On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 08:24:57PM +0100, Always Learning wrote:
> What might work, although the task is potentially daunting, is to
> examine the MX for each list member's domain name and from that derive
> the IP address. A quantity, much less than the list's total membership,
> of possible suspe
On Sat, 2015-08-29 at 13:04 -0400, James B. Byrne wrote:
> In consequence of this thread I went looking for a probe script that
> would send individualized email messages to each subscriber of a
> mailman list and found none. Does such a thing in fact exist?
What might work, although the task i
On Sat, August 29, 2015 12:04 pm, James B. Byrne wrote:
> In consequence of this thread I went looking for a probe script that
> would send individualized email messages to each subscriber of a
> mailman list and found none. Does such a thing in fact exist?
>
> It seems to me that this would be a
On 08/29/15 12:04, James B. Byrne wrote:
> In consequence of this thread I went looking for a probe script that
> would send individualized email messages to each subscriber of a
> mailman list and found none. Does such a thing in fact exist?
>
> It seems to me that this would be an invaluable t
In consequence of this thread I went looking for a probe script that
would send individualized email messages to each subscriber of a
mailman list and found none. Does such a thing in fact exist?
It seems to me that this would be an invaluable tool in tracking down
which subscriber is the bot-bai
AND With that all said, I am UNSUBSCRIBING FROM THIS LIST! I came to
this list hoping to LEARN and get HELP with CentOS, but instead, I am
getting plagued with this damn garbage. 30+ emails daily in the last
week or so is way too much. Maybe I can find more INTELLIGENT
conversation in the forum
On 08/27/2015 07:29 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Gary Stainburn wrote:
>> Bad news Guys, they've just moved the emails to somewhere else and have
>> started again:
>
>
> A suggestion: there should be a way to filter using *domain* AND mailhost;
> that is, if emails come from a domain, and through
g wrote:
> On 08/27/15 13:07, John R Pierce wrote:
>> On 8/27/2015 10:56 AM, g wrote:
>>> we had a vary serious and meaningful intercourse that only someone of
>>> a high amount of education and intelligence would have been able to
>>> maintain.
>>
>> PLEASE tell me this whole post is tongue-in-che
On 08/27/15 13:32, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 8/27/2015 11:30 AM, g wrote:
>> i have invited Alice to continue this on moz gen. how about you?
>
> I am neither on that list nor have any interest in joining it.
>
.
fine. end of discussion.
have a great day.
mine has been most enjoyable so far.
On 8/27/2015 11:30 AM, g wrote:
i have invited Alice to continue this on moz gen. how about you?
I am neither on that list nor have any interest in joining it.
--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.or
On 08/27/15 13:07, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 8/27/2015 10:56 AM, g wrote:
>> we had a vary serious and meaningful intercourse that only someone of
>> a high amount of education and intelligence would have been able to
>> maintain.
>
> PLEASE tell me this whole post is tongue-in-cheek.
>
.
that is
On 08/27/15 13:00, Alice Wonder wrote:
>
>
> On 08/27/2015 10:56 AM, g wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/27/15 12:12, Alice Wonder wrote:
>>> On 08/27/2015 08:58 AM, g wrote:
On 08/27/15 09:31, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
<>
> *sigh*
> And they're probably sent by a script running on the
On 8/27/2015 10:56 AM, g wrote:
we had a vary serious and meaningful intercourse that only someone of
a high amount of education and intelligence would have been able to
maintain.
PLEASE tell me this whole post is tongue-in-cheek.
nayways, none of this has ANYthing to do with CENTOS and real
On 08/27/2015 10:56 AM, g wrote:
On 08/27/15 12:12, Alice Wonder wrote:
On 08/27/2015 08:58 AM, g wrote:
On 08/27/15 09:31, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
<>
*sigh*
And they're probably sent by a script running on the PC of a fat,
47 yr old guy living in a basement and making money this way
On 08/27/15 12:12, Alice Wonder wrote:
> On 08/27/2015 08:58 AM, g wrote:
>> On 08/27/15 09:31, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> <>
>>
>>> *sigh*
>>> And they're probably sent by a script running on the PC of a fat,
>>> 47 yr old guy living in a basement and making money this way
>>>
>> .
>> i seri
On 08/27/2015 08:58 AM, g wrote:
On 08/27/15 09:31, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
<>
*sigh*
And they're probably sent by a script running on the PC of a fat,
47 yr old guy living in a basement and making money this way
.
i seriously doubt it.
several of the responses could not have been fr
On 08/27/15 09:31, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
<>
> *sigh*
> And they're probably sent by a script running on the PC of a fat,
> 47 yr old guy living in a basement and making money this way
>
.
i seriously doubt it.
several of the responses could not have been from a fat 47 yo guy.
--
peace
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 10:35 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Me too: I started receiving them from different IP (with much longer
> delay, so they do add "improvements" to their setup). This IP, has neither
> DNS A record nor DNS PTR record, but has DNS MX record. One can use these
> (have your MX
On Thu, August 27, 2015 9:29 am, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Gary Stainburn wrote:
>> Bad news Guys, they've just moved the emails to somewhere else and have
started again:
>
>
> A suggestion: there should be a way to filter using *domain* AND
mailhost;
> that is, if emails come from a domain, and t
g] On Behalf Of
m.r...@5-cent.us
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 9:30 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] please block user
Gary Stainburn wrote:
> Bad news Guys, they've just moved the emails to somewhere else and
> have started again:
A suggestion: there should be a way
g wrote:
> On 08/27/15 07:11, Gary Stainburn wrote:> Bad news Guys, they've just
> moved
> the emails to somewhere else and have started again:
> <>
>> From: Caylian Curtis
> <>
> not true. she has been at that site for a while.
>
> i received 1st email from her and Julie Anna just after i posted
Gary Stainburn wrote:
> Bad news Guys, they've just moved the emails to somewhere else and have
> started again:
A suggestion: there should be a way to filter using *domain* AND mailhost;
that is, if emails come from a domain, and through one mailhost, then
block the domain. If many domains, and
On 08/26/2015 09:01 PM, Always Learning wrote:
I've blocked the spammer's host name (*.loverhearts.com) on my Exim.
Shouldn't your organisation, and others too, do the same or similar ?
That is of course up to the individual organization. I use several
DNSBLs, and I did not receive any of the
On 08/27/15 07:11, Gary Stainburn wrote:> Bad news Guys, they've just moved
the emails to somewhere else and have
> started again:
<>
> From: Caylian Curtis
<>
not true. she has been at that site for a while.
i received 1st email from her and Julie Anna just after i posted to this
thread.
i w
IcMXk=;
b=bbmKwgB0hG2rPrgHwUes63nmRozyqrLi7VVW4qmLC6019nRt0Cf4enbC60kJQzZw
Qx/UaYetwOkCm4LUObL7zw+uP0JJYzNXVooAZD7NdB1Dzs5gwT5B5ltM2sv0xxA11ev
vnxdKiIUER2QKOcFOkYczDJV6QYtpOj3yr7cPYMM=
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 11:39:05 +
To: "Gary Stainburn "
From: Caylian Curtis
Reply-To: caylian@enjoylovef**k.com
Subject: Re: Re:
On Wednesday 26 August 2015 20:11:20 g wrote:
> so the only harm is spam, which i now have going to my Junk folder.
>
That is not the only harm. These people are very good and very effective
confidence tricksters and are experts at getting vulnerable people to send
them money which they usually
On Thursday 27 August 2015 01:40:21 zep wrote:
> digital ocean finally replied (at least to me):
>
> Hi there,
>
> I'm sorry about this. We gave our customer time to resolve the issue,
> and he hasn't done so, so we've blocked his ability to send email, pending
> further action if necessar
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/08/15 02:54, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>
> On Wed, August 26, 2015 7:40 pm, zep wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/26/2015 08:22 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>>> On 8/26/2015 5:09 PM, Always Learning wrote:
Whoops. Lovehearts just arrived. They don't look lik
On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 19:54 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Happily unblocked their blocks of IP addresses (as they do not need
> this sort of pressure to hear out about the trouble with their customer).
> This message will inadvertedly serve as a test if what is said is done ;-)
I've blocked the
On Wed, August 26, 2015 7:40 pm, zep wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/2015 08:22 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>> On 8/26/2015 5:09 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>>> Whoops. Lovehearts just arrived. They don't look like 'hearts' to me.
>>>
>>> Have complained to lovehearts.com owner = Swizzels Matlow Ltd, an
>>> Eng
On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 17:37 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> you realize Digital Ocean is a rather large virtual private server
> provider?wikipedia says they host over 190,000 sites, and last year
> surpassed Rackspace to become the 4th largest hosting provider.
>
> a blanket block of /16 su
On 08/26/2015 08:22 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 8/26/2015 5:09 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>> Whoops. Lovehearts just arrived. They don't look like 'hearts' to me.
>>
>> Have complained to lovehearts.com owner = Swizzels Matlow Ltd, an
>> English company.
>
> its loverhearts.com, and they are al
On 8/26/2015 5:30 PM, Always Learning wrote:
Easier just to block Digital Ocean for port 25 - as I have previously
done for all port 80 traffic.
you realize Digital Ocean is a rather large virtual private server
provider?wikipedia says they host over 190,000 sites, and last year
surpassed
On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 17:22 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> its loverhearts.com, and they are also using heartslover.com for web
> links. the first domain is registered to someone claiming to be in
> Miami Florida, while the 2nd is registered to some organization in
> Bangladesh. yeah, right.
On 8/26/2015 5:09 PM, Always Learning wrote:
Whoops. Lovehearts just arrived. They don't look like 'hearts' to me.
Have complained to lovehearts.com owner = Swizzels Matlow Ltd, an
English company.
its loverhearts.com, and they are also using heartslover.com for web
links. the first domain
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 00:44 +0100, Always Learning wrote:
This is a typical internal message:
REJECTED
Sender's IP: 14.215.136.13 => (no host name)
Sender's HELO : gmail.com => 173.194.116.118
Sender's port : 18168
Our server : abc.def.ghi
Date : Wednesday, 23:19:33, 26 Augu
On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 09:53 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> Thanks a lot! The most difficult part of this I noticed is to make sure
> they responded with report of what discovered and which actions were
> taken, and if this didn't happen to have the whole block of IPs registered
> to them blocked
On 08/26/2015 03:38 PM, Peter wrote:
On 08/27/2015 07:29 AM, Alice Wonder wrote:
Maybe I'll start blocking any server with an SPF record that includes
more than 5 IP addresses,
That's not a very good idea. major ESPs (eg: gmail.com) have way more
IPs listed than that.
Yeah, I thought abou
On 08/27/2015 07:29 AM, Alice Wonder wrote:
> Maybe I'll start blocking any server with an SPF record that includes
> more than 5 IP addresses,
That's not a very good idea. major ESPs (eg: gmail.com) have way more
IPs listed than that.
> or servers where any host in the SPF record is in a DNS bl
On Wed, August 26, 2015 4:23 pm, Alice Wonder wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/2015 02:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>> On Wed, August 26, 2015 2:29 pm, Alice Wonder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/26/2015 12:11 PM, g wrote:
On 08/26/15 13:11, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James
On 08/26/2015 02:07 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, August 26, 2015 2:29 pm, Alice Wonder wrote:
On 08/26/2015 12:11 PM, g wrote:
On 08/26/15 13:11, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James A. Peltier wrote:
<<>>
something no one seems to have mentioned, so i will..
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26/08/15 20:11, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>
> On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James A. Peltier wrote:
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - | -BEGIN PGP SIGNED
>> MESSAGE- | Hash: SHA1 | | On 25/08/15 23:09, Fabian Arrotin
>> wrote: | > On
On Wed, August 26, 2015 2:29 pm, Alice Wonder wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/2015 12:11 PM, g wrote:
>> On 08/26/15 13:11, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>>> On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James A. Peltier wrote:
>> <<>>
>> something no one seems to have mentioned, so i will..
| >> Received: from mx2.loverhe
On 08/26/15 14:29, Alice Wonder wrote:
<<>>
> If you look at the SPF record for loverhearts.com (where they are coming
> from for me) there are a whole slew of servers permitted to send on
> their behalf.
>
> So I took all those IP addresses specified and added them to my
> blacklist, it appe
On 08/26/2015 12:11 PM, g wrote:
On 08/26/15 13:11, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James A. Peltier wrote:
<<>>
something no one seems to have mentioned, so i will..
| >> Received: from mx2.loverhearts.com (mx2.loverhearts.com
loverhearts.com is a single page t
On 08/26/15 13:11, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James A. Peltier wrote:
<<>>
something no one seems to have mentioned, so i will..
>> | >> Received: from mx2.loverhearts.com (mx2.loverhearts.com
loverhearts.com is a single page that seems to do nothing. and there i
On Wed, August 26, 2015 12:55 pm, James A. Peltier wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> | -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> | Hash: SHA1
> |
> | On 25/08/15 23:09, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> | > On 25/08/15 20:39, Alice Wonder wrote:
> | >> julie70773 [at] loverhearts.com
> | >
> | >> Respo
On 8/26/2015 10:55 AM, James A. Peltier wrote:
I told my wife (yes awkward) that I thought that the list would be removing
content of this type (images), since likely it is of little value to the list
for helping people. I was shocked (for many reasons) that it is not.
the spammer was NOT em
- Original Message -
| -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
| Hash: SHA1
|
| On 25/08/15 23:09, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
| > On 25/08/15 20:39, Alice Wonder wrote:
| >> julie70773 [at] loverhearts.com
| >
| >> Responded off-list to message on the list, spam with content
| >> that is not suit
On Wed, August 26, 2015 1:12 am, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 25/08/15 23:09, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>> On 25/08/15 20:39, Alice Wonder wrote:
>>> julie70773 [at] loverhearts.com
>>
>>> Responded off-list to message on the list, spam with content
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25/08/15 23:09, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> On 25/08/15 20:39, Alice Wonder wrote:
>> julie70773 [at] loverhearts.com
>
>> Responded off-list to message on the list, spam with content
>> that is not suitable for minors.
>
>> It is possible subscribed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25/08/15 20:39, Alice Wonder wrote:
> julie70773 [at] loverhearts.com
>
> Responded off-list to message on the list, spam with content that
> is not suitable for minors.
>
> It is possible subscribed under different address.
>
> IP of offending s
julie70773 [at] loverhearts.com
Responded off-list to message on the list, spam with content that is not
suitable for minors.
It is possible subscribed under different address.
IP of offending spam :
Received: from mx2.loverhearts.com (mx2.loverhearts.com [45.55.128.151])
(using TLSv
53 matches
Mail list logo
