well, perhaps try tarpitting, there is a patch on www.qmail.org i stop outgoing mail at 25 rcpts and incoming at 100 rcpts. also, i try to scare the piss out of spammers, for example we use to offer payment by check, and so we would have some customers call in, sign up to pay by check, so at 5:00pm the new accounts were added, and at 8:00pm when tech support went home, the spamming started. i remember one time this *hole signed up, and around 11pm started spamming, luckaly (or unluckaly) for me i was at work late, and i allways keep a xterm open with the mail log scrolling by, and all of a sudden i saw 500 emails outbound for aol.com. so i stoped qmail, and started sorting thru the queue, and watching inbound smtp connections, and boom, i see a dialup keep trying to connect to port 25, so i find out who that dialup was, and it was the only customer that signed up to pay by check that day... damn. so i dug out his papers and *67,called his ass and read him the riot act. anyway, thats my $0.50 lates, -xs end +-------------------------------------+ |Greg Albrecht KF4MKT [EMAIL PROTECTED]| |Safari Internet Fort Lauderdale, FL| |www.safari.net 888-537-9550| +------L-O-W-E-R--D-O-T--O-R-G--------+ On Wed, 31 Mar 1999, XxEDGExX wrote: > >Honestly, I agree with you 100%, but pointy haired boss's get a strange >look on their face when you give them the "we'll just get rid of them" >answer. So, what is an admin to do when your boss doesn't want to remove >the user, but also doesn't want to be getting 1000 hate mail messages from >your customers selling the get rich plan. > >This user was warned, and I did what I could to remove his messages in the >queue, but I'm still seeing an occassional bounce back. What sucks is a >lot of these guys don't care what you tell them as long as they're on long >enough to get their 100,000 messages out the door. > >-jeremy > >> XxEDGExX writes: >> > Russ writes: >> > > Tell him that if he does it again, you're going to give him an early Y2K. >> > >> > PFfft. HAHA. >> > >> > Thanks :-) >> >> No, I'm serious. Some problems are better suited to a social than a >> technological solution. If your own user is misbehaving, you tell >> them to behave. If they don't, you whack their entire access. Why >> should you be burdened with trying to install capability limiting when >> a simple "Don't do this again." should be sufficient? >> >> -- >> -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson >> Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence >> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the >> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace. >> > > >http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] >--------------------------------------------- >Y2K. We're all gonna die. > >
