suggests and Jim asks for clarification on. If this is *not* what you were talking about, why did you quote and reply to those cites, and how the heck did you expect the rest of us to know you were now talking about something else??? jc From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 18:28:11 2003 Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75325195A02 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:28:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from plaidworks.com (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186]) by plaidworks.com (8.12.8/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h272RwZQ004992; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:27:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:27:57 -0800 Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com To: JC Dill From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <3E680019.1050801@vo.cnchost.com> Message-Id: <68874004-5044-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/79 X-Sequence-Number: 1397 On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 06:12 PM, JC Dill wrote: > A "disposable domain" is TRACEABLE, so we can nail the spammer, and > with the increase in anti-spam laws, the cost gets higher as time goes > on. > Not if it's registered in a haven like Vanuatu. -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ But I can hear the sound Of slamming doors and folding chairs And that's a sound they'll never know From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 18:59:14 2003 Received: from www.lofcom.com (oldradio.net [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09AC4195F8E for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 18:59:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-46-251-038.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.46.251.38]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA20628; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 21:58:42 -0500 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E680019.1050801@vo.cnchost.com> References: <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 21:50:40 -0500 To: JC Dill , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list X-Archive-Number: 200303/80 X-Sequence-Number: 1398 At 9:12 PM -0500 3/6/03, JC Dill is rumored to have typed: > A "disposable domain" is TRACEABLE, so we can nail the spammer, and with > the increase in anti-spam laws, the cost gets higher as time goes on. You _are_ kidding, right? I mean, c'mon...how many spammer domains have you done a whois on that have _any_ legitimate in them? Or haven't you actually _looked_ at any whois records lately? The good-old-days of actually requiring legit contact information is LONG gone. For giggles, please feel free to TRACE www.pacificmeds.com (from today's 2-meg spam collection, chosen pretty much at random based on subject line, targeted to one of the mailing list addresses on my server), and lemme know how how much good United States laws will be in, "nail[ing] the spammer" in this real-world example. Charlie Summers From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 19:05:13 2003 Received: from yancy.pkiclue.com (yancy.pkiclue.com [209.172.115.117]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D62E196634 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:05:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from vo.cnchost.com (IDENT:root@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by yancy.pkiclue.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA02332 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:10:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3E680CFE.7040009@vo.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 19:07:42 -0800 From: JC Dill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <68874004-5044-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> In-Reply-To: <68874004-5044-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/81 X-Sequence-Number: 1399 Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 06:12 PM, JC Dill wrote: > >> A "disposable domain" is TRACEABLE, so we can nail the spammer, and >> with the increase in anti-spam laws, the cost gets higher as time >> goes on. >> > Not if it's registered in a haven like Vanuatu. Huh? > Spamming > > TVL feels very strongly that the sending of unsolicited bulk email or > excessive Usenet posting ("spamming") constitutes theft of service, > and we do not condone the use of .VU domain names for this purpose. > If we receive complaints that a .VU domain name has been used for > this purpose, we will advise the domain owner of the complaint and > request that they desist from this activity. TVL reserves the right > to remove any .VU name registration if a name is used as a source of > spam, or an address to which to reply to such bulk mail > solicitations. We will also publish the names and contact information > for any accounts terminated for such a reason. Assuming that the above is just window dressing, and that .vu is indeed a spam haven, this is easy to solve: Block domains in .vu from subscribing or posting to your list, either at the MTU (spam filtering before the subscription request or confirmation email gets to the list server) or in the list server config files (e.g with majordomo's taboo_header, block if the from ends with .vu). If a spammer (who can be *identified* via their disposable domain (because they have subscribed and confirmed to your list)) is in "a haven like Vanuatu" and decided to repeatedly forge Habeas headers in their email, I bet Habeas would find a way to track them down and sue. But if "a haven like Vanuatu" is so impermiable that spammers can spam from it with impunity and we (list managers) can't safely/easily implement "haven-wide" anti-spam blocking, then we (TINW) have a lot bigger problem than if they can auto-bot subscribe to and then spam mailing lists. jc From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 19:36:52 2003 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB14C19661F for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:36:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h273agO96976 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:36:42 -0500 (EST) X-Envelope-To: Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 22:36:49 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Message-ID: <342786875.1046990209@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94FF@sfdc.us.sychron.com> References: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94FF@sfdc.us.sychron.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Archive-Number: 200303/82 X-Sequence-Number: 1400 --On Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:43 PM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese" wrote: >> [mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Tom Neff >> See if you can read this: >> >> .,.._...,_,..,, >> _,X..,,_,,X,_,. >> .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. >> .,..X,..X..._.. >> .,,,.X,X.