This useless thread generated more traffic than I've seen in spam in the
last couple of months. (And if you add the traffic from the last couple
of times we had this *same discussion*...)
I'd like to propose that we blacklist people who propose solutions to
deal with non-existant spam problems on
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 11:36:00AM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> Just tested that. ssh to master, telnet to localhost smtp, it was quite
> willing to relay mail with a non-local envelope. (And left enough clues in
> the header to track who did that just in case it ever becomes necessary.)
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miles Bader) wrote on 24.12.00 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
> >
>
> GNU mailing lists (supposedly) use RBL, but in a mode where `spam' isn't
> deleted, but rather jus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hamish Moffatt) wrote on 25.12.00 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 08:43:51PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > I have a comment: NO WAY IN HELL. The day that we start rejecting DUL
> > posts is the day that several people leave the project, me included. How
>
On 12/24/2000 13:13, Mark Brown at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Spam to the Debian mailing lists tends to be especially annoying since
> the spammers always seem to hit each and every mailing list (or at
> least, a large number of them), which makes each spam much more
> noticable.
The GIMP-user an
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 10:38:50PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Oh yeah. If only there was some way of automatic killing of such spams, sent
> to more than X (say, 5) mailing lists... something that would remember the
> last X-1 mails from the same domain name (or whatever) and kill off the
> remai
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 09:13:36PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> Spam to the Debian mailing lists tends to be especially annoying since
> the spammers always seem to hit each and every mailing list (or at
> least, a large number of them), which makes each spam much more
> noticable.
Oh yeah. If only
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 05:53:36PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> It has been said in a related thread on a mailing list that shall not be
> named :) that making a DNS lookup for hosts carrying the blacklists on each
> delivery would slow it down. It has also been said that this isn't hard to
> work
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 10:18:55AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> >
> > Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
> >
>
> GNU mailing lists (supposedly) use RBL, but in a mode where `spam' isn't
> deleted, but rather just gets a header added saying `this message is
> considered
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 08:43:51PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> I have a comment: NO WAY IN HELL. The day that we start rejecting DUL
> posts is the day that several people leave the project, me included. How
> many ISPs these days route mail worth a damn?
:-) Joseph you make it too easy.
You
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 12:10:29PM +0200, Gil Bahat wrote:
> Here is a (somewhat?) constructive idea regarding the spam.
> i would like to point everyone to sugarplum:
> (http://www.devin.com/sugarplum/)
> quote from README file:
Cool program! Might be a good way to discourage spammers
from harves
> Here is a (somewhat?) constructive idea regarding the spam.
> i would like to point everyone to sugarplum:
> (http://www.devin.com/sugarplum/)
> quote from README file:
> [snip]ac
I'd suggest putting a lot of IFRAME tag which include the document generated
by sugerplum which occuplies only a min
Here is a (somewhat?) constructive idea regarding the spam.
i would like to point everyone to sugarplum:
(http://www.devin.com/sugarplum/)
quote from README file:
sugarplum is a spam-bot database poisoner utility. The
specific usage of a spam poisoner is to provide a spammer's email
spider with b
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 04:02:34PM -0800, Carl B. Constantine wrote:
> >
> > Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
> >
>
> I think that would be a good compromise position. Any chance we can
> implement that at least? It would go a long way to accomplish both goals:
>
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 10:18:55AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
> >
>
> GNU mailing lists (supposedly) use RBL, but in a mode where `spam' isn't
> deleted, but rather just gets a heade
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
>
GNU mailing lists (supposedly) use RBL, but in a mode where `spam' isn't
deleted, but rather just gets a header added saying `this message is
considered suspicious'. That allows indivi
Quoting Carl B. Constantine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists...
> > :-)
> >
> disallow spammers
> allow posts from outside those subscribed
We already allow spammers:
The Debian Linux mailing lists accept commercial advertising for payment.
We off
On 12/23/2000 15:10, Hamish Moffatt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
>
>
I think that would be a good compromise position. Any chance we can
implement that at least? It would go a long way to accomplish both goals:
disallow spamm
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 07:52:21PM -0800, Carl B. Constantine wrote:
> No one should be allowed to post to ANY mail list that is NOT subscribed to
> that list!
It's pretty common place on these lists, so I don't think we're about
to stop it. Sorry.
Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and R
This discussion is being taken off list to avoid yet another flame war (not
my intention to start another flamewar).
--
Carl B. Constantine ([EMAIL PROTECTED])Phone: 250.953.2650
Open Source Solutions Inc. Fax: 250.953.2659
4252 Commerce Circle, Victoria,
"Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yo ppl, it's not hard to archive a closed list, most list software supports
> archive directly. Sheesh! You make it sound like it's the end of the world
> for crying out loud. Give me a break!
I was complaining about not being able to post to the
On 12/22/2000 19:44, Miles Bader at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> No, lets not.
>
> Right now I'm subscribed to debian-devel, but often in the past I've
> read it occasionally in the archives, and sent mail as I thought
> appropriate. I know there are other people who do this.
>
> The fact is that
"Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm getting tired of getting spam through mail lists I subscribe to
> that have an open post policy. Can we please close the debian-devel
> and other such lists that "should" be closed. I don't think trademark
> domains is doing anything for deb
"Carl B. Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm getting tired of getting spam through mail lists I subscribe to
> that have an open post policy. Can we please close the debian-devel
> and other such lists that "should" be closed. I don't think
> trademark domains is doing anything for debi
Carl B. Constantine wrote:
> I'm getting tired of getting spam through mail lists I subscribe to that
> have an open post policy. Can we please close the debian-devel and other
> such lists that "should" be closed. I don't think trademark domains is doing
> anything for debian development.
This is
I'm getting tired of getting spam through mail lists I subscribe to that
have an open post policy. Can we please close the debian-devel and other
such lists that "should" be closed. I don't think trademark domains is doing
anything for debian development.
--
Carl B. Constantine ([EMAI
26 matches
Mail list logo
