1996-12-27 - Re: Forged addresses

Header Data

From: Carl Johnson <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
To: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Message Hash: cd0f47354f3bc7f1ace88c6c483d8dd0058b3a91e3e4d83afa37871dc4f76930
Message ID: <32C460FA.4470@sk.sympatico.ca>
Reply To: <v0300784daee974a92a6d@[]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-27 21:53:22 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 13:53:22 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Carl Johnson <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 13:53:22 -0800 (PST)
To: Robert Hettinga <rah@shipwright.com>
Subject: Re: Forged addresses
In-Reply-To: <v0300784daee974a92a6d@[]>
Message-ID: <32C460FA.4470@sk.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

> From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
> Subject: Re: Forged addresses
> It's somewhat more work for me as moderator. It's a significantly
> reduced noise level for the list.

  The way it should have been in the first place?

> The days of laissez-faire administration are dead. The braindead, 
> the novice blunderer and the spammer have killed them.

  Not to mention laissez-faire administrators.

> So to cut out the Spammers and the folks who have no clue what their
> email is, my systems will be going to the
> confirmation-reply-before-subscribe setup.

   The way it should have been in the first place?

> Fairly sophisticated in
> some ways, but mostly, they knew when I wasn't looking and got around
> my traps. 

  I think maybe 'limped' around your traps would be a better description.
(It might have been blind quadraplegics)

>  in one case, they seem to have broken into a machine to send the spam attack, so it'll be tough...)

  Does this not 'ring a bell' that suggests how 'they' know when you're
"not looking?" (Buy a clue!)

> I'm going to make all lists moderated, and then extend moderation 
> priviledges to the "trusted" set of users.

  So that I won't get 1,000 spammed messages from your list?  What a
brilliant idea, setting up your system so that any idiot with a
Commodore 64 and 256k of ram can't use your system to spam the world.

> I don't log mailbot requests. Well, I will starting tomorrow...

  Like you should have from the beginning?

> And suggestions on how to continue to make mailbots available AND make
> them reasonably safe encouraged.

  The mailbot problems are 'warts'.  I think you need to check for