+...,, >> ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. >> .,,..X,X._._.,. >> _,,.X,..X,,,.,, >> _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, >> .,X,._,..,X._,, >> .,,,._.,.,...,. > > Yes, but members of our lists for blind glbt folk won't... How do you know? Pick one, send it and ask them. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 19:54:42 2003 Received: from yancy.pkiclue.com (yancy.pkiclue.com [209.172.115.117]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A32E195F8E for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:54:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from vo.cnchost.com (IDENT:root@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by yancy.pkiclue.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA02497 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 20:00:26 -0800 Message-ID: <3E681896.9030300@vo.cnchost.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 19:57:10 -0800 From: JC Dill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/83 X-Sequence-Number: 1401 Charlie Summers wrote: > At 9:12 PM -0500 3/6/03, JC Dill is rumored to have typed: > >>A "disposable domain" is TRACEABLE, so we can nail the spammer, and with >>the increase in anti-spam laws, the cost gets higher as time goes on. > > You _are_ kidding, right? I mean, c'mon...how many spammer domains have > you done a whois on that have _any_ legitimate in them? Or haven't you > actually _looked_ at any whois records lately? The good-old-days of actually > requiring legit contact information is LONG gone. This is venturing off from the topic of this list (managing mailing lists) into the topic of fighting spam. I suggest further anti-spam discussion move to an appropriate forum like spam-l. However, I'd like to address the specific topic of spam and managing lists. The biggest problem with fighting spam is that most spammers send from an address that can not be clearly identified as belonging to them, and then they can claim that the sender is doing a Joe Job and that the spamvertized site/company/service wasn't the bad person who sent the spam. With the case of a spammer *confirming to a mailing list* and subsequently spamming, the possibility that the email address that sent the spam isn't the email address of the person who confirmed drops to almost zero (allowing for rare cases of email interception). You HAVE the spammer, it's the person who gets email at that mail address, who confirmed the subscription request to the list. Because of the confirmation loop, the address isn't a bogus address, it is a REAL address that is hosted somewhere. If it's not a freemail account - if it's an email account with a supposedly "disposable domain name" - then behind it somewhere, someone is paying the bills (for the domain name, but more importantly for the *hosting* of the domain name). FOLLOW THE MONEY. You can sue the host, and force the host to either accept responsibility for sending the spam, or pass the buck and disclose who is behind the account. This isn't a perfect system, but it's a workable one. In the specific case of spam sent to mailing lists: If you want to be able to sue someone who intentionally subscribes to and then spams your list, add a clause to your mailing list welcome message (or better yet, to the confirmation request), which clearly states that if they send spam to your list, they are agreeing to pay you for the damages this costs to your list and to your reputation. Put a $ figure on it. Now you have the equivelant of a EULA, they have agreed to this "license" as part of subscribing to your list. So even if they aren't in a jurrisdiction that has anti-spam laws, they have AGREED to your terms when subscribing to your list, and you have a valid case for a lawsuit. Is this failsafe? Will it always win if this happens and you track down the spammer and sue? No. But IMHO it's better than nothing. jc From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 20:38:19 2003 Received: from www.lofcom.com (oldradio.net [216.105.35.108]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 266F9195A29 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 20:38:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.123.10] (lof@washdc3-ar1-4-46-251-038.washdc3.dsl-verizon.net [4.46.251.38]) by www.lofcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA26766; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:38:01 -0500 X-Envelope-From: charlie@lofcom.com X-Sender: lof@oldradio.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3E681896.9030300@vo.cnchost.com> References: <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> <772A5713-5005-11D7-9168-0003934516A8@plaidworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:37:31 -0500 To: JC Dill , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Charlie Summers Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list X-Archive-Number: 200303/84 X-Sequence-Number: 1402 At 10:57 PM -0500 3/6/03, JC Dill is rumored to have typed: > This is venturing off from the topic of this list (managing mailing > lists) into the topic of fighting spam. No, it isn't. You claim that U.S. civil law will help you keep spam off your mailing list, while it's obvious to all but the most obtuse that it won't. Depend on the law, you lose. Like it or not, you're stuck with technological methods (i.e. moderation of newbies, IP blocks, scanners, etc.) if you plan on keeping spam off your mailing list. (At no point did I waste any time discussing how to "stop" spam - I only disputed your suggestion that the hypothetical spammer was "tracable.") > You HAVE > the spammer, it's the person who gets email at that mail address, who > confirmed the subscription request to the list. > > FOLLOW THE MONEY. You can sue the host, and force the host to either > > accept responsibility for sending the spam, or pass the buck and > > disclose who is behind the account. (*sigh*) Big deal. Since you didn't bother checking the domain I used as an example (I realise primary research might get in the way of your arguments), it is hosted in China (China Netcom Corp.) with phony info in the srsplus.com whois. Assuming someone at that domain (let's even assume they live right down the block from you) SSH'd into their leased box overseas and subscribed/confirmed/spammed directly from there instead of hacking some other box in Taiwan, you don't stand a snowball's chance in hades of finding out who they are, because suing a host in China for information is useless, "confirmation loop" or no. You "HAVE" nothing, except perhaps an IP. If you chose to block the 210.51.0.0/16 block, that might stop that one spammer...but again, that solution's technological, not legal. > This isn't a perfect system, but it's a workable one. It is NOT workable, and if you think it is, you are deluding yourself. These aren't the days when Sanford Wallace was spamming openly, daring people to stop him...these guys are buried deeper into the darkness than ever, just like the cockroaches they are, because they admit what they do is a bane on the Internet's existance, and they saw how well things worked for Sanford Wallice when he was spamming openly, and people took him up on his dare. If you really believe you can track down any but the dumbest spammers, I have a few bridges I'd like to sell you. > In the specific case of spam sent to mailing lists: If you want to be > able to sue someone who intentionally subscribes to and then spams your > list, ....make sure the spammer is too stupid to set himself up in foreign countries WHERE U.S. LAW DOESN'T APPLY, and the host companies will laugh off your nusance suits. The domain that _started_ this thread is based in the Netherlands (if you believe the DomainBank.com whois info); you might have a little more luck there than China, but I'd cheerfully wager against anyone suing that outfit, too. Heck, with that clown connecting to Hotmail through wanadoo.nl aDSL pool IPs, you'd know roughly where he is, and STILL you wouldn't stand much of a chance getting any kind of civil action anywhere. You are right about one thing, though - I am through wasting time on this. Charlie Summers From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 22:12:06 2003 Received: from jerusalem.christianitytoday.com (jerusalem.christianitytoday.com [12.158.13.148]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09EEE1967E1 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:12:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from IO06 ([12.24.216.130]) by christianitytoday.com ([12.158.13.148]) with SMTP (MDaemon.PRO.v6.0.7.R) for ; Fri, 07 Mar 2003 00:10:59 -0600 Reply-To: From: "Tatum, Richard" To: Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 00:11:54 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <342786875.1046990209@[192.168.254.79]> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-MDRemoteIP: 12.24.216.130 X-Return-Path: rich@ChristianityToday.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Archive-Number: 200303/85 X-Sequence-Number: 1403 Tom Neff wrote: < How do you know? Pick one, send it and ask them. > Tom, I believe all text-to-speech software would choke on this. If a blind email recipient could make sense of this speech, I'd be awed. This: .,.._...,_,..,, _,X..,,_,,X,_,. .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. .,..X,..X..._.. .,,,.X,X.+...,, ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. .,,..X,X._._.,. _,,.X,..X,,,.,, _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, .,X,._,..,X._,, .,,,._.,.,...,. Would literally sound like this: < Space, tab, period, comma, period, period, underscore, period, period, period, comma, underscore, comma, period, period, comma, comma, space, tab, underscore, comma, capital X, period, period, comma, comma, underscore, comma, comma, capital X, comma, underscore, comma, period, space, tab, period, comma, comma, capital X, underscore, comma, period, comma, period, capital X, period, comma, comma, period, period, space, tab, period, comma, period, period, capital X, comma, period, period, capital X, period, period, period, underscore, period, period, space, tab, period, comma, comma, comma, period, capital X, comma, capital X, period, plus, period, period, period, comma, comma, space, tab, comma, comma, comma, underscore, period, comma, capital X, comma, underscore, comma, period, semicolon, period, comma, period, space, tab, period, comma, comma, period, period, capital X, comma, capital X, period, underscore, period, underscore, period, comma, period, space, tab, underscore, comma, comma, period, capital X, comma, period, period, capital X, comma, comma, comma, period, comma, comma, space, tab, underscore, comma, comma, capital X, period, comma, comma, comma, period, capital X, comma, semicolon, period, comma, comma, space, tab, period, comma, capital X, comma, period, underscore, comma, period, period, comma, capital X, period, underscore, comma, comma, space, tab, period, comma, comma, comma, period, underscore, period, comma, period, comma, period, period, period, comma, period. > Regards, RIch. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 22:40:08 2003 Received: from planet.fef.com (unknown [166.90.172.7]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F6C195A29 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:40:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from planet.fef.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by planet.fef.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/check_local-5) with ESMTP id h276dxim023991; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:39:59 -0800 Received: (from alvin@localhost) by planet.fef.com (8.12.8/8.12.4/Submit) id h276dxfc023990; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:39:59 -0800 From: Alvin Oga Message-Id: <200303070639.h276dxfc023990@planet.fef.com> Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list - hard To: inet-list@vo.cnchost.com (JC Dill) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:39:58 -0800 (PST) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> from "JC Dill" at Mar 06, 2003 09:41:40 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/86 X-Sequence-Number: 1404 hi ya > JC Dill wrote: > > David W. Tamkin wrote: > > When Alvin Oga wrote, > > > >> - a good list manager sw will be able to defeat this > >> faked autoconfirmation from a supposed human confirmation > > > > Jim Galvin asked, > > > > | Would you please describe how one could detect that a message came from > > | a human and not an autoresponder? > > > > Perhaps to confirm one would have to follow some instructions other than just > > replying. (Such a requirement would lock out attempted subscriptions by > > humans who won't read instructions, but that might be a good thing.) For > > example, autoresponders are likely to quote back (a) none of the received > > text, (b) all of the received text, or (c) a certain amount from the top of > > the received text. So if the applicant is sent two confirmation codes and in > > order to confirm has to return only the lower one without the upper one, a bot > > is likely to fail. Or if the confirmation code needs to be edited slightly -- > > say it is twelve characters long, and it has to be sent back with the first > > five characters moved to the end -- a bot is likely to fail. > > > > And of course, so are 98% of human applicants. if the sw fails and bounces a human replying to their real subscription, than the "anti-spambot" detection failed ( i dont like false positives ) > Which makes it very odd that you would consider this "good list > management software". If list management software could distinguish > between a reply-bot and a human, for it to be considered "good" it would i'd guess that most auto-responders will put in some headers ... :-) - pick a set of random autoreponder from say "info@someplace.com" and see what different headers it has ( that is the assumption that you can use to reject confirmations ( from auto-spambot subscriptions > have to do it in a way that doesn't foil the normal human subscription > confirmation process. IMHO, such a software product doesn't exist, yup.. no such thing yet > because there is no way (via text email) to make the process both easy > for the human and difficult for a reply-bot. That is why many large > free sites are using "type in the word you see in the graphic below" to > thwart subscribe-bots, but this technique doesn't work in a plain-text > email world. > > Will this be the end for "plain text email for those with no web access" > mailing lists? for business mailing lists... i'd deny all access from yahoo/hotmail/excite/etc..etc.. - web based mails and perl scripts(?) to to/from/subject headers are probably the worst spam offenders ( too easy to do ) for personal mailing lists... i'd use a whitelist of subscribers... ;-) which is the list itself ... ( no auto-subscribes ) c ya alvin From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 23:16:01 2003 Received: from grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.46]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CA7195AA0 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:15:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from user-vcaum88.dsl.mindspring.com ([216.175.89.8] helo=queernet.org) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18rC5F-0007aa-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 23:15:58 -0800 Message-ID: <3E684738.3060903@queernet.org> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 23:16:08 -0800 From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us, fr-be, fr-ca, fr-fr, fr-lu, fr-mc, fr-ch MIME-Version: 1.0 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list References: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94FF@sfdc.us.sychron.com> <342786875.1046990209@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <342786875.1046990209@[192.168.254.79]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/87 X-Sequence-Number: 1405 Tom Neff wrote: >--On Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:43 PM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese" > wrote: > > >>>[mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Tom Neff >>> See if you can read this: >>> >>> .,.._...,_,..,, >>> _,X..,,_,,X,_,. >>> .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. >>> .,..X,..X..._.. >>> .,,,.X,X.+...,, >>> ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. >>> .,,..X,X._._.,. >>> _,,.X,..X,,,.,, >>> _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, >>> .,X,._,..,X._,, >>> .,,,._.,.,...,. >>> >>> >>Yes, but members of our lists for blind glbt folk won't... >> >> > >How do you know? Pick one, send it and ask them. > > > > They've complained about the technique before. How do you expect them to know what letter "dot comma dot dot underscore dot dot dot comma underscore comma dot dot comma comma, underscore comma x dot dot comma comma underscore comma comma x comma underscore comma dot" and so on represents? That's how it's read to them by the vocalization software, after all. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 23:16:55 2003 Received: from plaidworks.com (www.plaidworks.com [64.81.78.180]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688C5195A22 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:16:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from plaidworks.com (dsl081-078-186.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.78.186]) by plaidworks.com (8.12.8/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h277GfZQ008581; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:16:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:16:39 -0800 Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com To: JC Dill From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <3E680CFE.7040009@vo.cnchost.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/88 X-Sequence-Number: 1406 >>> A "disposable domain" is TRACEABLE, so we can nail the spammer, and >>> with the increase in anti-spam laws, the cost gets higher as time >>> goes on. >> Not if it's registered in a haven like Vanuatu. > > Huh? haven't been following the kazaa case closely? you'll find it interesting and relevant. I didn't say the domain would be .vu. I'm saying the company the domain is registered to is listed there. Or any of a dozen other haven countries that won't disclose data. -- Chuq Von Rospach, Architech chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.plaidworks.com/chuqui/blog/ He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Thu Mar 6 23:30:47 2003 Received: from jbod.calchiro.com (dsl093-182-128.sfo2.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.182.128]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86001967D3 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:30:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from bj (bj.calchiro.com [66.93.182.114]) by jbod.calchiro.com (8.12.8/linuxconf) with SMTP id h277U1G9004248 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:30:01 -0800 From: "Brian Zaleski" To: Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 23:32:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 In-Reply-To: <342786875.1046990209@[192.168.254.79]> X-Archive-Number: 200303/89 X-Sequence-Number: 1407 I dunno.... I still think it would have been easier to see that first one after a couple of glasses of wine.... :-) -----Original Message----- From: list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com [mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com]On Behalf Of Tom Neff Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 7:37 PM To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list --On Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:43 PM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese" wrote: >> [mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Tom Neff >> See if you can read this: >> >> .,.._...,_,..,, >> _,X..,,_,,X,_,. >> .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. >> .,..X,..X..._.. >> .,,,.X,X.+...,, >> ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. >> .,,..X,X._._.,. >> _,,.X,..X,,,.,, >> _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, >> .,X,._,..,X._,, >> .,,,._.,.,...,. > > Yes, but members of our lists for blind glbt folk won't... How do you know? Pick one, send it and ask them. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Mar 7 00:57:46 2003 Received: from dingo.home.kanga.nu (ocker.kanga.nu [198.144.204.213]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC7991959D7 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 00:57:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=kanga.nu) by dingo.home.kanga.nu with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18rDfd-00038I-00; Fri, 07 Mar 2003 00:57:37 -0800 To: Tom Neff Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list In-Reply-To: Message from Tom Neff of "Thu, 06 Mar 2003 13:00:10 EST." <308187921.1046955610@[192.168.254.79]> References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> <308187921.1046955610@[192.168.254.79]> X-face: ?^_yw@fA`CEX&}--=*&XqXbF-oePvxaT4(kyt\nwM9]{]N!>b^K}-Mb9 YH%saz^>nq5usBlD"s{(.h'_w|U^3ldUq7wVZz$`u>MB(-4$f\a6Eu8.e=Pf\ X-image-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/kanga.face.tiff X-url: http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 00:57:37 -0800 Message-ID: <12045.1047027457@kanga.nu> From: J C Lawrence X-Archive-Number: 200303/90 X-Sequence-Number: 1408 On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 13:00:10 -0500 Tom Neff wrote: > What letter do you see in the above block? I don't, if I use a proportionally spaced typeface. -- J C Lawrence ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh? http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Mar 7 06:01:32 2003 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 105DB195F25 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 06:01:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h27E1QO25402 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:01:27 -0500 (EST) X-Envelope-To: Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 09:01:29 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Message-ID: <380266140.1047027689@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <3E684738.3060903@queernet.org> References: <7AD6B1A7CA734A48B95E96591302A9B90B94FF@sfdc.us.sychron.com> <342786875.1046990209@[192.168.254.79]> <3E684738.3060903@queernet.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Archive-Number: 200303/91 X-Sequence-Number: 1409 I still say, if you know such a member, forward them my example and ask! We can all agree in the meantime that we know what a bunch of sighted folks here think they *should* answer. :) Just send the text block and say, Guess a letter. If they guess X, you owe me a dollar. Any other letter, I owe you a dollar. tmn --On Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:16 PM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese" wrote: > Tom Neff wrote: > >> --On Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:43 PM -0800 "Roger B.A. Klorese" >> wrote: >> >> >>>> [mailto:list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com] On Behalf Of Tom Neff >>>> See if you can read this: >>>> >>>> .,.._...,_,..,, >>>> _,X..,,_,,X,_,. >>>> .,,X_,.,.X.,,.. >>>> .,..X,..X..._.. >>>> .,,,.X,X.+...,, >>>> ,,,_.,X,_,.;.,. >>>> .,,..X,X._._.,. >>>> _,,.X,..X,,,.,, >>>> _,,X.,,,.X,;.,, >>>> .,X,._,..,X._,, >>>> .,,,._.,.,...,. >>>> >>>> >>> Yes, but members of our lists for blind glbt folk won't... >>> >>> >> >> How do you know? Pick one, send it and ask them. >> >> >> >> > > They've complained about the technique before. > > How do you expect them to know what letter "dot comma dot dot underscore > dot dot dot comma underscore comma dot dot comma comma, underscore comma x > dot dot comma comma underscore comma comma x comma underscore comma dot" > and so on represents? That's how it's read to them by the vocalization > software, after all. From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Fri Mar 7 06:22:11 2003 Received: from grassyhill.org (grassyhill.org [208.231.0.71]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93455195F13 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 06:22:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grassyhill.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id h27EM5O26712 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:22:05 -0500 (EST) X-Envelope-To: Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 09:22:07 -0500 From: Tom Neff To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to confirmed list Message-ID: <381504968.1047028927@[192.168.254.79]> In-Reply-To: <12045.1047027457@kanga.nu> References: <200303060938.h269coej021880@planet.fef.com> <00d101c2e3f6$a147ea60$21985742@ord351473> <3E678854.3020607@vo.cnchost.com> <308187921.1046955610@[192.168.254.79]> <12045.1047027457@kanga.nu> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Archive-Number: 200303/92 X-Sequence-Number: 1410 --On Friday, March 07, 2003 12:57 AM -0800 J C Lawrence wrote: > On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 13:00:10 -0500 > Tom Neff wrote: > >> What letter do you see in the above block? > > I don't, if I use a proportionally spaced typeface. No? That's really interesting. Because I took it and viewed it in a bunch of proportional fonts - Arial, Times, Goudy, etc - and in each case, the X stood out clearly, although it had a little of what you'd call a starfish shape in some of them. I suppose there's no chance that JC is just guessing here rather than actually trying it? :) From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 12 21:28:54 2003 Received: from mail.xnet.com (quake.xnet.com [198.147.221.67]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88693196020 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:28:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.8] (adamb.xnet.com [205.243.156.212]) by mail.xnet.com (8.9.3+Sun/XNet-3.0R) with ESMTP id XAA17612 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 23:28:47 -0600 (CST) User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 23:17:45 -0600 Subject: Re: gateway.net From: Adam Bailey To: list-managers Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20030306002008.8340619618C@mycroft.greatcircle.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/93 X-Sequence-Number: 1411 On Wed, 05 Mar 2003 14:09:15 -0600, Al Iverson wrote: > Does gateway.net still exist? It seems to be owned by AOL now. Are there > still any valid email addresses at gateway.net any more? Gateway.net was shut down and its users transitioned to AOL and/or CompuServe 2000. There may be a few stragglers, but for the most part there are no more valid email addresses there. -- Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois adamb@lull.org | Finger/Web for PGP adamkb@aol.com | http://www.lull.org/adam/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 12 21:29:01 2003 Received: from mail.xnet.com (quake.xnet.com [198.147.221.67]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D01D196020 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 21:28:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.8] (adamb.xnet.com [205.243.156.212]) by mail.xnet.com (8.9.3+Sun/XNet-3.0R) with ESMTP id XAA17597 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 23:28:45 -0600 (CST) User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.1.2418 Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 23:16:49 -0600 Subject: Re: Are members blocking instead of leaving? From: Adam Bailey To: list-managers Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20030227212052.D4D33196DAD@mycroft.greatcircle.