Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-14 Thread Paul Morgan
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 23:58:34 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:

 On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 06:31:55PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 
 - if you don't read communications from earthlink, then no wonder you
 don't know what's going on
 
 I did check my backed up folder and found the last 8 months of earthlink
 emails and NO mentions.
 snip
 
 -Happy Gnu to you,
 Kev

Then that is my mistake;  I offer my apology to you and to Ross.  I
found out about it several days ago during a normal routine check of
services offered on earthlink's web site, and immediately turned it on,
which has resulted in the removal of about 1.4MB per day of Swens.  All
were cleaned by removal of infected attachments and I received the
remainder of the disinfected items.

Incidentally, there has been expressed a dislike of earthlink's spam
filtering.  It's working well for me personally; however maybe it's worth
noting that no-one is forcing earthlink subscribers to use earthlink's
filtering. If one doesn't like it and wishes to do it oneself, one can
turn it off.

I carry no torch for earthlink.  I was just trying to correct an
inaccurate characterization of their services.

The best ISP I used was a local one: magicnet.net of Orlando.
Unfortunately, they were bought out by a national enterprise: Verio, was
it? can't remember the name now, I've blotted it from my memory, like the
survivor of a traffic accident. Anyway, they completely destroyed a first
class service in a stunningly short period of time.

Like the nun who prayed daily for Jesus' return tomorrow, I continue to
pray for the return of local ISPs who endeavor to excel because they
actually give a crap for their customers and not just for the content of
their wallets.

-- 
paul

Do the little things (Gwnewch y pethau bychain)

St. David (Dewi Sant) of Wales, last sermon, Sunday 27th February 589



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-14 Thread Kevin Mark
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 12:53:20PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
snip
 
 Then that is my mistake;  I offer my apology to you and to Ross.  I
 found out about it several days ago during a normal routine check of
 services offered on earthlink's web site, and immediately turned it on,

I did the same.

 which has resulted in the removal of about 1.4MB per day of Swens.  All
 were cleaned by removal of infected attachments and I received the
 remainder of the disinfected items.

Since my recent trial of Mutt, I noticed an added X-ETLK-AV header every
since. Ok for putting things in /dev/null.

 
 Incidentally, there has been expressed a dislike of earthlink's spam
 filtering.  It's working well for me personally; however maybe it's worth
 noting that no-one is forcing earthlink subscribers to use earthlink's
 filtering. If one doesn't like it and wishes to do it oneself, one can
 turn it off.

I have it on Medium and 99% of results are ok, so I just have to check
it once a month for obvious mistakes. But it doesnt seem to remember my
corrections 100%.


 
 I carry no torch for earthlink.  I was just trying to correct an
 inaccurate characterization of their services.
 
 The best ISP I used was a local one: magicnet.net of Orlando.
 Unfortunately, they were bought out by a national enterprise: Verio, was
 it? 

Yup, started with pipeline which became mindspring which became earthink
. Same result, less responsive.

can't remember the name now, I've blotted it from my memory, like the
 survivor of a traffic accident. Anyway, they completely destroyed a first
 class service in a stunningly short period of time.
 
 Like the nun who prayed daily for Jesus' return tomorrow, I continue to
 pray for the return of local ISPs who endeavor to excel because they
 actually give a crap for their customers and not just for the content of
 their wallets.

I once belived in the Great Pumkin, Too! Oh, Well.

-Kev


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-14 Thread Steve Lamb
Kevin Mark wrote:
more viruses, more cpu time, more MONEY. Its always money in the end.
snip
Well, not always money.  Money is the final factor, to be sure, but I can 
say with a resonable level of assurance that there are other factors.  Factors 
such as space and power.  Granted one can get more space and power by forking 
out more money but no matter how much money one throws at those problems it 
doesn't drop the amount of time it would take to bring up an accepteble space 
for computers with a reliable source of power and cooling.

--
 Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
   PGP Key: 8B6E99C5   | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-13 Thread Paul Morgan
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 20:56:48 -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:

 
 Although filtering should obviously be done by service providers, it
 seems they have a lot of trouble getting it right.  Mail to me goes
 through two service providers (one of them is just a forwarder, and I
 only recently found out they were attempting to remove spam).  In both
 cases, I see non-trivial numbers of legitimate messages classified as
 spam and never delivered to me.  As you point out, they never even
 report anything about what's going on.   (The irascible gentleman
 whose post started this thread apparently believes individual viruses
 are being sanitized by earthlink and delivered to him, but no one else
 has suggested they are doing that.)
 
