Re: Problems sending mail to yahoo?
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, Geo. wrote: > > > > of abuse might be useful for large providers, but since we can't even > > get many domains even to set up the already-specified abuse@ address, much > > less read the mail we send to it, > > When someone like AOL offloads their user complaints of spams to all the > abuse@ addresses instead of verifying that they actually are spams before > sending off complaints, is it any surprise that everyone else is refusing to > do their jobs for them? > > The reason abuse@ addresses are useless is because what is being sent to > them is useless. As one that works for a company that makes full use of complaints sent to it, abuse@ addresses are not useless, far from it. Please don't get the idea that because some think they're useless, it therefore is universal. We also get 100s of AOL feedbacks a day, which are filtered separately. Also not useless. And we've also reported incidents to other companies' abuse functions, and had them be resolved same-day because of it. Also, far from useless. How about if you're not actively in an abuse function, you hold off on declaring the function useless, cause the meme could catch on that it is, even if it's not, and I've yet to see an automated filtering/blocking system fully replace or completely obsolete a good trained network operator who understands what is and is not abuse on the network. -Dave D
Re: sorbs.net
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Micah McNelly wrote: > > Actually I got a response quickly from a list member who represent sorbs > at some level. Do you really think opinion has a place in mail > delivery? What if the USPS decided any magazine you subscribed to was > suddenly unfit for delivery and decided it should blocked (thrown away)? > > /m > Well, anyone remember the Comstock Act? But seriously, the analogy here is a bit false. It would be like the recipient of the mail signed up to use a service that inspected their mail for them, and made the decisions you are describing. You can argue that signing up for such a service is silly, wrong headed, ill informed and results in unintended consequences. But you cannot argue that it is government censorship. +----- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +-
Re: Spam Abuse Script from The World (roky@shell.TheWorld.com)
Guys, join SPAM-L and duke it out. nanog is supposed to be networking issues. Which a runaway spam reporting problem is most likely not. +- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +- On Sun, 26 Dec 2004, Joe Provo wrote: > > > Folllowups elsewhere - this isn't nanog fodder kids. > > On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 08:56:42PM -0800, David A. Ulevitch wrote: > > There is nobody behind the wheel at The World and they continue > > to send out this odd anti-spam spam. > > Wrong and wrong; there are definitely clues at the helm, and it > sure appears to be a user from offered evidence. As a matter of > fact the OWNER and OPERATOR of the site said as much in mail that > was forwarding in response to your first thrashing about on the > matter. See http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg03630.html > > > Some folks emailed me privately to suggest the emails are coming > > from one of their users but I believe this is not the case. > > Repeated assertions of beliefs does not transmogrify them into > facts. People who insist on making nanog [or some other public > fourm] their first stop on an troubleshooting chain will find > themselves wildly disappointed. In this case, see the FAQ for > more aappropriate places to spew. > > Joe > > -- > RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE >
Re: Sanity worm defaces websites using php bug
The one instance of this I observed did the following: 1) got permissions of apache daemon by way of the viewtopic.php script 2) ran the server's wget to download http://www.packetstormsecurity.nl/DoS/udp.pl 3) pulled udp.pl down into /tmp, and ran, not sure how it got its list of ip. The quick and dirty work around to shut this off right away was to chmod wget down to 0, then go fix viewtopic.php . +----- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +- On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, cw wrote: > > Does anyone have any more detail on exactly what this thing does after > it gets into a system? > > The cgi platform for a company I use has been hit and the effect is > not just limited to phpBB, it seems to get into the server and then go > through everything it can write to.. > > I lost a copy of UBB to this worm even though I don't rund phpBB off > the same vhost. > > Gonna be a nightmare for server ops to ensure that all client copies > of phpBB are patched.. > >
Re: Seeking abuse contact for 142.177.73.59
Dear Nanog Readers, I want to thank everyone that corrected my typo mistake, the domain for email was correct locally, then I did not cut/paste it into the nanog mail, resulting in a typo which many were quick to spot. Thanks for the attention to detail! Was also thanks to the list able to find an email with a person at the other end of aliant.ca, and will work with them on the original issue. Thanks again, Dave D +- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +- On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > > Try @aliant.ca (note the one L). Bell.ca (BCE) is a majority owner in > Aliant which is an amalgamation of the various old provincial incumbent > telcos and they are just finishing up a nasty protracted strike as well. > > ---Mike > > At 01:52 PM 07/09/2004, Dave Dennis wrote: > > >Greetings, > > > >Attempting to locate someone in authority for > >ip 142.177.73.59. > > > >Was referred to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but > >mail to that address bounces after rattling around > >inside Exchange for a bit. > >
Seeking abuse contact for 142.177.73.59
Greetings, Attempting to locate someone in authority for ip 142.177.73.59. Was referred to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but mail to that address bounces after rattling around inside Exchange for a bit. Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] also bounces, with a different message. Was referred to [EMAIL PROTECTED] by voice message at 1-506-694-6270 . Was referred there by person working for Bell.CA at +1-613-781-9095, where i got to where i whois'd the ip originally. Anyone have actual working abuse contact for this IP, is welcome to email me off list. Thanks! +----- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +-
noc/mail admin contact for hotmail.com?
