On Friday 18 November 2005 07:36, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote: >> >This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example, >> >since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay. >> >> And "open" relays should be banned. Period. > >UOL may be a lot of crap, but open relays they are not AFAIK. > >> I'm forwarding all such messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Its no doubt a >> black hole, but... > >IF it is a blackhole, complain at rfc-ignorant.org. Unlike a damnable > user with that annoying challenge-response system enabled to a mailing > list, an ISP failing to pay attention to abuse@ is not forgiveable, > and UOL has the resources to respond to abuse@ without problems. > >Rogério, I'd phone UOL right now, and give them hell. They won't listen > to YOU, but if enough people complain, they'll do something about it. > >> The Fedora list has simply expunged all users from this ISP from the >> subscription lists, a self defense brought on by a C/R response from >> this twerp for every message posted, doubling the load on the >> servers. > >Incompetent listmasters there? Blacklisting at least 100000 users for > one dumbass that replies with a constant email address you could drop > at the incoming MTAs? (and it is probably more like 500000 or so, > this ISP is *big* and country-wide).
I beg to differ about incompetent. And I doubt if its anything like 100000 linux users just from that one ISP. OTOH, if those users who do get tossed figure out why, they WILL take a cluebat to the ISP's offices and get it fixed. 10 pissed users showing up at the offices will usually get their attention, if only to occupy the 9 drones in the front room while the 10th heads for the real office. >> You see, the C/R responder this clueless twit has setup, is also >> expunging all traces of the source user from the headers of the >> messages, therefore we have no recourse against that user as an > >NOW, THAT is something UOL could fix without 'losing face or business'. >Rogério, you're their costumer. I'd highly suggest you contact them > NOW. Use the Fedora blocking as leverage, and open different tickets > (otherwise they WILL ignore your complain and all suggestions that are > in the same ticket). > >I'd suggest one for headers of the original email on the AntispamUOL > *email reply* and not the fucking web page, and another to allow us to > submit AntispamUOL blacklists to them (which will drop any and all > messages requiring AntispamUOL verification that are addressed to some > domains). And a third one for the abuse@, warning of the blacklisting > which WILL be done through rfc-ignorant.org sooner or later. Absolutely no response has been obtained from any of those addresses I posted earlier. I also have no clue if the forwarding in kmail 1.7 works as advertised since I'd never tried it before. I also haven't taken the time to search my sent-mail folder, call me lazy. >> individual and must perforce blacklist, reject, or otherwise dispose >> of all messages comeing from that triplet of addresses that represent >> uol.com.br. > >Ever heard of VERP? It is immune to forwarding and header cleanup. It > has been in use for years. It can be done automatically by the ML > software, or you can use an external utility and process the results > of a VERP run manually. Nope, never heard of it. Commercial I assume... I wonder if Warren Togami (RH) has knowledge of it? -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.36% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]