 Did earthlink send a notice of this change, or did they just do it?  I
 didn't know about it.  But then, I usually don't read their
 newsletters, where I suppose they might have mentioned it.  I used
 their webmail interface quite recently, and didn't see anything
 suggesting their filtering options had changed.

A couple of points of information:

- I didn't start the thread

- Irascible only when dealing with someone who doesn't check the facts
first

- Yet again you question my veracity: earthlink generally filters the
virus from an infected email and passes the remainder on;  however, in the
case of a legitimate-appearing message which can't be cleaned, it's placed
in a quarantine folder and the recipient is emailed.  Also, in the case of
a fake message, earthlink will delete it and email the recipient details
of the message, including the sender (in case someone you know is
unknowingly transmitting the virus.  You can easily find all this out for
yourself by reading the virus blocker help in the webmail interface.

- if you had checked, you would have found out that one gets virus
filtering from earthlink if one turns it on for one's account (in the
webmail preferences)

- if you don't read communications from earthlink, then no wonder you
don't know what's going on

- a gentleman only in the loosest definition of the word :)

-- 
paul

Do the little things (Gwnewch y pethau bychain)

St. David (Dewi Sant) of Wales, last sermon, Sunday 27th February 589



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-13 Thread Kevin Mark
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 06:31:55PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 20:56:48 -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
 
  
  Although filtering should obviously be done by service providers, it
  seems they have a lot of trouble getting it right.  Mail to me goes
  through two service providers (one of them is just a forwarder, and I
  only recently found out they were attempting to remove spam).  In both
  cases, I see non-trivial numbers of legitimate messages classified as
  spam and never delivered to me.  As you point out, they never even
  report anything about what's going on.   (The irascible gentleman
  whose post started this thread apparently believes individual viruses
  are being sanitized by earthlink and delivered to him, but no one else
  has suggested they are doing that.)
  
  Did earthlink send a notice of this change, or did they just do it?  I
  didn't know about it.  But then, I usually don't read their
  newsletters, where I suppose they might have mentioned it.  I used
  their webmail interface quite recently, and didn't see anything
  suggesting their filtering options had changed.
 
 A couple of points of information:
 
snip
 of the message, including the sender (in case someone you know is
 unknowingly transmitting the virus.  You can easily find all this out for
 yourself by reading the virus blocker help in the webmail interface.
 
 - if you had checked, you would have found out that one gets virus
 filtering from earthlink if one turns it on for one's account (in the
 webmail preferences)
As a long time earthlink(mindspring,pipeline) customer, the virus
option is very recent and the spam option is somewhat recent. I recall
reading the spam options about a year ago and noticed nothing about
virus checking. KMS said the virus was very recent also. I am not
100% sure, but if I called Earthlink, I would think it was added within
a few months of the swen storm (+/-). I emailed tech support during the
storm and they made NO mention of any 'simple' 'flip this switch'
option. Thus, it didn't exist before swen. I emailed them and stated I
was leaving after more then 9 years, so it would be expected that if
this option existed, they would be EAGER to tell me about it. They had
no reply. 

 
 - if you don't read communications from earthlink, then no wonder you
 don't know what's going on
 
I did check my backed up folder and found the last 8 months of earthlink
emails and NO mentions.
snip

-Happy Gnu to you,
Kev


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-12 Thread Karsten M. Self
on Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 08:56:48PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 04:15:45PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
 ...
  
  Earthlink have implemented virus and spam filtering within the past
  month or so, early November, if time serves.
 
 That explains some of the confusion.  It's good they are trying to be
 responsive.  Too bad they aren't doing it better.
 
 As an aside to the comment that earthlink said they couldn't scan for
 viruses because that would be an invasion of privacy: one support
 person I spoke to hinted that the real issue was that scanning the
 entire body of email messages takes more resources than scanning the
 headers.  They may have resisted doing anything because of a shortage
 of CPU power (yes, I know, viruses consume CPU, bandwidth, disk space
 even if ignored...).  They also claimed that they weren't getting that
 many swens over their subscriber base.  This is perhaps true if it was
 harvesting off usenet postings.
 
  
  It's more than slightly flawed in several regards:
  
- There's no SMTP-time blocking -- the only way to reliably inform a
  sender that their message wasn't delivered, without joe-job risks.
 joe-job = ?

