Re: "Antispam UOL" spam from petsupermarket@uol.com.br?
On Friday 18 November 2005 07:36, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >This attitude would punish a lot of users, "thank you". For example,
>> >since they are my ISP, I'm using them as a relay.
>>
>> And "open" relays should be banned. Period.
>
>UOL may be a lot of crap, but open relays they are not AFAIK.
>
>> I'm forwarding all such messages to abuse@uol.com.br. Its no doubt a
>> black hole, but...
>
>IF it is a blackhole, complain at rfc-ignorant.org. Unlike a damnable
> user with that annoying challenge-response system enabled to a mailing
> list, an ISP failing to pay attention to abuse@ is not forgiveable,
> and UOL has the resources to respond to abuse@ without problems.
>
>Rogério, I'd phone UOL right now, and give them hell. They won't listen
> to YOU, but if enough people complain, they'll do something about it.
>
>> The Fedora list has simply expunged all users from this ISP from the
>> subscription lists, a self defense brought on by a C/R response from
>> this twerp for every message posted, doubling the load on the
>> servers.
>
>Incompetent listmasters there? Blacklisting at least 100000 users for
> one dumbass that replies with a constant email address you could drop
> at the incoming MTAs? (and it is probably more like 500000 or so,
> this ISP is *big* and country-wide).
I beg to differ about incompetent. And I doubt if its anything like
100000 linux users just from that one ISP. OTOH, if those users who do
get tossed figure out why, they WILL take a cluebat to the ISP's
offices and get it fixed. 10 pissed users showing up at the offices
will usually get their attention, if only to occupy the 9 drones in
the front room while the 10th heads for the real office.
>> You see, the C/R responder this clueless twit has setup, is also
>> expunging all traces of the source user from the headers of the
>> messages, therefore we have no recourse against that user as an
>
>NOW, THAT is something UOL could fix without 'losing face or business'.
>Rogério, you're their costumer. I'd highly suggest you contact them
> NOW. Use the Fedora blocking as leverage, and open different tickets
> (otherwise they WILL ignore your complain and all suggestions that are
> in the same ticket).
>
>I'd suggest one for headers of the original email on the AntispamUOL
> *email reply* and not the fucking web page, and another to allow us to
> submit AntispamUOL blacklists to them (which will drop any and all
> messages requiring AntispamUOL verification that are addressed to some
> domains). And a third one for the abuse@, warning of the blacklisting
> which WILL be done through rfc-ignorant.org sooner or later.
Absolutely no response has been obtained from any of those addresses I
posted earlier. I also have no clue if the forwarding in kmail 1.7
works as advertised since I'd never tried it before. I also haven't
taken the time to search my sent-mail folder, call me lazy.
>> individual and must perforce blacklist, reject, or otherwise dispose
>> of all messages comeing from that triplet of addresses that represent
>> uol.com.br.
>
>Ever heard of VERP? It is immune to forwarding and header cleanup. It
> has been in use for years. It can be done automatically by the ML
> software, or you can use an external utility and process the results
> of a VERP run manually.
Nope, never heard of it. Commercial I assume... I wonder if Warren
Togami (RH) has knowledge of it?
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.36% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Reply to: