Re: Spammers go personal
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Fungi4All <email@example.com> wrote:
> I think I got it like anyone else may have but I can't be sure of it.
> It shows me as the one forwarding it. Did you get one?
> I can understand picking up addresses off the archive and using them to fake
> impersonate a list member, but it doesn't seem like it went through the
> list, it came direct. This is why I'm quoting it.
Only you can tell, from the headers, and from your own setup, whether the
junk-fraudmailers just spoofed your address or actually used your computer
to send it.
I think most of us have automatic filters that shunted the original into their
And, yes, the junkmailers are finding it harder to get responses from the
buckshot approach, so they are getting a bit more sophisticated with the
headers. Until we, as a race, learn to quit fighting poverty with more
opportunities to make people poor, this kind of problem will only get
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Spammers go personal
> Local Time: May 23, 2017 10:31 PM
> UTC Time: May 23, 2017 7:31 PM
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> To: Debian Users ML <email@example.com>
> On Tue, 23 May 2017 15:13:54 -0400
> Fungi4All <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hello Fungi4All,
>>If any of you received such a message I for sure did not send it, but
>>I'm pretty sure the theist spammer got it of the list.
> But you're happy to quote it.
> Regards _
> / ) "The blindingly obvious is
> / _)rad never immediately apparent"
> It's cool to know nothin'
> Never Miss A Beat - Kaiser Chiefs
One of these days I'll get someone to pay me
to design a language that combines the best of Forth and C.
Then I'll be able to leap wide instruction sets with a single #ifdef,
run faster than a speeding infinite loop with a #define,
and stop all integer size bugs with a bare cast.
More of my delusions: