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

Re: Another flood of spam



Curt Howland wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Monday 07 January 2008, "Shane D" <chatter8712@gmail.com> was heard to say:
I randomly started getting a lot of it that hit my inbox last
night, too. About the same time. Very weird.

Not strange at all.

We all know there are a relative few large-scale spammers who send a large percentage of the spam, I'm not surprised when this mailing list happens to make it onto one of their lists.

Each time the spammers find another way around the spam filters, the list gets a flood. The filters get updated, the flood slows, until the next time the spammers find a way around those filters, and so on.

As much as I do not want to restrict the Debian lists to "subscribers only post", I will not be surprised nor blame the Debian developers if that decision is made.

Heck, even the "subscribers only may post" mailing lists I'm on get spammed once in a while, the only lists that have so far remained "safe" are the ones where a moderator has to approve all subscriptions. Anyone here want that? Didn't think so.

Curt-


- -- November 5th: $4.3Million Dollars In One Day
December 16th: $6 Million Dollars In One Day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QD8vSST-bs8

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBR4Ikzi9Y35yItIgBAQL62gf/a7C+4RjLiVVXJxmJthuUXXtRFW3OI4Fl
YlyAYlcOtJm0sZL71TJkXO2o7RcRUCmcZHwqchyzU+02RFPjjtLCAuqkuCpmQzmc
kmYiIeUon2mzbgFJSwZ/fJcmlgXSM275l7iTrWWhZ4VoS2CV2zSpKK4vX1tmCh3R
KBq5RrOhcbmldy1Gh7omlMZDLU+kRtzfBQcn8RJjS6paIL3uH9k3iw/1PPCwtqgg
vFTnlsoevLYzjcVARsPPWEMHmoE9FCQJ34VnYA9aKQ9dRqnlpu1Jz3MTJYJN/Bgu
aZvzt3Bme4sJ/nohJtIZUs29+BEIgx70LC5+PuWqLJLcCKaaLVxVtA==
=bZd8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




hi curt,

IMO you are right. this spamflood is, like those before, annoying but bearable. at debian nobody is -given the mailinglists-policies - to blame.

reg.,

steef


--
drs. steef van duin

publicist, research-journalist


Reply to: