Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Craig McLean wrote on Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:30:03 +: craig.dnsalias.com is a dynamic DNS domain provided by dyndns.com. Ok, I see. There's no good reason to reject such a domain by it's name. In my case, my IP is supposedly dynamic, in that it's in a dynamic range, but in reality hasn't changed in over a year. That's why I got fukka.co.uk and just pointed it at this year-old IP lease. Well, no matter how long your lease is if it is advertised as dynmaic there's good reason to reject it, though ;-) So, if you send mail directly from that address it can bounce if it is known to RBLs, but not because of the dnsalias.com email address. However, they might have their own ACL and put dnsalias.com in there because of bad experience. No idea, it was months ago and the mails have been removed. Ah, sorry, I confused you with the original poster. I guess we have beaten this to death now :-) Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Craig McLean wrote on Sun, 25 Dec 2005 13:51:46 +: I *subscribed* with a dyndns-style address in a dynamic space, then couldn't *unsubscribe* it because the list bounced everything. This was even when using my ISPs SMTP relay smarthost-style. I don't know what a dyndns-style address is. An RBL will include IP numbers not email addresses. If your mail is bounced even when sending over a smarthost then something may be broken. What *is* the reason given in the bounced message? Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Jim C. Nasby wrote on Sun, 25 Dec 2005 21:21:23 -0600: Hence my suggestion for a version/option on SA that was meant to be extremely fast so that MTAs could use it while an email is inbound. That would allow (for example) hitting a number of RBLs and scoring them, instead of using a single RBL as a go/no-go decision. You can do this with other software, f.i. MailScanner. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kai Schaetzl wrote: Craig McLean wrote on Sun, 25 Dec 2005 13:51:46 +: I *subscribed* with a dyndns-style address in a dynamic space, then couldn't *unsubscribe* it because the list bounced everything. This was even when using my ISPs SMTP relay smarthost-style. I don't know what a dyndns-style address is. e.g. [EMAIL PROTECTED] craig.dnsalias.com is a dynamic DNS domain provided by dyndns.com. It's specifically designed for people who want to have a domain-name, but have dynamic IP addresses. It generally gives very short leases, and uses a client daemon to update your entry in the zone. In my case, my IP is supposedly dynamic, in that it's in a dynamic range, but in reality hasn't changed in over a year. That's why I got fukka.co.uk and just pointed it at this year-old IP lease. An RBL will include IP numbers not email addresses. Yep. I was aware of that. If your mail is bounced even when sending over a smarthost then something may be broken. What *is* the reason given in the bounced message? No idea, it was months ago and the mails have been removed. I remember them not giving any useful information other than something curt about dialup addresses and being, if I recall, from an unexpected (to me at least) address in Scandinavia. C. - -- Craig McLeanhttp://fukka.co.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Where the fun never starts Powered by FreeBSD, and GIN! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDsZY7MDDagS2VwJ4RAmOyAKDxahZ1bfsRsu4mmUVOFYPu+yh+hQCfda3N Nwpp5PhP0ryqicMB5lMa2m4= =+uzO -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Jim C. Nasby a écrit : Hence my suggestion for a version/option on SA that was meant to be extremely fast so that MTAs could use it while an email is inbound. That would allow (for example) hitting a number of RBLs and scoring them, instead of using a single RBL as a go/no-go decision. look at policyd-weight. This is a postfix policy service that uses a score based system.
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kai Schaetzl wrote: Craig McLean wrote on Fri, 23 Dec 2005 16:02:47 +: I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed You mean an address for which you sent email from dynamic IP space? Honestly, and not meant to be offensive, but if you do that that's your problem you should know better. I don't accept such mail either. And don't tell me you cannot send mail another way. You're missing the point. I *subscribed* with a dyndns-style address in a dynamic space, then couldn't *unsubscribe* it because the list bounced everything. This was even when using my ISPs SMTP relay smarthost-style. I'm still posting from the same IP range, but using a real domainname, and never seem to have a problem hitting the list, but the list management addresses may be a different matter. C. - -- Craig McLeanhttp://fukka.co.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Where the fun never starts Powered by FreeBSD, and GIN! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDrqPxMDDagS2VwJ4RAnS4AKDXkh1Gb86tKs/7/uTaIxwM5uiiXACgoru+ W95JsHh1QSu6ixEVRn07814= =jCh+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
From: Craig McLean [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kai Schaetzl wrote: Craig McLean wrote on Fri, 23 Dec 2005 16:02:47 +: I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed You mean an address for which you sent email from dynamic IP space? Honestly, and not meant to be offensive, but if you do that that's your problem you should know better. I don't accept such mail either. And don't tell me you cannot send mail another way. You're missing the point. I *subscribed* with a dyndns-style address in a dynamic space, then couldn't *unsubscribe* it because the list bounced everything. This was even when using my ISPs SMTP relay smarthost-style. I'm still posting from the same IP range, but using a real domainname, and never seem to have a problem hitting the list, but the list management addresses may be a different matter. Bounce back a message to the ezmlm software from the offending emailaddress. Ezmlm will see this and send you a probe. Bounce back that probe and you will be removed from the mailinglist. It is not a nice methode but a working one. This is told you by Tony Finch at 22-12-05. Maurice Lucas
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 11:32:57PM +0100, Kai Schaetzl wrote: Well, ressource-wise it makes a difference if you run a million mails thru SA or if you can unload 90% at MTA level and run only the remaining 100.000 thru SA. Hence my suggestion for a version/option on SA that was meant to be extremely fast so that MTAs could use it while an email is inbound. That would allow (for example) hitting a number of RBLs and scoring them, instead of using a single RBL as a go/no-go decision. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect[EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: Where do you want to go today? Linux: Where do you want to go tomorrow? FreeBSD: Are you guys coming, or what?
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Hence my suggestion for a version/option on SA that was meant to be extremely fast so that MTAs could use it while an email is inbound. That would allow (for example) hitting a number of RBLs and scoring them, instead of using a single RBL as a go/no-go decision. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect[EMAIL PROTECTED] I believe it would then have to be MTA specific as SpamAssassin is not always (not normally) used during the SMTP client conversation. If you use Postfix, you can gain this type of functionality; see: http://www.policyd-weight.org/ or possibly: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=135331 Gary V _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Craig McLean wrote on Fri, 23 Dec 2005 16:02:47 +: I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed You mean an address for which you sent email from dynamic IP space? Honestly, and not meant to be offensive, but if you do that that's your problem you should know better. I don't accept such mail either. And don't tell me you cannot send mail another way. It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Well, ressource-wise it makes a difference if you run a million mails thru SA or if you can unload 90% at MTA level and run only the remaining 100.000 thru SA. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Kai Schaetzl a écrit : Craig McLean wrote on Fri, 23 Dec 2005 16:02:47 +: I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed You mean an address for which you sent email from dynamic IP space? Honestly, and not meant to be offensive, but if you do that that's your problem you should know better. I don't accept such mail either. And don't tell me you cannot send mail another way. sometimes people's ISP gets listed (for good or bad reasons), and that can be a very frustrating situation. This may be considered as collateral damage, of course. but it's still annoying. It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Well, ressource-wise it makes a difference if you run a million mails thru SA or if you can unload 90% at MTA level and run only the remaining 100.000 thru SA. This is absolutely true if you can find reliable RBLs. but unfortunately, this is not as easy as we would like. BTW is the list of subscribers available to the MTA, so that it can reject non subscribers at MTA time? that won't help with forgeries, but should reduce the load (not sure, but would be good to know if spammers target the list without forging a subscriber's address).
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
You are all speculating. No one knows why or if the original poster can't unsubscribe. And, frankly, it was the first posting of this kind I've ever seen. It's not a problem at all. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kai Schaetzl wrote: You are all speculating. No one knows why or if the original poster can't unsubscribe. I'll agree with that, to a point. And, frankly, it was the first posting of this kind I've ever seen. It's not a problem at all. I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed because when I tried the normal channels everything got bounced. Maybe this guy is just the first to complain out loud? Anyway, I'll second (third?) Jim Nasby's comments that: It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Spam making it past that is a good indication of where SA could be improved afterall. C. - -- Craig McLeanhttp://fukka.co.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Where the fun never starts Powered by FreeBSD, and GIN! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDrB+nMDDagS2VwJ4RAr3EAJ9cvML0MGnq6cYMHYn+TFETxWREowCfUCRL mmY3RsZCaMJVWmog7WPMot8= =Xjch -END PGP SIGNATURE-
RE: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
-Original Message- From: Craig McLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 December 2005 16:03 To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kai Schaetzl wrote: You are all speculating. No one knows why or if the original poster can't unsubscribe. I'll agree with that, to a point. And, frankly, it was the first posting of this kind I've ever seen. It's not a problem at all. I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed because when I tried the normal channels everything got bounced. Maybe this guy is just the first to complain out loud? Anyway, I'll second (third?) Jim Nasby's comments that: It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Spam making it past that is a good indication of where SA could be improved afterall. C. But of course when people drop examples etc it'll get blocked. I have the SA list whitelisted other wise it's FP all over the place. -- Martin Hepworth Snr Systems Administrator Solid State Logic Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300 ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean. **
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin Hepworth wrote: -Original Message- From: Craig McLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 December 2005 16:03 To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kai Schaetzl wrote: You are all speculating. No one knows why or if the original poster can't unsubscribe. I'll agree with that, to a point. And, frankly, it was the first posting of this kind I've ever seen. It's not a problem at all. I'll disagree with you here, I have had to contact the list-owner to get a dynamic address unsubscribed because when I tried the normal channels everything got bounced. Maybe this guy is just the first to complain out loud? Anyway, I'll second (third?) Jim Nasby's comments that: It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Spam making it past that is a good indication of where SA could be improved afterall. C. But of course when people drop examples etc it'll get blocked. I have the SA list whitelisted other wise it's FP all over the place. As is the oft-repeated mantra of this list: SA doesn't block mail, it scores it. C. - -- Craig McLeanhttp://fukka.co.uk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Where the fun never starts Powered by FreeBSD, and GIN! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDrCVHMDDagS2VwJ4RAsDdAKD0rVshgzsCE1xzBlPpE9eSux7q+QCfbxJ3 XtA0kFwc1ZBBMaxNuEDAxXQ= =bu5v -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You see, it does not allow me to unsubscribe. It's ezmlm, so you can just reject all messages from the list and it will unsubscribe you :-) Tony. -- f.a.n.finch [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dotat.at/ BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR GOOD.
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 08:55:21PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: On Wednesday 21 December 2005 18:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You see, it does not allow me to unsubscribe. Some goofball running the SA list (or a server front-end for the list) decided to 100% block on incoming email to the list with the SORBS dynamic IP list (which is high false positives). Now, the problem is, and what makes this list now a spam source, is that I have no way to unsubscribe my email account that was allowed to sign up to the list months ago, but is now not worthy to post with. Ahh, but you just did, or didn't you consider that? Did anyone bother to read the email? He states that he's mailing from another account. BTW, this email is a great example of why it's a horrible idea to filter mail based on an RBL. It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Spam making it past that is a good indication of where SA could be improved afterall. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect[EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: Where do you want to go today? Linux: Where do you want to go tomorrow? FreeBSD: Are you guys coming, or what?
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim C. Nasby writes: BTW, this email is a great example of why it's a horrible idea to filter mail based on an RBL. It's surprising to me that the SA lists aren't just run through SA. Spam making it past that is a good indication of where SA could be improved afterall. Agreed ;) However, as an Apache project, we're hosting our lists at apache.org, and they get *insane* quantities of spam, viruses, and blowback -- far too many for the hardware to cope with, without upfront DNSBL use, apparently. It's not our call alone -- it's up to the ASF infrastructure volunteers. We can *ask* them nicely, but considering we get it for free, it's their call. - --j. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFDqwVgMJF5cimLx9ARAmBrAJwL0SyafdePYX9fYvmLTl+j/RbNfQCgo+Pf eiF43WUr/VmOt3nRVaAB/RI= =MRin -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 11:58:24AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote: However, as an Apache project, we're hosting our lists at apache.org, and they get *insane* quantities of spam, viruses, and blowback -- far too many for the hardware to cope with, without upfront DNSBL use, apparently. It's not our call alone -- it's up to the ASF infrastructure volunteers. We can *ask* them nicely, but considering we get it for free, it's their call. Sounds to me what's needed is a sort of 'SA-uberfast' that can be used as an MTA filter. For starters, this would allow for polling multiple RBLs instead of filtering on the results of just one. (Yes, I know you can poll multiple ones now, but the point is if you show up in any of them you get dropped. This we each RBL could be assigned a weight, and you only drop email based on total score). Hmm.. there's other tests that could be done quickly as well; checking for matching reverse DNS, for example. And having a score of some kind available, you could also decide how to handle the email based on the score. If the score is low, let the email right in. If it's medium, greylist it. If it's high, drop it completely. The one issue I can think of is this would have to perform better than a full-blown SA check does. If much of SA's time is spent doing things like BAYES checks then hopefully that wouldn't be an issue. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect[EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: Where do you want to go today? Linux: Where do you want to go tomorrow? FreeBSD: Are you guys coming, or what?
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Selon Justin Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]: However, as an Apache project, we're hosting our lists at apache.org, and they get *insane* quantities of spam, viruses, and blowback -- far too many for the hardware to cope with, without upfront DNSBL use, apparently. sure, but: - [philosopical] rejecting legitimate mail isn't the answer - [practical] a mailing list that makes it hard to unsubscribe is no different than a spammer that doesn't implement opt-out. an ML can reject mail from someone, but can't continue to send him email if he wants to stop. It's not our call alone -- it's up to the ASF infrastructure volunteers. We can *ask* them nicely, but considering we get it for free, it's their call. This explains the situation but doesn't solve the problem. I am certain that a lot of people can host a mailing list for the popular spamassassin. otherwise, we have a real problem: - people can subscribe - mail may be rejected for unreliable reasons - people can't even unsubscribe or am I to understand that volunteer=open source=unreliable fortunately not. a single example is the dspam ML. it doesn't reject sorbs slaves;-p
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 06:59:37PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you sign up to a list that won't let you unsubscribe, isn't that one of the key indicators of spam? I know that will get you a block at most all major ISP systems these days real quick, which would probably be hard to get off of. Typically one would make a reasonable effort to unsubscribe, not try once and complain. Obviously your address makes it to the list, so you could have sent mail to the owner alias and asked to be unsubscribed. Anyway, I've removed your address from the list. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: The difference between war and sex is that sex is a lot more fun ... I don't know if you've had sex, but it's really fantastic! - Jake Johannsen, Politically Incorrect 8/10/2001 pgpSldc49YUqG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Theo Van Dinter wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 06:59:37PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you sign up to a list that won't let you unsubscribe, isn't that one of the key indicators of spam? I know that will get you a block at most all major ISP systems these days real quick, which would probably be hard to get off of. Typically one would make a reasonable effort to unsubscribe, not try once and complain. Obviously your address makes it to the list, so you could have sent mail to the owner alias and asked to be unsubscribed. Anyway, I've removed your address from the list. Ahhh yes, but which address did you remove ? The one he can post from or the one he can't post from ? heheheh, Rick
RE: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, here is my dilemma. I can't unsubscribe from the other account (this list has it blocked as I described), and there is no alternate method presented in the emails from the list (such as a weblink to opt-out). From the headers: list-unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] So you're saying mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is blocked for all IP addresses in SORBS? -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, here is my dilemma. I can't unsubscribe from the other account (this list has it blocked as I described), and there is no alternate method presented in the emails from the list (such as a weblink to opt-out). From the headers: list-unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] So you're saying mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is blocked for all IP addresses in SORBS? If they're using the SORBS RBL at the MTA layer, yes. Most MTA layer RBL checks don't even bother waiting until there's a RCPT To: command before issuing the 550 command, so there's no way to have use the RBL but not for these addresses.
