[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: uol.com.br and petsupermarket

On 3/13/06, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
> "Gustavo Franco" <gustavorfranco@gmail.com>
> > Hi Anand,
> Hope you don't mind me replying. You sent this to -project.
> > Why every uol.com.br address was unsubscribed and not only
> > petsupermarket, AFAIK there's no  general problem with that domain,
> > right? [...]
> The Challenge-Response system appears to be a uol.com.br service
> and there seems no way to detect externally which users are using
> it.  I don't know what proportion of @uol.com.br use it. Do you?

Yes, it's their service and the C-R thing sucks. I'm not using
@uol.com.br but that's not the point, see below.

> See also:
>  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=355684
>  Bug report that triggered the unsubscribe, but apparently
>   not the first time @uol.com.br users have been C-R spamming.
>  http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Rants/challenge-response.html
>  Challenge Response Anti-Spam Systems Considered Harmful
>  http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2003/08/msg00338.html
>  Earlier version posted to debian-user

Good research really, but do you see that petsupermarket@uol.com.br
isn't subscribed in our MLs ? It's other address that is forwarding to
petsupermarket@uol.com.br. The mass-unsubscribe side effect here is
that we're hurting users when petsupermarket@uol.com.br is still free
to mail our lists. What's the rationale ? Force uol users after
unsubcribe them to ask their ISP send a reply for Debian ?


-- stratus

Reply to: