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

Re: [OT] Re: how do you protect from spammers in Debian lists?



On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 04:43:43PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from David Jardine:
> > 
> > What worries me is the spam that is sent out under my name.  Just 
> 
> I get bounces from clueless mail admins all the time.  If they'd spend
> two seconds scanning the original's Received: headers, they'd know I
> had nothing to do with it.  Blast it back to those fools and tell them
> to read email headers, and turn off their idiotic mail-bot until they
> do (if at all).

The messages I've been receiving (was receiving - I haven't had any 
today - perhaps they're using your address now) were polite 
(automated, I imagine) statements of inabilty to deliver the message 
- no accusations of spamming.  There must be masses of email flying 
around all the time with mis-typed addresses; isn't the appropriate 
response to return it to the apparent sender?  That's a real question, 
not a rhetorical one.

The worry I had was about the reject messages I didn't get.  If the 
Peoria Inter-Denominational College of Neo-Tibetan Goldfish Juggling 
received thirty of my dollops of spam, who else was getting them and 
was I being put on blacklists by, well, "clueless mail admins" and 
"fools" with "idiotic mail-bots"?

I would gladly help to educate the people I do get reject messages 
from, but what exactly do I tell them?


> Spammers are forging From: addresses, have been for at least a year,
> and anyone who looks at mail headers can see whether it's been done.
> Spamcop isn't fooled by moronic tricks like this.  It drills down and
> finds the real culprit.

This message comes to you with a forged From: address courtesy of the 
rewrite rules in /etc/exim/exim.conf.  Excuse me, there was a knock 
on the door.  Must be Spamcop...

If you don't get a message then you'll know I'm in jail.
David 

-- 
David Jardine

"Running Debian GNU/Linux and
loving every minute of it."  -L. von Sacher-M.(1835-1895)



Reply to: