Re: Modperl! Your spam awaits you

[mike808 <mi...@users.sourceforge.net>]

On Thursdayen den 1 January 1970 00.59, modperl@apache.org wrote:
> P.S. This is not spam!

Oden Eriksson <od...@kvikkjokk.net> writes:
> He he..., yeah right...
> How do one keep this kind of [ed. - expletive] out of here?

Michael Poole <po...@troilus.org>
> I'd like to know, too.

On Sunday 04 August 2002 10:04 am, Steven Lembark wrote:
> The answer, of course, is Perl. The spamassassin module
> to be precise, see <http://www.spamassassin.org> for
> details.

On Sunday 04 August 2002 10:13 am, Ged Haywood wrote:
> No, I think the answer in this case is Ask.


From what I can tell, the original had the following header:
> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

So did Ged's last response:
> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

It may have been included when Ged replied, which is how it got attached to 
his message. Which, in a way allows blocking of spam and spam-related 
threads, whether it is pro or con the originating message.

However, a completely unrelated recent thread had these headers:
> Subject: RE: can't fine ModuleConfig.c.
> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

What this tells me is that whatever is performing and inserting the 
X-Spam-Rating header is worthless to this list for this kind of spam.

But, it is always easier to identify ex-post-facto spam than a priori spam.

At the very least, the moderators (Ask?) should be able to identify the 
poster's originating subscribing infromation, unsubscribe them to the list, 
and/or notify them if it came from a compromised account.

And of course, send whatever info we can to the RBL folks (or your favorite 
public list of spam offenders).

Mike808/
-- 
() Join the ASCII ribbon campaign against HTML email and Microsoft-specific
/\ attachments. If I wanted to read HTML, I would have visited your website!
Support open standards.

Re: *****SPAM***** Re: Modperl! Your spam awaits you

[Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org>]

>> And of course, send whatever info we can to the RBL folks
>
> SpamAssasin does that - when a user gets spam which isn't flagged,
> he's supposed to send it to a 'sightings' address.  Matt, is that
> still right?  I'm still sending the stuff...
>

Yeah - but I don't read the sightings list - too much spam :-)

Matt.

Re: *****SPAM***** Re: Modperl! Your spam awaits you

[Ged Haywood <ge...@www2.jubileegroup.co.uk>]

Hi there,

> >From what I can tell, the original had the following header:
> > X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
> 
> So did Ged's last response:
> > X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
> 
> It may have been included when Ged replied,

I use SpamAssassin, it flagged the original message.

> X-Spam-Rating header is worthless to this list for this kind of spam.

Quite.

> At the very least, the moderators (Ask?) should be able to identify the 
> poster's originating subscribing infromation, unsubscribe them to the list, 
> and/or notify them if it came from a compromised account.

That's why I cc'd Ask in my post.

> And of course, send whatever info we can to the RBL folks

SpamAssasin does that - when a user gets spam which isn't flagged,
he's supposed to send it to a 'sightings' address.  Matt, is that
still right?  I'm still sending the stuff...

73,
Ged.