Re: List Status
[spam] I think Greg replied to this email via a public one. On Fri, May 28, 2021, 11:30 AM Karl wrote: > I use the HTML web interface. > > I know you said not to worry about the bounce count on the list > settings page terminating my access, but of course that bounce count > rises when there is a bounce. But you think it's likely a spam/filter > issue on my end, despite that? >
Re: List Status
[spam]
On Fri, May 28, 2021, 11:16 AM Greg Newby wrote:
> Hi, Karl. Yeah, it was 250 lines or so.
>
> As you noticed, I managed to break the list while trying to improve
> things. I think it's back now.
>
> Meanwhile, I've been seeing messages in my gmail folder. I added a filter
> rule to not flag cypherpunks messages as spam.
>
> For your gmail setup, are you using the web interface (i.e.,
> https://www.gmail.com or similar)? Or, are you using IMAP/POP to download
> messages to another client? I realized that if you are downloading, the
> stuff gmail filters as spam might simply not be visible.
>
> If you haven't already, try the web interface, and select the Spam folder,
> to see whether there is anything from cpunks there.
>
> Best,
> Greg
>
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 05:14:37PM -0400, Karl wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > Thanks so much for sharing this. I'm okay with others on the list
> > seeing my loglines, if that's ever an issue.
> >
> > So you know, I see 250 loglines here, not 900+ . I don't see mailman
> > bounces listed here.
> >
> > It looks like the development sources of mailman store bounce delivery
> > status notifications as of 1 month ago:
> >
> https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman/-/commit/e1d20b316024990535aeedc54aa84cd11a668317
> > .
> >
> > I see you resolved the spamassassin configuration issue around 09:30
> > today, timezone unspecified.
> >
> > It looks like the way to log mailman bounces a bit better would be to
> > open up mailman/model/bounce.py and add temporary output to
> > BounceProcessor.register around line 80:
> > with open('/var/tmp/' + email + '.bouncelog', 'a') as bouncelog:
> > bouncelog.write(str(msg) + "\n")
> >
> > Bounces from me would then hopefully end up in
> > /var/tmp/gmk...@gmail.com.bouncelog .
> >
> > On 5/27/21, Greg Newby wrote:
> > > Here are the 900+ logfile messages for your email address, in case you
> find
> > > anything informative.
> > >
> > > As noted, I've made a few changes. These include:
> > > - turning off outbound spamassassin for cypherpunks list traffic, via
> > > whitelist
> > > - adding a bad spamc.cf setting, then fixing it (pertains to maximum
> message
> > > length of messages, which isn't a factor in the cpunks list)
> > > - removing blacklist checking, as mentioned on the list
> > >
> > > The bounce score in Mailman isn't much of an issue: if you get
> unsubscribed,
> > > I can easily add you back. But I don't know where those bounces came
> from -
> > > Mailman doesn't provide an easy way, even for a list admin, to recover
> > > specific bounce details.
> > >
> > > I'm not paranoid about surveillance on the cypherpunks list, since
> it's an
> > > open list with open archives. The subscriber list is kept confidential
> > > within Mailman (so only I can see it), but anyone that could tap the
> network
> > > would know who messages were going to. So, it's confidential, but
> barely
> > > secure.
> > >
> > > The standard techniques like John linked to are much more likely to be
> > > damaging, or potentially damaging, to the cypherpunks list:
> > > https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, though, it's distressing that gmail seems to be filtering. I
> > > indeed confirmed that a list message went to the spam folder, but it
> was
> > > visible there (i.e., it didn't simply disappear, for me).
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Greg
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 01:23:10PM -0400, Karl wrote:
> > >> >> Maybe some day a cronjob that filters logs for only people who
> post,
> > >> >> or only who have an option set, could make for public logs
> eventually
> > >> >> ...
> > >> >
> > >> > Yes, that would be aligned with the transparency that is the
> philosophy
> > >> > of
> > >> > the list.
> > >> > Best,
> > >> > Greg
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> grep --fixed-strings --file=one_email_address_per_line.txt
> > >> /var/log/mailman/bounce.log > public_logfile
> > >>
> > >> mailman is written in python; i'm thinking of how hackable it might
> be.