STFW i-mean type=in the nicest way

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22joe-job%22

  
- Viruses are filtered to a quarantine folder, which you still have
  to check and clear periodically.  Whether and how this counts to you
  10 MiB mail buffer quota isn't clear.  Filter is based on Brightmail
  IIRC.  This is *not* enabled by default, but must be selected by the
  subscriber.
 
 Their junk mail folder, according to their webmail interface, does not
 count against your quota, but may get periodically cleared out.  I'll
 have to check what the relation of this is to the new stuff, but
 probably it will work on the same principle.

There are several layers of ambiguity about this.  It appears poorly
considered in balance.

 Although filtering should obviously be done by service providers, it
 seems they have a lot of trouble getting it right.  Mail to me goes
 through two service providers (one of them is just a forwarder, and I
 only recently found out they were attempting to remove spam).  In both
 cases, I see non-trivial numbers of legitimate messages classified as
 spam and never delivered to me.  As you point out, they never even
 report anything about what's going on.   

I'm simply boggled that they can do this and think by any stretch of
logic or ethics that it's in some manner OK.

That said, most ISPs get a whole lot of crud wrong.  AOL was blocking
mail from me to my mother for some nine months, without notifying her of
the fact in advance, admitting it on inquiry, or offering any
alternatives.

That said, users can be a PITA, and _any_ introduced variance in the
system is another opportunity for things to go wrong.  Lord knows I
generally fsck myself up with even apparently minor changes to procmail
rules.  Mail is high-volume, affects lots of people, barely adheres to
even nominal standards by minimal margins, and is seen as a birthright
on the Internet


 (The irascible gentleman whose post started this thread apparently
 believes individual viruses are being sanitized by earthlink and
 delivered to him, but no one else has suggested they are doing that.)

There are various nodes through which mail is delivered.  Some are
taking to stripping viral payloads.  I've taken to reporting such
mail as spam, traning SA on the material, and spamlisting any
originating reporting addresses.


 Did earthlink send a notice of this change, or did they just do it?  I
 didn't know about it.  But then, I usually don't read their
 newsletters, where I suppose they might have mentioned it.  I used
 their webmail interface quite recently, and didn't see anything
 suggesting their filtering options had changed.

The announcement was scattershot at best.  Some press, website notice,
IIRC.  Though I rarely hit their own site.


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
The Earth *is* flat.  But Mars is sharp and Venus is in tune, which
makes up for it.


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-12 Thread Kevin Mark
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 08:56:48PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 04:15:45PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
 ...
  
  Earthlink have implemented virus and spam filtering within the past
  month or so, early November, if time serves.
 
Yea!
snip
 headers.  They may have resisted doing anything because of a shortage
 of CPU power (yes, I know, viruses consume CPU, bandwidth, disk space
 even if ignored...).  They also claimed that they weren't getting that
 many swens over their subscriber base.  This is perhaps true if it was
 harvesting off usenet postings.
 
more viruses, more cpu time, more MONEY. Its always money in the end.
snip
 Did earthlink send a notice of this change, or did they just do it?  I
 didn't know about it.  But then, I usually don't read their
 newsletters, where I suppose they might have mentioned it.  I used
 their webmail interface quite recently, and didn't see anything
 suggesting their filtering options had changed.
I went to the 'email options' page and turned on the VIRUS options as
soon as KMS mentioned it. Ever since my email has included a new
header:X-ELNK-AV (0 or 1). Where 1 means virus, and the message is
cleaned and edited to display the reason it was edited.

-Kev
 
 
 -- 
 To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-11 Thread Ross Boylan
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 04:15:45PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
...
 
 Earthlink have implemented virus and spam filtering within the past
 month or so, early November, if time serves.

That explains some of the confusion.  It's good they are trying to be
responsive.  Too bad they aren't doing it better.

As an aside to the comment that earthlink said they couldn't scan for
viruses because that would be an invasion of privacy: one support
person I spoke to hinted that the real issue was that scanning the
entire body of email messages takes more resources than scanning the
headers.  They may have resisted doing anything because of a shortage
of CPU power (yes, I know, viruses consume CPU, bandwidth, disk space
even if ignored...).  They also claimed that they weren't getting that
many swens over their subscriber base.  This is perhaps true if it was
harvesting off usenet postings.

 
 It's more than slightly flawed in several regards:
 
   - There's no SMTP-time blocking -- the only way to reliably inform a
 sender that their message wasn't delivered, without joe-job risks.
joe-job = ?

 
   - Viruses are filtered to a quarantine folder, which you still have
 to check and clear periodically.  Whether and how this counts to you
 10 MiB mail buffer quota isn't clear.  Filter is based on Brightmail
 IIRC.  This is *not* enabled by default, but must be selected by the
 subscriber.
 
Their junk mail folder, according to their webmail interface, does not
count against your quota, but may get periodically cleared out.  I'll
have to check what the relation of this is to the new stuff, but
probably it will work on the same principle.

   - In virus storms, virus filtering is enabled automatically.  There
 is no way for the subscriber to control this behavior.

If the filters worked that would be fine.  But they don't.

 
   - Spam filtering is largely limited to known spam checks, analagous
 to Vipul's Razor.  This is the same useless crap that was previously
 marketed as SpamBlocker.  Which didn't
 
   - There is a known senders mail filtering system, based on
 challenge-response (itself an evil concept) which again quarantines
 mail not delivered, again, counting against your mail buffer.
 
   http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Rants/challenge-response.html
 
   - There is no reporting to the user of what mail was blocked, sender,
 subject, or reason for blocking.  There is no option for user
 training of filters.
 
 Upshot:  I've not enabled any of the filtering.  I want to know what is
 blocked.  I want blocking at SMTP level.  And I want context-sensitive
 spam filters (e.g.:  Bayesian filters).  I can apply this through my own
 rules after downloading mail.  Current mail loads are sufficiently small
 that I can do this effectively.  I've also found that reporting received
 Swen tends to keep counts down (~60-65 per day, vs. 250+ if not
 reported).  I've created a few scripts for this (some assembly required):
 
Thanks for doing the reports.  It's a public service, as well as
helping you.

 http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/reportSwen
 http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/fqdn2domain
 
 
 Peace.
 


Although filtering should obviously be done by service providers, it
seems they have a lot of trouble getting it right.  Mail to me goes
through two service providers (one of them is just a forwarder, and I
only recently found out they were attempting to remove spam).  In both
cases, I see non-trivial numbers of legitimate messages classified as
spam and never delivered to me.  As you point out, they never even
report anything about what's going on.   (The irascible gentleman
whose post started this thread apparently believes individual viruses
are being sanitized by earthlink and delivered to him, but no one else
has suggested they are doing that.)

Did earthlink send a notice of this change, or did they just do it?  I
didn't know about it.  But then, I usually don't read their
newsletters, where I suppose they might have mentioned it.  I used
their webmail interface quite recently, and didn't see anything
suggesting their filtering options had changed.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-09 Thread Kevin Mark
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:44:18AM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
 on Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 05:40:16AM -0500, Kevin Mark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 11:55:57PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
   on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
   Perhaps their recently introduced virus filtering service:
   
   http://www.earthlink.net/myaccount/help/virusblocker/
 
 
  Hi KMS,
  Funny, I am a subscriber to this ISP and I didn't notice any email
  announcements (but then I ususally just delete the isp mail site unseen). 
  I'm sure
  this recent additions was because I (and i'm sure others) were really
  pissed at them during the swen 'flash flood' and sent quite a few
  emails. I guess this is as 'responsive' as they get. Now if they only
  get of their duff and get encrypted pop or the like!!! This would
  decrease my spam further!
 
 Protocol APOP is supported.  Not that this is mentioned anywhere that
 I'm aware.  I just learned of this a few weeks ago.
 
 I'm not sure how encrypted POP would help you with regard to spam
 though
 
HI,
IIRC, APOP only encrypts the login and the email message is sent in the clear.
with ssl or the like, my mail would not be sent in the clear and thus
could not be read and or harvested for email addresses or other info.
-Kev


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Spam, email, encrypted transit, harvesting (was Re: Earthlink and Swen)

2003-12-09 Thread Karsten M. Self
on Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 03:05:04AM -0500, Kevin Mark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:44:18AM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
  on Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 05:40:16AM -0500, Kevin Mark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
   On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 11:55:57PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
wrote:
Perhaps their recently introduced virus filtering service:

http://www.earthlink.net/myaccount/help/virusblocker/
  
  
   Hi KMS,
   Funny, I am a subscriber to this ISP and I didn't notice any email
   announcements (but then I ususally just delete the isp mail site unseen). 
   I'm sure
   this recent additions was because I (and i'm sure others) were really
   pissed at them during the swen 'flash flood' and sent quite a few
   emails. I guess this is as 'responsive' as they get. Now if they only
   get of their duff and get encrypted pop or the like!!! This would
   decrease my spam further!
  
  Protocol APOP is supported.  Not that this is mentioned anywhere that
  I'm aware.  I just learned of this a few weeks ago.
  
  I'm not sure how encrypted POP would help you with regard to spam
  though
  
 HI,

 IIRC, APOP only encrypts the login and the email message is sent in
 the clear.  with ssl or the like, my mail would not be sent in the
 clear and thus could not be read and or harvested for email addresses
 or other info.

Your email transiting between you and your ISP _frequently_ (but not
always) crosses only their internal network.  Odds of it being harvested
are low.

The mail has _already_ transited between the remote sender (if not you
or another user on your ISP) and your ISP's mailserver.  Almost always
in the clear.

Still, odds of your address being harvested in this manner are low,
though it's technically possible.  For someone with physical or
technical access to the direct link itself.  Pretty much anyone with
sufficient access to do this can get your address by other means,
though.

Far more likely, though, that your friend's been compromised by a virus
which is harvesting your address from his/her addressbook.



Encrypting your authentication tokens in APOP is useful.

Encrypting the mail in transit would be nice for a number of reasons,
but I don't see it having a significant impact on spam.

I'd recommend you focus your attention on realistic and controllable
risks.


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
In his dream he was walking late at night along the East Side,
beside the river which had become so extravagantly polluted that new
lifeforms were now emerging from it spontaneously, demanding welfare
and voting rights.
-- HHGTG


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-08 Thread Karsten M. Self
on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 ...
  I have all services locked down to localhost; my only connections to
  the outside world are mail, news via nntpcached, web via squid... I run
  Apache but it too is locked down to localhost.  My mail is run through my
  ISP's (earthlink's) virus and spam filters before I get it (otherwise I'd
  be getting like 10 Svens per day). I do see, from time to time, Apache
  refusing connections attempts which are generally attacks by Windoze worms.
 
 I had a long talk with earthlink a month or two ago in which they told
 me they were not filtering out swen (and they certainly weren't; I got
 a ton).  Soon after that, I did see some swen-like stuff in their spam
 filter for my account (but I also saw plenty still coming at me).
 
 What's your basis for saying they are filtering out swen, rather than
 that you're just getting less swen?

Perhaps their recently introduced virus filtering service:

http://www.earthlink.net/myaccount/help/virusblocker/


Synopsis: 

  If activated:
  - Infected legitimate mail is cleaned and delivered.
  - Infected virally distributed mail is blocked and deleted.
  - Legitimate mail which cannot be cleaned is quarantined.

  In emergency mode (mail storm), the system is activated automatically
  but only for the specific mail associated with the storm. 


My beefs:  

  - The system is unaccountable.  There's no reporting built in to
indicate how much mail is being blocked.

  - The system appears to work after SMTP transaction.  This means
that viral mail cannot be denied on delivery.  This is an issue
because:

 - Such delivery errors tip off other sites that they've got a virus
   problem.

 - Any attempted notification after receipt cannot be made without
   a high likelihood of false notification to spoofed addresses (a
   Joe-job attack).

  - Mail which cannot be cleaned is quarantined.  I don't need crap mail
sitting on my account.

  - There's no discussion of how messages that others send you are
distinguished from viral breeding mail.  Magick?

Nice try, but ultimately deficient.


However, it does exist.


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
Reject EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-08 Thread Kevin Mark
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 11:55:57PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
 on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 Perhaps their recently introduced virus filtering service:
 
 http://www.earthlink.net/myaccount/help/virusblocker/
 -- 
 Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
  What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
 Reject EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/

Hi KMS,
Funny, I am a subscriber to this ISP and I didn't notice any email
announcements (but then I ususally just delete the isp mail site unseen). 
I'm sure
this recent additions was because I (and i'm sure others) were really
pissed at them during the swen 'flash flood' and sent quite a few
emails. I guess this is as 'responsive' as they get. Now if they only
get of their duff and get encrypted pop or the like!!! This would
decrease my spam further!

-Kev


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-08 Thread Karsten M. Self
on Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 05:40:16AM -0500, Kevin Mark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 11:55:57PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
  on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  Perhaps their recently introduced virus filtering service:
  
  http://www.earthlink.net/myaccount/help/virusblocker/


 Hi KMS,
 Funny, I am a subscriber to this ISP and I didn't notice any email
 announcements (but then I ususally just delete the isp mail site unseen). 
 I'm sure
 this recent additions was because I (and i'm sure others) were really
 pissed at them during the swen 'flash flood' and sent quite a few
 emails. I guess this is as 'responsive' as they get. Now if they only
 get of their duff and get encrypted pop or the like!!! This would
 decrease my spam further!