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/94 X-Sequence-Number: 1412 On Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:13:25 -0700, Bob Bish wrote: > I believe that message means the AOL user is blocking mail from the > ORIGINAL sender of the message, not from the entire mailing list. I see > these a lot, but lately they've been taking the form like: > > Your mail to the following recipients could not be delivered because they > are not accepting mail from user@some.dom: > aoluser AOL's mail filters have two different behaviors. First, they work on the envelope sender, which generates the aforementioned 550 error about not accepting mail. Second, they also work on the From header, which generates the above terrible awful non-compliant message. Back when AOL's filters only worked on the envelope sender, you could set up a whitelist to allow a mailing list -- provided it generated a static Return-Path. But now that no longer works, since AOL will also compare your whitelist against From. More information about this at . -- Adam Bailey | Chicago, Illinois adamb@lull.org | Finger/Web for PGP adamkb@aol.com | http://www.lull.org/adam/ From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 17 02:40:37 2003 Received: from itfuture.dekundenserver.de (unknown [62.26.119.143]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3675195AD5 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 02:40:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from intra2 (unknown [213.217.101.98]) by itfuture.dekundenserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50EE6147A4F for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:40:33 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Markus Tacker Organization: IT Future AG To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Variables available in info document Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:35:27 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200303171235.27074.mtacker@itfuture.de> X-Archive-Number: 200303/95 X-Sequence-Number: 1413 Hello List, I've read the docs, faq and a part of the archive but i=20 can't find a comprehensive list of variables (like $USER)=20 available in the different documents especially the info=20 document. Any hint? --=20 sincerely yours Markus Tacker From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Wed Mar 19 22:08:57 2003 Received: from mx2.biglist.com (westside.urbanblight.com [216.223.208.40]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 84F33195A97 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 22:08:56 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 85054 invoked by uid 601); 20 Mar 2003 06:08:46 -0000 Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 01:08:46 -0500 From: Omar Thameen To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: AOL spam filtering looking at content? Message-ID: <20030320010846.A58420@westside.urbanblight.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-Archive-Number: 200303/96 X-Sequence-Number: 1414 Is anyone seeing any issues with AOL tossing email messages based on the message content or even a particular list name, starting around March 12? I have 2 lists on 2 different virtual domains, but delivering from the same server with the same configuration for delivery. Both have fairly large AOL subscriberships. Both deliveries are being accepted by AOL, but the messages from one of the lists are not making it to the AOL user inboxes. In fact, the list that is being delivered successfully has several times more AOL subscribers than the one that isn't. Omar From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 24 15:19:15 2003 Received: from jerusalem.christianitytoday.com (jerusalem.christianitytoday.com [12.158.13.148]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E14D6196268 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 15:19:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from IO06 ([12.24.216.130]) by christianitytoday.com ([12.158.13.148]) with SMTP (MDaemon.PRO.v6.0.7.R) for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:16:40 -0600 Reply-To: From: "Tatum, Richard" To: Subject: Research on HTML mail and question about hotmail Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 17:18:00 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <200303171235.27074.mtacker@itfuture.de> X-MDRemoteIP: 12.24.216.130 X-Return-Path: rich@ChristianityToday.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Archive-Number: 200303/97 X-Sequence-Number: 1415 We've been testing HTML email for our newsletter audience, and I thought I'd share what we found to any who are interested. I'm surprised at the current widespread support for cascading stylesheets in the most popular mail clients. Yet, simultaneously, I'm shocked at how badly the web-based email services render email. Of course, web-based email services have to solve the problem of displaying somebody else's HTML code within their own wrapper--and it seems the solution is to re-write (or mangle) incoming HTML mail. In the specific case of hotmail, everything from the top of the email (the doctype declaration) to the first table tag in our email was overwritten--eliminating our stylesheet declarations as well as any tag modifications we had in place. To add insult to the injury, Hotmail rewrites all the incoming image SRC"*" and HREF="*" tags to point to their own caching servers. But beware: the caching servers time out, so if a user keeps an email message open too long (likely, if you send a lot of content), the HTML redirects that Hotmail substituted for your URLs start decaying. Strangely, if you forward the message from Hotmail to some other ISP or if you download your Hotmail messages with Outlook Express, nothing gets rewritten--the original message arrives in the remote inbox as though there had never been a badly mangled version sent from Hotmail. I tested the following clients:] AOL 7 AOL 8 Eudora 5.2 Juno (web-based) Netscape Composer 7.02 Outlook 2000 version 9 Outlook Express 6.0 Outlook Express 6.0 -- via Hotmail Web-based (AOL) Web-based (Hotmail) Web-based (Yahoo.com) Web-based (Yahoo.com printer friendly) I have created full-length screen captures of each of these tests (top of the email to the bottom) and can send a ZIP file with the HTML used to create these emails and all the screen caps. The ZIP file is 1.89 MB. If you're interested, let me know. I'll send it. Even though Hotmail comprises 20% of our newsletter audience we have yet to resolve the presentation problems with their web based client. I don't think we *can* resolve them right now. We may have to send Hotmail recipients only TXT--but that's an obviously drastic choice. Does anybody have any suggestions? Rich. -- Richard Tatum Website manager for Christianity Today International email: rich@christianitytoday.com web: christianitytoday.com aol im: richtatum -Stephen L. Talbott From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 24 16:47:33 2003 Received: from above.proper.com (mail.proper.com [208.184.76.45]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9693195A02 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:47:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [63.202.92.152] (adsl-63-202-92-152.