> > >>
> > >> sorry to be bugging you, it's sad the bounces don't show up in the
> > >> logs =S really some malicious sotware could be messing with us.
> > >> cleaning logfiles is such a basic part of malicious software.
> > >
>
Re: List Status
[spam] just forwarding my messages with Greg during downtime to the list. When confused, share and preserve, that's my motto. On Thu, May 27, 2021, 4:10 PM Greg Newby wrote: > Here are the 900+ logfile messages for your email address, in case you > find anything informative. > > As noted, I've made a few changes. These include: > - turning off outbound spamassassin for cypherpunks list traffic, via > whitelist > - adding a bad spamc.cf setting, then fixing it (pertains to maximum > message length of messages, which isn't a factor in the cpunks list) > - removing blacklist checking, as mentioned on the list > > The bounce score in Mailman isn't much of an issue: if you get > unsubscribed, I can easily add you back. But I don't know where those > bounces came from - Mailman doesn't provide an easy way, even for a list > admin, to recover specific bounce details. > > I'm not paranoid about surveillance on the cypherpunks list, since it's an > open list with open archives. The subscriber list is kept confidential > within Mailman (so only I can see it), but anyone that could tap the > network would know who messages were going to. So, it's confidential, but > barely secure. > > The standard techniques like John linked to are much more likely to be > damaging, or potentially damaging, to the cypherpunks list: > https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm > > Meanwhile, though, it's distressing that gmail seems to be filtering. I > indeed confirmed that a list message went to the spam folder, but it was > visible there (i.e., it didn't simply disappear, for me). > > Best, > Greg > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 01:23:10PM -0400, Karl wrote: > > >> Maybe some day a cronjob that filters logs for only people who post, > > >> or only who have an option set, could make for public logs eventually > > >> ... > > > > > > Yes, that would be aligned with the transparency that is the > philosophy of > > > the list. > > > Best, > > > Greg > > > > > > > grep --fixed-strings --file=one_email_address_per_line.txt > > /var/log/mailman/bounce.log > public_logfile > > > > mailman is written in python; i'm thinking of how hackable it might be. > > > > sorry to be bugging you, it's sad the bounces don't show up in the > > logs =S really some malicious sotware could be messing with us. > > cleaning logfiles is such a basic part of malicious software. >
Re: List Status
> I confirmed that messages are in fact being delivered to the @gmail > addresses (no bounces). So, it's a mystery why they are not showing up in > your inbox. If so then NSA's $CARNIVORE variable tap inside Google's unencrypted internal network was set by mistake to HUNGRY instead of SNIFF, thus exposing themselves again. Gmail users may now send decoy text laced with BEEF attachment to put the VORE in SLEEP_MODE allowing secret mail to SNEAK_AROUND them.
Re: List Status
> I'm not receiving messages from the > listserv to gmail. Those old missing messages still have never appeared from whatever queue or bitbucket they got sent to, however a regular flow of newly originated spam from others appears to have resumed delivery ok, so expect more of my spam to resume as usual.