Protocol APOP is supported.  Not that this is mentioned anywhere that
I'm aware.  I just learned of this a few weeks ago.

I'm not sure how encrypted POP would help you with regard to spam
though


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
Reject EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-08 Thread Vineet Kumar
* Kevin Mark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031208 03:17]:
 I guess this is as 'responsive' as they get. Now if they only
 get of their duff and get encrypted pop or the like!!! This would
 decrease my spam further!

By encrypted pop do you mean pop3/ssl?  If so, how do you expect would
this decrease the amount of spam you receive?

good times,
Vineet
-- 
http://www.doorstop.net/
-- 
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. --Benjamin Franklin


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-06 Thread Ross Boylan
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 04:52:27PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:56:59 -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
 
  On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
  ...
  I have all services locked down to localhost; my only connections to
  the outside world are mail, news via nntpcached, web via squid... I run
  Apache but it too is locked down to localhost.  My mail is run through my
  ISP's (earthlink's) virus and spam filters before I get it (otherwise I'd
  be getting like 10 Svens per day). I do see, from time to time, Apache
  refusing connections attempts which are generally attacks by Windoze worms.
  
  I had a long talk with earthlink a month or two ago in which they told
  me they were not filtering out swen (and they certainly weren't; I got
  a ton).  Soon after that, I did see some swen-like stuff in their spam
  filter for my account (but I also saw plenty still coming at me).
  
  What's your basis for saying they are filtering out swen, rather than
  that you're just getting less swen?
 
 I have no idea why you are attacking my veracity.  My statement is fact.

Well, try reading a little harder.  And generally, if someone asks you
why is something true? responding because it's a fact doesn't add
much. 

First, I'm not attacking your veracity, I'm asking what the basis is
for your statements.  Yes, I do find them a little hard to believe.

Second, the reason I'm surprised is based on my own experience with
earthlink, including their explicit statements that they weren't
blocking Swen.

What the mail you attached below is supposed to demonstrate, I don't
know.  You don't provide any context with which to understand it.
This is mail you sent?  received? both?
Perhaps the statements about Earthlink Virus blocking are meant as
proof of something, but considering how much forged stuff is floating
around I don't think it's very strong proof.  Why would some foreign
system be informing you about earthlink's filtering arrangements?  The
mail is obviously filled with forged headers since the FROM doesn't
match the return path and the TO doesn't match you (assuming the mail
was to you).

My idea of a convincing demonstration that earthlink is doing
something useful would be that you look at what's caught in
earthlink's filters, and see x swen's/day.

My aggravation level with earthlink just went up a notch, as I
attempted to file a problem report with them and again encountered
their usual go away level of technical support (I filed something
via their inadequate web form, since they've stopped listening to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  They sent me back a reply that didn't address
my problem, saying to write back if the problem wasn't solved.  I
wrote back.  They sent me a reply saying they had lost the original
problem report, so couldn't handle my response!).  I wish I knew of a
decent ISP.

 
 From - Fri Dec  5 15:57:48 2003
 X-UIDL: 1asa4W2Al3NZFop0
 X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
 X-Mozilla-Status2: 0800
 Status:  U
 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Received: from mail.telebit.ru ([217.107.81.59])
   by coot (EarthLink SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1asa4W2Al3NZFop0
   Thu, 4 Dec 2003 23:08:41 -0800 (PST)
 Received: from [81.25.172.123] (HELO qivz)
   by mail.telebit.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6)
   with SMTP id 3349026; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:07:59 +0300
 FROM: Email System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 TO: Mail Receiver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 SUBJECT: Failure Letter
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
   boundary=tkvyqd
 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:08:00 +0300
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 X-ELNK-AV: 1
 
 Content-Type: text/html
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 HTMLYou currently have EarthLink Virus Blocker powered by Symantec enabled.brThe 
 following attachments were infected and have been repaired:brbrNo attachments 
 are in this category.br
 brThe following infected attachments were deleted:brbr1. fdbq.exe: [EMAIL 
 PROTECTED]br
 br Original message text follows brbr
 
 HEAD/HEAD
 BODY
 iframe src=3Dcid:bbhhysgma; height=3D0 width=3D0/iframe
 BRBRHi.
 BRThis is the qmail programBR
 BRBRBRUndeliverable to B[EMAIL PROTECTED]/B
 /BODY/HTML
 
