Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
Marc G. Fournier wrote: Someone on this list has one of those 'confirm your email' filters on their mailbox, which is bouncing back messages ... this is an attempt to try and narrow down the address that is causing this ... So it seems you're still unable to determine the problematic address? -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
Marc G. Fournier wrote: Someone on this list has one of those 'confirm your email' filters on their mailbox, which is bouncing back messages ... this is an attempt to try and narrow down the address that is causing this ... Did you find out? -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: On Thu, 01 May 2008 01:16:00 -0300 Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone on this list has one of those 'confirm your email' filters on their Argh! Why do people think that it is OK to make their spam problem everyone else's problem? Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. People, please, I know the spam you get isn't your fault but it isn't my fault either. You clean up your mailbox and I'll clean up mine. I second that completely We use http://www.commtouch.com/ which is built into GMS along with black holes When they added commtouch to the server our spam went to maybe 2 to 5 spam messages a day per mailbox with only a handful of false positives over the past 2 years. Now if i can get them to dump MySQL as the backend
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
On Thu, 1 May 2008, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. Ah, the ever popular vigilante spam method. What if the message is coming from, say, gmail.com, and it's getting routed so that you're not sure which account is originating it? Do you blackhole everybody on *that* server just because there's one idiot? This is the same problem on a smaller scale. It's not clear which account is reponsible, and I believe I saw that there are other people using the same ISP who also subscribe to the list. That's why Marc is testing who the guilty party is rather than unsubscribing everyone there. -- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
Hi all the ignorers, ;) Greg Smith wrote: On Thu, 1 May 2008, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. Ah, the ever popular vigilante spam method. What if the message is coming from, say, gmail.com, and it's getting routed so that you're not sure which account is originating it? Do you blackhole everybody on *that* server just because there's one idiot? This is the same problem on a smaller scale. It's not clear which account is reponsible, and I believe I saw that there are other people using the same ISP who also subscribe to the list. That's why Marc is testing who the guilty party is rather than unsubscribing everyone there. yes, blackholing is bad as well as accepting everything and then sending out errors. Unfortunaly, email resembles the ideas of the decade when it was invented (freedom of speach over regulating) so security is only available as ad on. I wish however everybody would go by cryptography, meaning in our case the sender signs and the list checks (1) and also the list signs (2) when sending out, which makes it easy to check for the receiver if to accept the mail or decline in band... Cheers Tino PS: happy 1st of may :-) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
On Thu, 1 May 2008 02:55:10 -0400 (EDT) Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 1 May 2008, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. Ah, the ever popular vigilante spam method. What if the message is coming from, say, gmail.com, and it's getting routed so that you're not sure which account is originating it? Do you blackhole everybody on *that* server just because there's one idiot? Well, I actually do block gmail groups on another list that is gatewayed to a newsgroup due to the volume of spam that originates from there but in this case my experience has been that it is done by a service. For example, I reject all email from spamarrest.com. There is nothing I want to see from them. This is the same problem on a smaller scale. It's not clear which account is reponsible, and I believe I saw that there are other people using the same ISP who also subscribe to the list. That's why Marc is testing who the guilty party is rather than unsubscribing everyone there. Of course. If someone is running it on a server independent of the ISP that's a different story. However, it is pretty hard to run that code on most ISPs without the cooperation of the ISP. That's why there are companies like SpamArrest. People who run their own server and are in a position to do this themself tend to also be smart enough to understand why it is a bad idea. On the other hand, this type of thing is no different than spam and in this day and age every ISP, no matter how big, has a responsibility to deal with spammers on their own system and if they don't they deserve to be blocked just like any other spam-friendly system. The fact that Marc has to run this test and does not immediately know who the guilty party is suggests to me that they are using a service. I never saw the offending message myself so perhaps it is coming from SpamArrest and I just rejected the email on my SMTP server. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
[PERFORM] Please ignore ...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Someone on this list has one of those 'confirm your email' filters on their mailbox, which is bouncing back messages ... this is an attempt to try and narrow down the address that is causing this ... - -- Marc G. FournierHub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org) Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.orgICQ . 7615664 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.8 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkgZRAAACgkQ4QvfyHIvDvNHrwCcDdlkjAXSyfyOBa5vgfLVOrSb JyoAn005bSbY6lnyjGmlOQzj7fSMNSKV =n5PC -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
On Thu, 01 May 2008 01:16:00 -0300 Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone on this list has one of those 'confirm your email' filters on their Argh! Why do people think that it is OK to make their spam problem everyone else's problem? Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. People, please, I know the spam you get isn't your fault but it isn't my fault either. You clean up your mailbox and I'll clean up mine. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