Re: List Status
(I'm cc'ing Karl & grarpamp directly, also) I just made a small tweak to the outbound mail settings, and also subscribed my own gmail account to see whether I can replicate the situation. I confirmed that messages are in fact being delivered to the @gmail addresses (no bounces). So, it's a mystery why they are not showing up in your inbox. If this is impacting other cypherpunks users in gmail domains, they might simply think the list has suddenly gone quiet. Let's keep pursuing this. It shouldn't be happening. Sorry that list administrivia needs to be discussed on the list :( Greg On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 05:16:59AM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > I'm not receiving messages from the > listserv to gmail. People post them since > they appear in archives, but after that > the listserv to gmail function appears broken. > I don't think any of the 'List Status' thread, > made it to my gmail box. Same for a bunch > more posts that I now discovered in the archives. > > However, unsubscribe and subscribe works, > so that part of the queue/delivery is still ok, > even those those management messages > all got spamfoldered by gmail. There are no > user defined filters here. > > I don't know if anyone is seeing my messages > to the list. > > I would generally check the listservs outbound > mail queues for excess spooling to gmail, and > specifically verify that some of the message-ids > got 'accepted' by gmail service from cpunks, > such as... > > 1105930251.4796.1621985406...@wamui-dingo.atl.sa.earthlink.net > 732012978.354083.1622093972...@mail.yahoo.com
Re: List Status
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 05:16:59AM -0400, grarpamp wrote: > I'm not receiving messages from the > listserv to gmail. People post them since google checks sfp, and mailinglists violate that. hence any mail from an address with sfp will be dropped by google and the other feudal overlords. > they appear in archives, but after that > the listserv to gmail function appears broken. > I don't think any of the 'List Status' thread, > made it to my gmail box. Same for a bunch > more posts that I now discovered in the archives. > > However, unsubscribe and subscribe works, > so that part of the queue/delivery is still ok, > even those those management messages > all got spamfoldered by gmail. There are no > user defined filters here. > > I don't know if anyone is seeing my messages > to the list. > > I would generally check the listservs outbound > mail queues for excess spooling to gmail, and > specifically verify that some of the message-ids > got 'accepted' by gmail service from cpunks, > such as... > > 1105930251.4796.1621985406...@wamui-dingo.atl.sa.earthlink.net > 732012978.354083.1622093972...@mail.yahoo.com > ---end quoted text---
Re: List Status
I am not receiving any emails from this list at all and am effectively banned by something in the delivery chain. It's possible it could be corrupt filters in my configuration that I haven't noticed. > Here is one of the emails I have not received: https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087718.html
Re: List Status
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 02:04:58PM -0300, juan wrote: > On Tue, 25 May 2021 09:48:20 -0700 > Greg Newby wrote: > > > > > None of this is nefarious or specific to cpunks. Other than the change > > mentioned to remove the blacklists from Spamassassin, all of this stuff is > > out-of-the-box with Ubuntu. > > > Well, out-of-the-box ubuntu censors cock.li, which I would describe as > nefarious. And it means that bona fide users of ubuntu end up unwillingly > censoring cock.li. Which looks nefarious to me as well =P I don't think that's accurate, otherwise the censorship would have been happening earlier. The mechanism that blocked the cock.li domain is the blacklist. Spamassassin is a separate project than Ubuntu, which loads the blacklists by default. The blacklists are, in turn, separate projects. Personally, as mentioned earlier, I am not a fan of blacklists. They are too easy to get on, and too difficult to get off of. They seem to have close to no ability to respond to reports of false positives (i.e., when a domain ends up on a blacklist, but should not be). Good riddance to the blacklists for the cpunks list! ~ Greg
Re: List Status
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 01:10:50PM -0400, Karl wrote: > On 5/25/21, Greg Newby wrote: > > Hi, Karl. The list was a bit quiet yesterday. Perhaps cpunks were outside in > > the Big Blue, or otherwise engaged. I sent a note that you should have > > received. > > I found it (but never received it): > https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087696.html > > Guess it's an issue with me receiving things via gmail. The Gmail filter that Tom suggested might help. As mentioned, I can try to diagnose messages that don't go through, but it's tough to do unless I know the specific message in question, and when it's sent. This is because we get around 1M lines/day in the mail log, invariably including multiple similar messages to the cypherpunks subscriber list. Yes, I realize it's hard to know when a message does NOT arrive, unless you are watching the archive at the same time as you are watching your inbox. More: > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:11:26PM -0400, Karl wrote: > >> Hey Greg, > >> > >> Can you confirm that people _subscribed_ to the list experience a spam > >> filter now? I thought my emails were getting spammed due to not being > >> subscribed, but it turns out this address is, actually, subscribed; I > >> was told this when I attempted subscribing. > > > > Yes, there are a few standard spam filters and related mechanisms on the > > server. This includes Spamassassin, DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. These have been