I've had two email returned advisories where my address has been
spoofed (see below).
I can't figure out the the motivation for this. There was an embedded
link in the message (no I didn't click on it), but the whole email
aspect is fake.
What is the payoff to the sender?
Jan
pS: I did have my
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 16:04 +1000, Jan Whitaker wrote:
I've had two email returned advisories where my address has been
spoofed (see below).
I can't figure out the the motivation for this. There was an embedded
link in the message (no I didn't click on it), but the whole email
aspect is
At 04:35 PM 9/07/2014, Karl Auer you wrote:
It's because spammers now routinely use other people's addresses as the
sending addresses that getting mad at the apparent sender is pointless.
The apparent sender is almost certainly not the actual sender.
Thanks. Makes perfect sense now.
Bottom line:
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 16:44 +1000, JanW wrote:
What is interesting is that when this happens, I seldom get any
complaints to me about the original email, so at least that's
something positive. I just get the mailbox full, dead address results.
You'll only ever get a complaint if the spam
Hi Karl,
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 16:58:06 +1000 Karl Auer ka...@biplane.com.au wrote:
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 16:44 +1000, JanW wrote:
What is interesting is that when this happens, I seldom get any
complaints to me about the original email, so at least that's
something positive. I just get
On 09/07/14 16:35, Karl Auer wrote:
If you are asking why the sender address used was yours, it is for
several reasons: Spammers like to use real sender addresses, because
they are less likely to be identified as spammy senders. Also, the
backscatter (such as the bounces you received, or the
Hi Hamish,
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 17:27:08 +1000 Hamish Moffatt ham...@cloud.net.au wrote:
Consider implementing SPF to prevent this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sender_Policy_Framework
In summary, through the DNS you publish a list of all servers authorised
to send mail from your domain,
On 2014/Jul/09, at 4:44 PM, JanW wrote:
Bottom line: the internet is still filled with idiots.
got it
That's why spammers. They still get bites. Send a million spams, get a bite,
profit.
Kim
--
Kim Holburn
IT Network Security Consultant
T: +61 2 61402408 M: +61 404072753
Stephen Loosley wrote:
Facebook uses functional programming to make News Feeds run smoothly
Functional programming has been instrumental in helping debug complex code
issues, one Facebook development team has found
By Joab Jackson 08 July, 2014 http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/549435
Whao
On 10 July 2014 01:35, Rick Welykochy wrote:
Novel, eh?
Indeed. Microsoft has their functional programming language (F#) as part of
Visual Studio. Therefore, functional programming isn't novel. :)
Jim
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
On 9/07/2014 5:27 PM, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
...
Consider implementing SPF ...
That cure is worse than the disease.
--
David Boxall| Perfection is achieved, not when
| there is nothing more to add, but
http://david.boxall.id.au | when
11 matches
Mail list logo