I need to get in touch with RP at hotmail, tried [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is only for consumers of hotmail, as it needs to reference a hotmail account. I tried [EMAIL PROTECTED], but have received no response. Is there a more appropriate known address? This has to do with blocking mail at the server level. Reply off-list as preferred. Kind regards, Dave D +- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +-
Re: Definition of P2P (was Feinstein)
With bots that were widely available at the time, yes. +- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +- On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Bora Akyol wrote: > Sorry, was it possible to search for a file from > millions of storage > nodes > in IRC? > > Bora > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Dave Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 5:04 PM > > To: Bora Akyol > > Cc: 'Martin J. Levy'; 'Sean Donelan'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Senator Diane Feinstein Wants to know about the > > Benefits of P2P > > > > > > /dcc send filename > > > > peer to peer sharing, on irc, since 1991. > > > > Napster simply implemented the IRC protocol's DCC function, > > with a better command set / GUI. > > > > > > > > +- > > + Dave Dennis > > + Seattle, WA > > + [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > + http://www.dmdennis.com > > +- > > > > On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Bora Akyol wrote: > > > > > > > > I think we need to define what P2P is before we can address this. > > > > > > IMHO, P2P started with NAPSTER, yes before that there was > > WWW, gopher, > > > ftp, > > > files by email, bitnet, x/y/z modem, bbs (dating myself here), > > > but the large scale bandwidth usage that is seen started > > with NAPSTER. > > > > > > P2P I would define as distributed file sharing with > > database like search > > > capabilities. If you define it in this context, the bandwidth > > > characteristics of P2P is a lot closer (but on a higher > > scale) than the > > > bandwidth characteristics of a traditional web surfer. > > Hence, ADSL in > > > particular and asymmetric data comm in general hamper P2P. > > > > > > > > > Bora > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Martin J. Levy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 4:13 PM > > > > To: Sean Donelan > > > > Cc: Bora Akyol; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: RE: Senator Diane Feinstein Wants to know about the > > > > Benefits of P2P > > > > > > > > > > > > Sean, > > > > > > > > >There were lots of FTP mirrors around. > > > > >Every Sun workstation could have a Anonymous FTP. Of > > > > course, the problem > > > > >was every Sun workstation could be an Anonymous FTP :-) > > > > > > > > ... but you forgot to mention that filtering and firewalls > > > > and NAT were not in common use, hence everywhere was > > > > accessible from everywhere. P2P was all there was. > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
RE: Senator Diane Feinstein Wants to know about the Benefits of P2P
/dcc send filename peer to peer sharing, on irc, since 1991. Napster simply implemented the IRC protocol's DCC function, with a better command set / GUI. +----- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +- On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Bora Akyol wrote: > > I think we need to define what P2P is before we can address this. > > IMHO, P2P started with NAPSTER, yes before that there was WWW, gopher, > ftp, > files by email, bitnet, x/y/z modem, bbs (dating myself here), > but the large scale bandwidth usage that is seen started with NAPSTER. > > P2P I would define as distributed file sharing with database like search > capabilities. If you define it in this context, the bandwidth > characteristics of P2P is a lot closer (but on a higher scale) than the > bandwidth characteristics of a traditional web surfer. Hence, ADSL in > particular and asymmetric data comm in general hamper P2P. > > > Bora > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Martin J. Levy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 4:13 PM > > To: Sean Donelan > > Cc: Bora Akyol; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Senator Diane Feinstein Wants to know about the > > Benefits of P2P > > > > > > Sean, > > > > >There were lots of FTP mirrors around. > > >Every Sun workstation could have a Anonymous FTP. Of > > course, the problem > > >was every Sun workstation could be an Anonymous FTP :-) > > > > ... but you forgot to mention that filtering and firewalls > > and NAT were not in common use, hence everywhere was > > accessible from everywhere. P2P was all there was. > > > > Martin > > > >
Re: Controls are ineffective without user cooperation
Tell them that every time they click on that thing, it costs $1000 to disinfect the LAN and keep the firewall up to date. Caveat: have yet to actually try this approach, but seems like it would have a chance at least. +- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] + http://www.dmdennis.com +- On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Christopher L. Morrow wrote: > > > On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Sean Donelan wrote: > > > > > Donn S. Parker pointed out controls are ineffective without user > > cooperation. > > > > According to an AT&T sponsored survey, 78% of executives admitted to > > opening attachments from unknown senders in the last year, 29% used their > > own name or birthday as a "secure" password, 17% accessed the company > > network in a public place and didn't log out, 9% informally shared > > a network password with someone outside of the company. > > surprised? if you don't teach the baby the consequences then they continue > to behave badly. I suppose it IS a little bit tough to tell the executive: > "Bad Exec!! NO COOKIE!!!" or the equivalent in execu-speak :( > > > > > http://www.att.com/news/item/0,1847,13137,00.html > > > > The survey included relatively few people, 254 executives from Europe, > > North America ans Asia-Pacific regions. > > >
Need 3M System Admin contact
Dear NANOG, Anyone know how to contact responsible mail admin for 3M corp? The whois contact number 651-736-7182 rings to the legal department who are on holiday til Tuesday and 651-733-8122 just infinite rings. The 3M corp (spock.mmm.com) is blocking a domain which I admin for, and even emailing them as postmaster is being bounced. Thanks! +- + Dave Dennis + Seattle, WA + [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-