in > > place since the list moved to pglaf.org a few years ago. > > When you said "Any subscriber email address can post anything" at > https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087482.html I > thought you meant that there as no spam filtering of subscribed posts. > I infer I misunderstood. I over-generalized. It's true if the spam filtering doesn't reject it, or another failure condition, like temporary network outages. Or exceeding the max message size (I think it's 20M). What I really meant not "can post" but "is permitted to post." Or, "is not restricted from posting based on topic etc." More simply stated, there's no moderation of list traffic, other than the types of automation that Mailman (the list manager software), Postfix (the message transfer agent) or related elements of the email stack apply. > My perception of cypherpunks has been of a list where no posts are > censored, it being up to the users to filter their mails. Do you have > a memory of this? Sure (I've been on the list since the year 2000 or so). One way this used to be handled was with remailers. Some remailers were completely unfiltered - for example, they would accept random SMTP connections to port 25 and not do any checks that the email headers were valid or accurate. John Gilmore's toad.com was canonical for this, but not the only member of the remailer circle. Subscribers would choose a remailer to subscribe to. In addition to choosing a level of comfort for spam and some noisier subscribers, the remailer system made cypherpunks more resistant to state-level shutdowns. (It didn't make it less susceptible to surveillance, particullarly, and it also made the whole system more prone to various problems like delivery failure and message loops.) There were other remailers that had different procedures (i.e., stricter), which translated into less spam (in the "unsolicited commercial email" sense). For awhile, there was at least one moderated remailer where a human tried to only let the "good" stuff through. Today, the cypherpunks list doesn't have anyone doing censorship. However, it does use a set of standard mechanisms for limiting abuse. I already mentioned Spamassassin (one of many, many spam filters), and the trio of standards: DMARC, DKIM and SPF. In addition, the server enables TLS and a few other things to make it more difficult to spoof someone else's email address (i.e., to send email as bill.ga...@microsoft.com or somesuch; or email the cypherpunks list claiming to be a subscriber -- a common way, in olden times, of sending spam or of impersonating someone else). A less restricted remailer is definitely still possible, and could interoperate alongside the current system, just like remailers used to interoperate. Someone (not me) would need to set that up. > > I have not observed any messages from you that were flagged as spam or > > rejected. > > Do you receive this link to a message of mine that was rejected? > https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087594.html Dunno - I don't keep copies of most individual messages to the list. > > If you are seeing other people's messages in the list archive, but not > > getting them in your inbox, the first thing to check is your Gmail Spam > > folder. If messages still don't arrive within a few minutes, send me details > > and I can check the server logs to see whether delivery was attempted and > > what happened. > > I have my spam filter configured to prevent all cpunks list messag
Re: List Status
Greg, these complaints seem to fit the disruptive practices of attackers described here: https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm Maybe coincidental but not the first to aim at messing with the list. Other lists have been wiped out with endless bitches, accusations, demand for attention. Good job you're doing, amazing patience. -Original Message- >From: Greg Newby >Sent: May 25, 2021 5:35 PM >To: Karl >Cc: cypherpunks >Subject: Re: List Status > >On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 01:10:50PM -0400, Karl wrote: >> On 5/25/21, Greg Newby wrote: >> > Hi, Karl. The list was a bit quiet yesterday. Perhaps cpunks were outside >> > in >> > the Big Blue, or otherwise engaged. I sent a note that you should have >> > received. >> >> I found it (but never received it): >> https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087696.html >> >> Guess it's an issue with me receiving things via gmail. > >The Gmail filter that Tom suggested might help. > >As mentioned, I can try to diagnose messages that don't go through, but it's >tough to do unless I know the specific message in question, and when it's >sent. This is because we get around 1M lines/day in the mail log, invariably >including multiple similar messages to the cypherpunks subscriber list. > >Yes, I realize it's hard to know when a message does NOT arrive, unless you >are watching the archive at the same time as you are watching your inbox. > >More: > >> > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:11:26PM -0400, Karl wrote: >> >> Hey Greg, >> >> >> >> Can you confirm that people _subscribed_ to the list experience a spam >> >> filter now? I thought my emails were getting spammed due to not being >> >> subscribed, but it turns out this address is, actually, subscribed; I >> >> was told this when I attempted subscribing. >> > >> > Yes, there are a few standard spam filters and related mechanisms on the >> > server. This includes Spamassassin, DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. These have been >> > in >> > place since the list moved to pglaf.org a few years ago. >> >> When you said "Any subscriber email address can post anything" at >> https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087482.html I >> thought you meant that there as no spam filtering of subscribed posts. >> I infer I misunderstood. > >I