RE: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
Matt Kettler wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From the headers: list-unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] So you're saying mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is blocked for all IP addresses in SORBS? If they're using the SORBS RBL at the MTA layer, yes. Most MTA layer RBL checks don't even bother waiting until there's a RCPT To: command before issuing the 550 command, so there's no way to have use the RBL but not for these addresses. An interesting theoretical problem... I suppose one fix would be to have unsubscribe addresses of the form [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that unsubscribe requests could go to a dedicated MX... -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer
Re: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
On Wednesday 21 December 2005 18:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You see, it does not allow me to unsubscribe. Some goofball running the SA list (or a server front-end for the list) decided to 100% block on incoming email to the list with the SORBS dynamic IP list (which is high false positives). Now, the problem is, and what makes this list now a spam source, is that I have no way to unsubscribe my email account that was allowed to sign up to the list months ago, but is now not worthy to post with. Ahh, but you just did, or didn't you consider that? I am using a standard fixed IP address business class DSL (paid extra for it), as more and more small companies are doing these days. I follow all the rules, and I am not black listed for spamming anyone. Now it would seem intuitive to me that an SA list would have more trust in the SA program to tag or block spammers that to rely on a high false positive dynamic IP list for 100% blocking, but I guess maybe I expect too much from SA list these days? Maybe I got lucky setting my SA up to block nearly 100% of spam but the list owners (or someone) can't figure out how to use it. So, here is my dilemma. I can't unsubscribe from the other account (this list has it blocked as I described), and there is no alternate method presented in the emails from the list (such as a weblink to opt-out). So, I feel in all good conscience I must now report this list as a spam source. If you sign up to a list that won't let you unsubscribe, isn't that one of the key indicators of spam? I know that will get you a block at most all major ISP systems these days real quick, which would probably be hard to get off of. What do others think? SA list spam source now? Thanks... No, and the last time I looked, there was indeed a web page where you can handle this. However, I also think it will send you a message at that subscriptions address asking for confirmation of the unsub. That must be returned, and usually all you have to do is hit the reply button, then send it. If thats being filtered, then I'd assume the list manager will have to intervene. But I don't think your coming in here with threats is going to be very well received. Goto http://spamdassassin.apache.org and you should be able to find an address that will take care of your 'problem'. -- Cheers, Gene People having trouble with vz bouncing email to me should add the word 'online' between the 'verizon', and the dot which bypasses vz's stupid bounce rules. I do use spamassassin too. :-) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
RE: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source
I hardly think that a list that you have to go through a three-step process to be put on would qualify as spam, even if you've had difficulty getting removed (and by difficulty, I mean you made one weak attempt at unsubscription, then came in here to throw a public childish fit without asking the moderators of the list to simply remove you.) What do others think? I think you're a childish troll. You asked. -Aaron -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 7:00 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: I'm afraid I might have to report this list as a spam source You see, it does not allow me to unsubscribe. Some goofball running the SA list (or a server front-end for the list) decided to 100% block on incoming email to the list with the SORBS dynamic IP list (which is high false positives). Now, the problem is, and what makes this list now a spam source, is that I have no way to unsubscribe my email account that was allowed to sign up to the list months ago, but is now not worthy to post with. I am using a standard fixed IP address business class DSL (paid extra for it), as more and more small companies are doing these days. I follow all the rules, and I am not black listed for spamming anyone. Now it would seem intuitive to me that an SA list would have more trust in the SA program to tag or block spammers that to rely on a high false positive dynamic IP list for 100% blocking, but I guess maybe I expect too much from SA list these days? Maybe I got lucky setting my SA up to block nearly 100% of spam but the list owners (or someone) can't figure out how to use it. So, here is my dilemma. I can't unsubscribe from the other account (this list has it blocked as I described), and there is no alternate method presented in the emails from the list (such as a weblink to opt-out). So, I feel in all good conscience I must now report this list as a 'spam source'. If you sign up to a list that won't let you unsubscribe, isn't that one of the key indicators of spam? I know that will get you a block at most all major ISP systems these days real quick, which would probably be hard to get off of. What do others think? SA list spam source now? Thanks...