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.202.92.152]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2P0lGg12630; Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:47:16 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 16:47:16 -0800 To: , From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: Research on HTML mail and question about hotmail Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200303/98 X-Sequence-Number: 1416 At 5:18 PM -0600 3/24/03, Tatum, Richard wrote: >In the specific case of hotmail, everything from the top of the >email (the doctype declaration) to the first table tag in our >email was overwritten--eliminating our stylesheet declarations as >well as any tag modifications we had in place. To add >insult to the injury, Hotmail rewrites all the incoming image >SRC"*" and HREF="*" tags to point to their own caching servers. >But beware: the caching servers time out, so if a user keeps an >email message open too long (likely, if you send a lot of >content), the HTML redirects that Hotmail substituted for your >URLs start decaying. I would be interested in your tests on Yahoo. From earlier casual observations, I suspect the results will be the same, but you are obviously being more careful in your analysis. >Strangely, if you forward the message from Hotmail to some other >ISP or if you download your Hotmail messages with Outlook >Express, nothing gets rewritten--the original message arrives in >the remote inbox as though there had never been a badly mangled >version sent from Hotmail. Wow. I think you will *not* find this with Yahoo. In specific, I think that Yahoo will forward the message with the SRC"*" and HREF="*" tags in their re-written states, but I could be wrong. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 25 02:47:00 2003 Received: from parrot.squawk.com (parrot.squawk.com [64.244.111.110]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26099195F8F for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 02:46:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from toshiba.scifi.squawk.com (toshiba.squawk.com [199.74.151.118]) by parrot.squawk.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE4D725B19F; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 05:46:51 -0500 (EST) X-America-Has-Resolve: yes X-Message-Flag: Microsoft Outlook is insecure. Upgrade your Mail Program Now! Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030325042844.068dca60@199.74.151.1> X-Sender: njs@199.74.151.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 05:07:15 -0500 To: "Anne P. Mitchell, Esq." , list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Nick Simicich Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to In-Reply-To: <3E669954.23636.88E2625@localhost> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030303125840.0224a190@mail.attbi.com> <20030303203216.14391.qmail@celery.tssi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-53907B63; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archive-Number: 200303/99 X-Sequence-Number: 1417 At 12:41 AM 2003-03-06 -0800, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. wrote: >It has been suggested that this can be done by some sort of robot - >anybody know how that works? Almost anything that can be done by a human can be done by a program. Simple as that. There are actually experiments underway to get people to prove their humanity. One involves recognizing warped words, another typing in words you have heard. The point is that it is hard to beat. Simple e-mail which responds with a token can be parsed and responded to, and success messages can be reacted to with spams. Eventually, the only thing that will stop spam is moderation. -- SPAM: Trademark for spiced, chopped ham manufactured by Hormel. spam: Unsolicited, Bulk E-mail, where e-mail can be interpreted generally to mean electronic messages designed to be read by an individual, and it can include Usenet, SMS, AIM, etc. But if it is not all three of Unsolicited, Bulk, and E-mail, it simply is not spam. Misusing the term plays into the hands of the spammers, since it causes confusion, and spammers thrive on confusion. Spam is not speech, it is an action, like theft, or vandalism. If you were not confused, would you patronize a spammer? Nick Simicich - njs@scifi.squawk.com - http://scifi.squawk.com/njs.html Stop by and light up the world! From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Tue Mar 25 07:16:59 2003 Received: from bacon.hamjudo.com (hamjudo.com [64.32.216.34]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DD361959DB for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 07:16:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from hamjudo.com (hamjudo.com [192.168.1.134]) by hamjudo.com (8.12.6/8.12.6/Debian-7) with ESMTP id h2PFGuwk025429 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:16:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:16:54 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Haas Reply-To: paulh@hamjudo.com To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Wow..I just saw it for myself - spam to In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030325042844.068dca60@199.74.151.1> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Archive-Number: 200303/100 X-Sequence-Number: 1418 On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Nick Simicich wrote: > Almost anything that can be done by a human can be done by a > program. Simple as that. There are actually experiments underway to get > people to prove their humanity. One involves recognizing warped words, > another typing in words you have heard. Humans get annoyed when they fail a test like that. If only 5% fail, that's still a lot of annoyed people even on my little list server. Imagine what it would be like for the folks with the big lists. So we need a tiny false negative rate to be practical. Conversely, the spammers aren't adverse to letting their software try again and a again. Spammers will be happy if their software was able to subscribe in 1% of attempts. So the false positive rate needs to be even lower. I saw 30,000 web hits from a single IP address that was mixing and matching text from my web pages to make URLs. I'm not sure what they were looking for. I don't use hidden URLs to protect content. > The point is that it is hard to beat. Simple e-mail which responds with a > token can be parsed and responded to, and success messages can be reacted > to with spams. > Eventually, the only thing that will stop spam is moderation. That will slow the spammers down quite a bit. However, spammers will still be able to forge headers so their spam looks like list traffic. Its probably time to work on getting list software to cryptographically sign outgoing list traffic and administrivia. Key management is hard. I already have trouble with subscribers who filter out the monthly status email from the list management software. -- Paul Haas paulh@hamjudo.