over-generalized. It's true if the spam filtering doesn't reject it, or >another failure condition, like temporary network outages. Or exceeding the >max message size (I think it's 20M). > >What I really meant not "can post" but "is permitted to post." Or, "is not >restricted from posting based on topic etc." More simply stated, there's no >moderation of list traffic, other than the types of automation that Mailman >(the list manager software), Postfix (the message transfer agent) or related >elements of the email stack apply. > >> My perception of cypherpunks has been of a list where no posts are >> censored, it being up to the users to filter their mails. Do you have >> a memory of this? > >Sure (I've been on the list since the year 2000 or so). One way this used to >be handled was with remailers. Some remailers were completely unfiltered - for >example, they would accept random SMTP connections to port 25 and not do any >checks that the email headers were valid or accurate. > >John Gilmore's toad.com was canonical for this, but not the only member of the >remailer circle. Subscribers would choose a remailer to subscribe to. In >addition to choosing a level of comfort for spam and some noisier subscribers, >the remailer system made cypherpunks more resistant to state-level shutdowns. >(It didn't make it less susceptible to surveillance, particullarly, and it >also made the whole system more prone to various problems like delivery >failure and message loops.) > >There were other remailers that had different procedures (i.e., stricter), >which translated into less spam (in the "unsolicited commercial email" sense). >For awhile, there was at least one moderated remailer where a human tried to >only let the "good" stuff through. > >Today, the cypherpunks list doesn't have anyone doing censorship. However, it >does use a set of standard mechanisms for limiting abuse. I already mentioned >Spamassassin (one of many, many spam filters), and the trio of standards: >DMARC, DKIM and SPF. > >In addition, the server enables TLS and a few other things to make it more >difficult to spoof someone else's
Re: List Status
Hi, Karl. The list was a bit quiet yesterday. Perhaps cpunks were outside in the Big Blue, or otherwise engaged. I sent a note that you should have received. On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:11:26PM -0400, Karl wrote: > Hey Greg, > > Can you confirm that people _subscribed_ to the list experience a spam > filter now? I thought my emails were getting spammed due to not being > subscribed, but it turns out this address is, actually, subscribed; I > was told this when I attempted subscribing. Yes, there are a few standard spam filters and related mechanisms on the server. This includes Spamassassin, DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. These have been in place since the list moved to pglaf.org a few years ago. Just in the past days, in Spamassassin, I turned off use of the blacklists, since they have occasionally been problematic. I have not observed any messages from you that were flagged as spam or rejected. However, sometimes messages are rejected before they get to the list or to me - if this happens to you, then (a) you will get a bounce from the pglaf.org (a.k.a., cpunks.org) server, and (b) the message won't go into the archive. None of this is nefarious or specific to cpunks. Other than the change mentioned to remove the blacklists from Spamassassin, all of this stuff is out-of-the-box with Ubuntu. > > In other news, I haven't been receiving mails from the list recently > (recent mails in the archive aren't in my inbox yet), not sure if it > matters. Yes, you are subscribed. Only subscribers can submit, and your messages are going through and in the archive. If you are not certain whether your message went to the list, first check the archive via https://lists.cpunks.org (no login required). If you are not getting copies of your own messages, there is a setting for this that everyone can select for their own subscription. Use the web interface at https://lists.cpunks.org to login to the list and see your settings. You can opt to get a copy of your own messages, and you can also get an "ack" email message when your message was posted. The default is to *not* get a copy of your own messages, and to *not* get an acknowledgment. HOWEVER, gmail absolutely positively will not show you a copy of your own message!! Even if you set the list (via Mailman) to send you a copy. It will silently discard it or otherwise mask it. This is a gmail thing that is well-known and does not have a workaround that I've heard about. If you are seeing other people's messages in the list archive, but not getting them in your inbox, the first thing to check is your Gmail Spam folder. If messages still don't arrive within a few minutes, send me details and I can check the server logs to see whether delivery was attempted and what happened. Greg
Re: List Status
I have such a filter configured too.
Re: List Status
Messages would get sent to spam if it weren't for a filter I've created. So yes, this is a common issue. On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 18:12, Karl wrote: > Hey Greg, > > Can you confirm that people _subscribed_ to the list experience a spam > filter now? I thought my emails were getting spammed due to not being > subscribed, but it turns out this address is, actually, subscribed; I > was told this when I attempted subscribing. > > In other news, I haven't been receiving mails from the list recently > (recent mails in the archive aren't in my inbox yet), not sure if it > matters. > > Karl >
Re: List Status
apologies for the attachment. I found the email archived at https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-April/087395.html . i'm probably suppressing frustration. i have not received any cypherpunks emails since the 23rd.
Re: List Status
On 5/25/21, Greg Newby wrote: > Hi, Karl. The list was a bit quiet yesterday. Perhaps cpunks were outside in > the Big Blue, or otherwise engaged. I sent a note that you should have > received. I found it (but never received it): https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087696.html Guess it's an issue with me receiving things via gmail. > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:11:26PM -0400, Karl wrote: >> Hey Greg, >> >> Can you confirm that people _subscribed_ to the list experience a spam >> filter now? I thought my emails were getting spammed due to not being >> subscribed, but it turns out this address is, actually, subscribed; I >> was told this when I attempted subscribing. > > Yes, there are a few standard spam filters and related mechanisms on the > server. This includes Spamassassin, DKIM, SPF, and DMARC. These have been in > place since the list moved to pglaf.org a few years ago. When you said "Any subscriber email address can post anything" at https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087482.html I thought you meant that there as no spam filtering of subscribed posts. I infer I misunderstood. My perception of cypherpunks has been of a list where no posts are censored, it being up to the users to filter their mails. Do you have a memory of this? > I have not observed any messages from you that were flagged as spam or > rejected. Do you receive this link to a message of mine that was rejected? https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2021-May/087594.html > If you are seeing other people's messages in the list archive, but not > getting them in your inbox, the first thing to check is your Gmail Spam > folder. If messages still don't arrive within a few minutes, send me details > and I can check the server logs to see whether delivery was attempted and > what happened. I have my spam filter configured to prevent all cpunks list messages from being spammed, so it's something else. Maybe routing delay. Hey, did you ever receive the attached e-mail? I'm not finding it in the list archives. It was sent on April 30th. MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 07:31:35 -0400 References: <01d73d1f$e819bb80$b84d3280$@li> In-Reply-To: <01d73d1f$e819bb80$b84d3280$@li> Message-ID: Subject: Re: *SPAM* RE: Dan Kaminsky Dies from Vaccine From: Karl To: Greg Newby Cc: cypherpunks Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="675c6105c12ef462" --675c6105c12ef462 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Greg, can you clarify whether or not the list is doing spam filtering? On Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 1:49 PM lolwut wrote: > Spam detection software, running on the system "mail.pglaf.org", > has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original > message has been attached to this so you can view it or label > similar future email. If you have any questions, see > the administrator of that system for details. > > Content preview: > > Content analysis details: (4.3 points, 4.0 required) > > pts rule name description > -- > -- > -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% > [score: 0.] > -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record > 1.3 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in > bl.spamcop.net > [Blocked - see < > https://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?37.120.193.123>] > 0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to > DNSWL was blocked. See > > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block > for more information. > [37.120.193.123 listed in list.dnswl.org] > -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2) > [37.120.193.123 listed in wl.mailspike.net] > 1.3 RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL RBL: Relay in Validity RPBL, > https://senderscore.org/blocklistlookup/ >[37.120.193.123 listed in > bl.score.senderscore.com] > -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record > 0.1 DKIM_SIGNEDMessage has a DKIM or DK signature, not > necessarily > valid > -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK > signature > -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from > author's domain > 0.8 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with > no rDNS > 2.8 DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with Outlook headers > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: lolwut > To: > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:48:29 -0400 > Subject: RE: Dan Kaminsky Dies from Vaccine > -Original Message- > From: cypherpunks [mailto:cypherpunks-boun...@lists.cpunks.org] On Behalf > Of
Re: List Status
On Tue, 25 May 2021 09:48:20 -0700 Greg Newby wrote: > > None of this is nefarious or specific to cpunks. Other than the change > mentioned to remove the blacklists from Spamassassin, all of this stuff is > out-of-the-box with Ubuntu. Well, out-of-the-box ubuntu censors cock.li, which I would describe as nefarious. And it means that bona fide users of ubuntu end up unwillingly censoring cock.li. Which looks nefarious to me as well =P
