Re: spam from an auto-responder
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 00:58:34 -0500, Andy wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You could always tell him that he's just handing his new email address > out to all the spambots testing his old one. That might scare him > enough to turn the damn thing off. ..or, this could be an opportunity for an useful-uses-of-netcat-pingpong contest; there _are_ spammers out there, and the lullaby singer senator who made his son so drowsy after law school that he took SCOvsIBM, has stated he "is interested" in such methods, at least to curb music etc file sharing piracy. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case.
Re: spam from an auto-responder
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 00:58:34 -0500, Andy wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You could always tell him that he's just handing his new email address > out to all the spambots testing his old one. That might scare him > enough to turn the damn thing off. ..or, this could be an opportunity for an useful-uses-of-netcat-pingpong contest; there _are_ spammers out there, and the lullaby singer senator who made his son so drowsy after law school that he took SCOvsIBM, has stated he "is interested" in such methods, at least to curb music etc file sharing piracy. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: spam from an auto-responder
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Wagner) wrote: > The only thing I will grant is that it should only respond once to each > email address. Responding repeatedly to the same person is useless and > potentially annoying. With all due respect Russell should've suggested > that from the get go instead of the bland "quit" message. ;) Ward is correct. Auto-responces are always spam. If you have an old address that you want to send messages about then make your mail server send a custom 55x code to reject the message. No bounces or responses will be sent to spam, but legitimate messages will get bounced by the sending server. Trying to use an auto-responder to escape spam is just stupid, the auto-responder sends the new address to all the spammers. But if you want to be REALLY stupid then be rude to people who complain, then you get your email address archived in a long-running thread that's archived all over the net... -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: spam from an auto-responder
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Wagner) wrote: > The only thing I will grant is that it should only respond once to each > email address. Responding repeatedly to the same person is useless and > potentially annoying. With all due respect Russell should've suggested > that from the get go instead of the bland "quit" message. ;) Ward is correct. Auto-responces are always spam. If you have an old address that you want to send messages about then make your mail server send a custom 55x code to reject the message. No bounces or responses will be sent to spam, but legitimate messages will get bounced by the sending server. Trying to use an auto-responder to escape spam is just stupid, the auto-responder sends the new address to all the spammers. But if you want to be REALLY stupid then be rude to people who complain, then you get your email address archived in a long-running thread that's archived all over the net... -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: spam from an auto-responder
The only thing I will grant is that it should only respond once to each email address. Responding repeatedly to the same person is useless and potentially annoying. With all due respect Russell should've suggested that from the get go instead of the bland "quit" message. ;) At 11:58 PM 6/15/04 -0700, Ward Willats wrote: >> How can u blame him for some spammer emailing it using ur address >>as a source? > >He is the responsible party for mail originated from the pduck.com domain. > >The minute his auto-responder fired off incorrectly, he became a spammer. > >When he ignored requests to stop, he became a _willful_ spammer. > >This is how I can blame him, and why an un-programmable >auto-responder is now pretty useless. > >-- Ward > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: spam from an auto-responder
How can u blame him for some spammer emailing it using ur address as a source? He is the responsible party for mail originated from the pduck.com domain. The minute his auto-responder fired off incorrectly, he became a spammer. When he ignored requests to stop, he became a _willful_ spammer. This is how I can blame him, and why an un-programmable auto-responder is now pretty useless. -- Ward
Re: spam from an auto-responder
Chris, here's a present for you --> yoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyo <-- Please use them in front of your 'u's, makes your messages so much easier to read. On Wednesday 16 June 2004 08.27, Chris Wagner wrote: > An auto-responder has no way of knowing who or what emailed it. You're saying... Yes. And this is why autoresponders are something people should think carefully about before using them. I use an autoresponder, too, on one of my old email addresses. But - you won't get more than one notice, ever - I'm able to see who sent the offending message, if it was something with forged sender and most importantly, - the autoresponder is on an address on a quite heavily armed machine (blocklists and spamassassin), so I don't autorespond to most spam. Sure, it's still possible that some people get a message from my autoresponder, and they have every right to be annoyed at me, as I am annoyed with people I get autoresponds from. But I figure that's a tradeoff I can live with. Now in Russel's case, apparently it's not one message, so the autoresponder in question is severely broken. Also, the user's brain is severely broken, since he apparently doesn't know what's going on, and that's the real problem. /me will vote for an Internet Driver's License cheers -- vbi -- P-K4 pgpuUqYcADm3Q.pgp Description: signature
Re: spam from an auto-responder
You could always tell him that he's just handing his new email address out to all the spambots testing his old one. That might scare him enough to turn the damn thing off.
Re: spam from an auto-responder
An auto-responder has no way of knowing who or what emailed it. How can u blame him for some spammer emailing it using ur address as a source? It seems like the only recourse is to try to find out who or what was using ur address and blow that person off the net. At 02:52 PM 6/16/04 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Could someone please help educate this person. > -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: spam from an auto-responder
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:49, Ward Willats <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Could someone please help educate this person. > > You mean the "From:" header could be forged?! Dear Lord NO! Russell, > say it ain't so! Some people haven't realised this yet. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: spam from an auto-responder
The only thing I will grant is that it should only respond once to each email address. Responding repeatedly to the same person is useless and potentially annoying. With all due respect Russell should've suggested that from the get go instead of the bland "quit" message. ;) At 11:58 PM 6/15/04 -0700, Ward Willats wrote: >> How can u blame him for some spammer emailing it using ur address >>as a source? > >He is the responsible party for mail originated from the pduck.com domain. > >The minute his auto-responder fired off incorrectly, he became a spammer. > >When he ignored requests to stop, he became a _willful_ spammer. > >This is how I can blame him, and why an un-programmable >auto-responder is now pretty useless. > >-- Ward > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: spam from an auto-responder
Could someone please help educate this person. You mean the "From:" header could be forged?! Dear Lord NO! Russell, say it ain't so! I personally like giving forwarding pointers in the 550 text. People can read it, but machines ignore it. (Though I hear Exchange suppresses multi-line 550 text, so be brief!) Am I missing something with this approach? -- Ward
Re: spam from an auto-responder
How can u blame him for some spammer emailing it using ur address as a source? He is the responsible party for mail originated from the pduck.com domain. The minute his auto-responder fired off incorrectly, he became a spammer. When he ignored requests to stop, he became a _willful_ spammer. This is how I can blame him, and why an un-programmable auto-responder is now pretty useless. -- Ward -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: spam from an auto-responder
Chris, here's a present for you --> yoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyo <-- Please use them in front of your 'u's, makes your messages so much easier to read. On Wednesday 16 June 2004 08.27, Chris Wagner wrote: > An auto-responder has no way of knowing who or what emailed it. You're saying... Yes. And this is why autoresponders are something people should think carefully about before using them. I use an autoresponder, too, on one of my old email addresses. But - you won't get more than one notice, ever - I'm able to see who sent the offending message, if it was something with forged sender and most importantly, - the autoresponder is on an address on a quite heavily armed machine (blocklists and spamassassin), so I don't autorespond to most spam. Sure, it's still possible that some people get a message from my autoresponder, and they have every right to be annoyed at me, as I am annoyed with people I get autoresponds from. But I figure that's a tradeoff I can live with. Now in Russel's case, apparently it's not one message, so the autoresponder in question is severely broken. Also, the user's brain is severely broken, since he apparently doesn't know what's going on, and that's the real problem. /me will vote for an Internet Driver's License cheers -- vbi -- P-K4 pgpqOgSpZgQPK.pgp Description: signature
spam from an auto-responder
Could someone please help educate this person. -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:53 From: "Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'll tell you once more because you're apparently STUPID. This is an AUTOMATED message. Thus the words AUTO-RESPONDER. If YOU send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] you WILL get an auto-response. PERIOD. So the simple solution is for you to NOT send any e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good luck figuring out where the problem is on your end because it surely isn't on mine. G-Man -Original Message- From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 8:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:04, "Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I have no clue what the auto-responder is responding to. If you > could give me some idea I might be able to track it down. Otherwise I > can't. It's not responding to any mail from me. I don't know what it's responding to, probably a virus. Just make sure it doesn't do it any more. > G-Man > > -Original Message- > From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 8:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! > > On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:47, "Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > I changed my old e-mail to be an auto responder in case there was > > anyone who was still using my old e-mail. > > I don't care, I just want the stupid email from your domain to stop. > > > G-Man > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 1:14 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Fwd: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! > > > > Please don't send messages like this in response to viruses. > > > > -- Forwarded Message -- > > > > Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! > > Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:40 > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Please be advised that the amount of spam coming to this account > > reached intolerable levels. As such, I have changed my e-mail > > address. The new e-mail is: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Thanks, > > > > G-Man > > > > --- -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page --- -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: spam from an auto-responder
You could always tell him that he's just handing his new email address out to all the spambots testing his old one. That might scare him enough to turn the damn thing off. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: spam from an auto-responder
An auto-responder has no way of knowing who or what emailed it. How can u blame him for some spammer emailing it using ur address as a source? It seems like the only recourse is to try to find out who or what was using ur address and blow that person off the net. At 02:52 PM 6/16/04 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Could someone please help educate this person. > -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: spam from an auto-responder
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:49, Ward Willats <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Could someone please help educate this person. > > You mean the "From:" header could be forged?! Dear Lord NO! Russell, > say it ain't so! Some people haven't realised this yet. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: spam from an auto-responder
Could someone please help educate this person. You mean the "From:" header could be forged?! Dear Lord NO! Russell, say it ain't so! I personally like giving forwarding pointers in the 550 text. People can read it, but machines ignore it. (Though I hear Exchange suppresses multi-line 550 text, so be brief!) Am I missing something with this approach? -- Ward -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
spam from an auto-responder
Could someone please help educate this person. -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:53 From: "Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'll tell you once more because you're apparently STUPID. This is an AUTOMATED message. Thus the words AUTO-RESPONDER. If YOU send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] you WILL get an auto-response. PERIOD. So the simple solution is for you to NOT send any e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good luck figuring out where the problem is on your end because it surely isn't on mine. G-Man -Original Message- From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 8:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:04, "Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I have no clue what the auto-responder is responding to. If you > could give me some idea I might be able to track it down. Otherwise I > can't. It's not responding to any mail from me. I don't know what it's responding to, probably a virus. Just make sure it doesn't do it any more. > G-Man > > -Original Message- > From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 8:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! > > On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:47, "Geoffrey Faivre-Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > I changed my old e-mail to be an auto responder in case there was > > anyone who was still using my old e-mail. > > I don't care, I just want the stupid email from your domain to stop. > > > G-Man > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 1:14 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Fwd: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! > > > > Please don't send messages like this in response to viruses. > > > > -- Forwarded Message -- > > > > Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] No Longer Used! > > Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:40 > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Please be advised that the amount of spam coming to this account > > reached intolerable levels. As such, I have changed my e-mail > > address. The new e-mail is: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Thanks, > > > > G-Man > > > > --- -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page --- -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