 Content-Type: text/plain;
   name=DELETED0.TXT
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
 Content-Id: bbhhysgma
 
 ZmlsZSBhdHRhY2htZW50OiBmZGJxLmV4ZQ0KDQpUaGUgZmlsZSBhdHRhY2hlZCB0byB0aGlz
 IGVtYWlsIHdhcyByZW1vdmVkIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaXMgaW5mZWN0ZWQgd2l0aCB0aGUgVzMy
 LlN3ZW4uQUBtbSB2aXJ1cy4NCg==
 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-06 Thread Paul Morgan
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 00:11:49 -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:

 On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 04:52:27PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 
 I have no idea why you are attacking my veracity.  My statement is fact.
 
 Well, try reading a little harder.  And generally, if someone asks you
 why is something true? responding because it's a fact doesn't add
 much. 
 
 First, I'm not attacking your veracity, I'm asking what the basis is
 for your statements.  Yes, I do find them a little hard to believe.
 
 Second, the reason I'm surprised is based on my own experience with
 earthlink, including their explicit statements that they weren't
 blocking Swen.
 
 What the mail you attached below is supposed to demonstrate, I don't
 know.  You don't provide any context with which to understand it.
 This is mail you sent?  received? both?
 Perhaps the statements about Earthlink Virus blocking are meant as
 proof of something, but considering how much forged stuff is floating
 around I don't think it's very strong proof.  Why would some foreign
 system be informing you about earthlink's filtering arrangements?  The
 mail is obviously filled with forged headers since the FROM doesn't
 match the return path and the TO doesn't match you (assuming the mail
 was to you).
 
 My idea of a convincing demonstration that earthlink is doing
 something useful would be that you look at what's caught in
 earthlink's filters, and see x swen's/day.
 

The email I attached is an example of how I receive infected emails from
earthlink: I receive the email with the infected executable removed and a
message to that effect inserted.  The rest of the email remains untouched.
 I am surprised that you were unable to get that.

So, what I had posted seems to fit your idea of a convincing demonstration.

And in my original post, I gave you a rough average of swens caught daily.

I had replied that you were attacking my veracity because you were.  You
chose, for whatever reason, not to believe my statement and demanded
proof.  Strangely, when I provided proof, you continued to disbelieve me.

I really don't give a toss whether you believe me or not, but I have
persevered with this thread so that others do not have a mistaken
impression of earthlink's virus filtering.

You are like *this* close to going into my Pan bozos filter.

-- 
paul

The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
(The UNIX Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-06 Thread Karsten M. Self
on Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 ...
  I have all services locked down to localhost; my only connections to
  the outside world are mail, news via nntpcached, web via squid... I run
  Apache but it too is locked down to localhost.  My mail is run through my
  ISP's (earthlink's) virus and spam filters before I get it (otherwise I'd
  be getting like 10 Svens per day). I do see, from time to time, Apache
  refusing connections attempts which are generally attacks by Windoze worms.
 
 I had a long talk with earthlink a month or two ago in which they told
 me they were not filtering out swen (and they certainly weren't; I got
 a ton).  Soon after that, I did see some swen-like stuff in their spam
 filter for my account (but I also saw plenty still coming at me).
 
 What's your basis for saying they are filtering out swen, rather than
 that you're just getting less swen?

Earthlink have implemented virus and spam filtering within the past
month or so, early November, if time serves.

It's more than slightly flawed in several regards:

  - There's no SMTP-time blocking -- the only way to reliably inform a
sender that their message wasn't delivered, without joe-job risks.

  - Viruses are filtered to a quarantine folder, which you still have
to check and clear periodically.  Whether and how this counts to you
10 MiB mail buffer quota isn't clear.  Filter is based on Brightmail
IIRC.  This is *not* enabled by default, but must be selected by the
subscriber.

  - In virus storms, virus filtering is enabled automatically.  There
is no way for the subscriber to control this behavior.

  - Spam filtering is largely limited to known spam checks, analagous
to Vipul's Razor.  This is the same useless crap that was previously
marketed as SpamBlocker.  Which didn't

  - There is a known senders mail filtering system, based on
challenge-response (itself an evil concept) which again quarantines
mail not delivered, again, counting against your mail buffer.

  http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Rants/challenge-response.html

  - There is no reporting to the user of what mail was blocked, sender,
subject, or reason for blocking.  There is no option for user
training of filters.