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 31 11:36:36 2003 Received: from AMYS-ANSWERS.COM (amys-answers.com [206.53.239.113]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD649196601 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 11:36:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from famroom [206.53.239.126] by AMYS-ANSWERS.COM with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id A903180108; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:37:39 -0500 From: "Amy Stinson" Organization: Amy's Answers, LLC To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:36:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: I got one of these on my list...anyone else? Message-ID: <3E885268.1999.165C00FB@localhost> References: <3E680CFE.7040009@vo.cnchost.com> In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02a) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body X-Archive-Number: 200303/101 X-Sequence-Number: 1419 One of my list members had this sent to everyone in his address book. He has no idea how he it happened. Has anyone else seen this Spam spew... If you want to seriously improve your internet speed you need to try SPEED FREAK. I have authorized this recommendation to be sent to you because this product works. Don't worry, you are not on some list, this was sent from me as a recommendation. I strongly suggest that you give SPEED FREAK a try whether you have a dial up or a cable connection. This is not another bogus accelerator, SPEED FREAK really works. It costs nothing to download and you can noticeably improve your internet speed in minutes! John Cooper For a free download of SPEED FREAK click here or go to http://www.getfreaked.com From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 31 12:04:33 2003 Received: from mail-out2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.254.0.51]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E6C5196333 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:04:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (A17-129-100-225.apple.com [17.129.100.225]) by mail-out2.apple.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2VK4UsJ016306 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:04:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv3.apple.com (scv3.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:04:30 -0800 Received: from plaidworks.com (vg0602e-dhcp175.apple.com [17.216.21.175]) by scv3.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h2VK4Td10676; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:04:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:04:30 -0800 Subject: Re: I got one of these on my list...anyone else? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com To: "Amy Stinson" From: Chuq Von Rospach In-Reply-To: <3E885268.1999.165C00FB@localhost> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Archive-Number: 200303/102 X-Sequence-Number: 1420 virus? are spammers now writing macro viruses to spam people via people's address books? great. self-propogating spam messages. (anyone got an advil?) On Monday, March 31, 2003, at 11:36 AM, Amy Stinson wrote: > One of my list members had this sent to everyone in his address book. > He has no idea how he it happened. > Has anyone else seen this From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 31 13:13:42 2003 Received: from above.proper.com (mail.proper.com [208.184.76.45]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA61E1961D3 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:13:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [63.202.92.152] (adsl-63-202-92-152.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.202.92.152]) by above.proper.com (8.12.9/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2VLDWJN012029; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:13:32 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:13:04 -0800 To: Chuq Von Rospach , "Amy Stinson" From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: I got one of these on my list...anyone else? Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Archive-Number: 200303/103 X-Sequence-Number: 1421 At 12:04 PM -0800 3/31/03, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: >virus? Possibly, but possibly not. Assume that someone installs a piece of freeware and uses it for a while. On a certain day, that software reads his address book and sends out an advertisement like the one Amy sent. The user goes back and sees that, yes, in the middle of the EULA there is a paragraph that very explicitly says the software can do this if the user is using the software. Not a virus. Definitely spam, and the spammer is the poor user who "chose" to become a spammer in exchange for getting the high value of using the software. Thought experiment: if there is an enforceable anti-spam law in effect at the time, would the software vendor have a strong argument that the end users, not the vendor, were the spammers because the users agreed to the contract? I predict that some variant of the above will happen, and it will be messy. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 31 13:27:52 2003 Received: from mscan2.ucar.edu (mscan2.ucar.edu [192.43.244.124]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E287196269 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:27:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mscan2.ucar.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE34D124014; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:27:44 -0700 (MST) Received: from snowcrash.scd.ucar.edu (snowcrash.scd.ucar.edu [128.117.8.131]) by mscan2.ucar.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8773124017; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:27:39 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: I got one of these on my list...anyone else? From: Greg Woods To: Chuq Von Rospach Cc: Amy Stinson , list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-9.7x) Date: 31 Mar 2003 14:28:12 -0700 Message-Id: <1049146093.11154.31.camel@snowcrash> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.7 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, SUBJECT_IS_LIST version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200303/104 X-Sequence-Number: 1422 On Mon, 2003-03-31 at 13:04, Chuq Von Rospach wrote: > virus? > > are spammers now writing macro viruses to spam people via people's > address books? Unfortunately yes, spam viruses do exist that will install themselves on Winblows machines and use them to send spam. It has been discussed on bugtraq. This is an excellent way to get past any spam blocks that a company might have in place: dupe a user into infecting his machine with the spam virus, and spam away from inside the firewall. Very ugly. --Greg From list-managers-owner@greatcircle.com Mon Mar 31 13:31:07 2003 Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3673196239 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:31:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from h-66-167-132-38.phndaz91.covad.net ([66.167.132.38] helo=Vaio.earthlink.net) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1906rx-0005qn-00 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:31:05 -0800 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030331142955.02f85fe0@pop.earthlink.net> X-Sender: bobbish@pop.earthlink.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:31:05 -0700 To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: Bob Bish Subject: Re: I got one of these on my list...anyone else? In-Reply-To: <3E885268.1999.165C00FB@localhost> References: <3E680CFE.7040009@vo.cnchost.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Archive-Number: 200303/105 X-Sequence-Number: 1423 Well, I've added: /SPEED FREAK/ to taboo_body in all my config files just in case one of my users does this too. The heads-up is much appreciated. ...Bob