See below;-)...\Stef At 0:52 +0100 8/31/03, Tim Chown wrote: >On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 05:25:19PM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote: > > > > The Virus writer obviously went to some trouble to pick valid addresses. > > It stands to reason that they expect that someone is getting mail to these > > addresses. It also stands to reason that the abuser expects those persons > > to get Virus notifications. > >I don't think so; isn't it more likely the writer wants the infection to >spread, and the best chance for that is that the recipient sees a From: >address that they recognise and "trust", rather than [EMAIL PROTECTED], >so they look at the content where they otherwise would be wary? > >I don't see a problem with notifications where the virus is known not to >forge the sender. > >Tim +++++++++++++++++++++
I get lots of bounces of spam bearing Joe-Jobs that were sent to what I expect are nonexistent addresses (at AOL, and others), with the initial sender's apparent intent to get the bounce to me with my address obtained from a spamming list, or just privately harvesting it from the web. Just put my address in GOOGLE and stand back to see why they find it. It has been harvested for every spam list CD in captivity since day one. Just one of the little rewards given to us pioneers;-)... I have elected to avoid running from them by often changing my address, perhaps with throw-away MSN or Yahoo or Juno and whatever. Frequent changes don't mix with wanting to be reachable over time;-)... So, I have a filtering scheme that for now catches all of them and deposits them in the trash;-)... Nothing too sophisticated! Cheers...\Stef