Upshot:  I've not enabled any of the filtering.  I want to know what is
blocked.  I want blocking at SMTP level.  And I want context-sensitive
spam filters (e.g.:  Bayesian filters).  I can apply this through my own
rules after downloading mail.  Current mail loads are sufficiently small
that I can do this effectively.  I've also found that reporting received
Swen tends to keep counts down (~60-65 per day, vs. 250+ if not
reported).  I've created a few scripts for this (some assembly required):

http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/reportSwen
http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Download/fqdn2domain


Peace.

-- 
Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of Gestalt don't you understand?
Reject EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-05 Thread kmark+debian-user
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:56:59PM -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:
 On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 ...
  I have all services locked down to localhost; my only connections to
  the outside world are mail, news via nntpcached, web via squid... I run
  Apache but it too is locked down to localhost.  My mail is run through my
  ISP's (earthlink's) virus and spam filters before I get it (otherwise I'd
  be getting like 10 Svens per day). I do see, from time to time, Apache
  refusing connections attempts which are generally attacks by Windoze worms.
 
 I had a long talk with earthlink a month or two ago in which they told
 me they were not filtering out swen (and they certainly weren't; I got
 a ton).  Soon after that, I did see some swen-like stuff in their spam
 filter for my account (but I also saw plenty still coming at me).
 
 What's your basis for saying they are filtering out swen, rather than
 that you're just getting less swen?

Hi,
I had a few choice words for earthlink after they responsed to my
emails. They said spam they could filter but viruses 'somehow' require
them to scan the entire email and this would 'invade' my privacy. I told
them that was bs. so having my 10mb email account fill up and start
bouncing and losing emails was what I was suppose to get for my bucks?!
They offer a 'blocking' black list web page but you have to enter a single email
address, no regex. Like spamers use a single address!
all in all earthlink sucks. and of course they dont offer encrtpted mail
like secure pop or imap.
-Kev


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Earthlink and Swen

2003-12-05 Thread Paul Morgan
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:56:59 -0800, Ross Boylan wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
 ...
 I have all services locked down to localhost; my only connections to
 the outside world are mail, news via nntpcached, web via squid... I run
 Apache but it too is locked down to localhost.  My mail is run through my
 ISP's (earthlink's) virus and spam filters before I get it (otherwise I'd
 be getting like 10 Svens per day). I do see, from time to time, Apache
 refusing connections attempts which are generally attacks by Windoze worms.
 
 I had a long talk with earthlink a month or two ago in which they told
 me they were not filtering out swen (and they certainly weren't; I got
 a ton).  Soon after that, I did see some swen-like stuff in their spam
 filter for my account (but I also saw plenty still coming at me).
 
 What's your basis for saying they are filtering out swen, rather than
 that you're just getting less swen?

I have no idea why you are attacking my veracity.  My statement is fact.

From - Fri Dec  5 15:57:48 2003
X-UIDL: 1asa4W2Al3NZFop0
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0800
Status:  U
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from mail.telebit.ru ([217.107.81.59])
by coot (EarthLink SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1asa4W2Al3NZFop0
Thu, 4 Dec 2003 23:08:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [81.25.172.123] (HELO qivz)
  by mail.telebit.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6)
  with SMTP id 3349026; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:07:59 +0300
FROM: Email System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TO: Mail Receiver [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SUBJECT: Failure Letter
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=tkvyqd
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 10:08:00 +0300
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-ELNK-AV: 1

--tkvyqd
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

HTMLYou currently have EarthLink Virus Blocker powered by Symantec enabled.brThe 
following attachments were infected and have been repaired:brbrNo attachments are 
in this category.br
brThe following infected attachments were deleted:brbr1. fdbq.exe: [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]br
br Original message text follows brbr

HEAD/HEAD
BODY
iframe src=3Dcid:bbhhysgma; height=3D0 width=3D0/iframe
BRBRHi.
BRThis is the qmail programBR
BRBRBRUndeliverable to B[EMAIL PROTECTED]/B
/BODY/HTML

--tkvyqd
Content-Type: text/plain;
name=DELETED0.TXT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Id: bbhhysgma

ZmlsZSBhdHRhY2htZW50OiBmZGJxLmV4ZQ0KDQpUaGUgZmlsZSBhdHRhY2hlZCB0byB0aGlz
IGVtYWlsIHdhcyByZW1vdmVkIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaXMgaW5mZWN0ZWQgd2l0aCB0aGUgVzMy
LlN3ZW4uQUBtbSB2aXJ1cy4NCg==
--tkvyqd--

-- 
paul

The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
(The UNIX Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972)



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]