Mike Schwartz wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Technomage-hawke > wrote: > >> On Thursday 14 February 2008 06:19, Shawn Badger wrote: >>> Other than the emails about politics which could be considered spam at >>> least by me, I can't remember the last time I saw spam on the plug mailing >>> list. Maybe it is just me though. >> I wasn't specifically complaining about *this* list. There are a lot of other >> lists that I have been seeing bounces from lately (and none of them I am >> subscribed to). it seems my e-mail got harvested and someone has been using >> it as a "return envelope" address. >> >> unfortunately, just about all listserv software bounces back to the given >> return address. >> >> it seems that those folks that manage listserv's have never bothered with any >> kind of spam administration (spamd and others). I have contacted several of >> the admins on some of these lists and been told that they let the package >> deal with spam (IOW, it bounces back to the "victim" and >> said victim has to deal with the mess.). >> >> now, politics that has relevance to linux or freedom of choice (in your use of >> OS) is never off topic (IMHO). the healthcare debacle we just went through >> wasn't specifically on topic, but it did provide a barometer of who was alive >> on this list . >> >> anyway. thats my beef with listserv admins who don't pay attention or do their >> jobs (and its one of the reasons I have been seeing 400 "backscatter spams" a >> day for the last week!). >> >> TMH >> --------------------------------------------------- >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > interesting; > I have read some stuff (a white paper, e.g.) about greylisting, it might > be useful for you. > Also, I have a little story to relate. > On Feb. 5, I happened to have occasion to send an e-mail to a guy > Raymond > [I had never e-mailed to before], who uses "http://www.spamarrest.com/" > for his spam arresting. NOTE, I am not hesitating to give out the guy's > e-mail address here, even though it might wind up in an archive of this > list, on a PLUG web server of some kind. > The way it worked, was, the robot detected that it did not know who > I was, (bogus or on the level), so it sent me a polite little "one-time" > e-mail message, saying [in part] > << > Due to the large amount of Spam that I am receiving, I've opted to use > SpamArrest. Please take a moment to just verify that you are a real > person and I'll get your email. > > Thanks! > > Chip > > Please click the link below to complete the verification process. > You have to do this only once. > > http://www.spamarrest.com/a2?AQNmZQxkAmcmL2u3LKW0rxOuL20ho3WaByWurJ1iozDj > > > > You are receiving this message in response to your email to Raymond, a > Spam Arrest customer. > > Spam Arrest requests that senders verify themselves before their email > is delivered. > > When you click the above link, you will be taken to a page with a > graphic on it. Simply read the word in the graphic, type it into the > form, and you're verified. > > You have to do this only once per Spam Arrest customer. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Below are the complete headers of the message that this email was > generated in response to. > [...snip...] > > I do not remember for sure whether there was a CAPTCHA involved, > I think it just required me to click on that link with that very > hard-to-guess > (& presumably computationally difficult to reverse engineer) > scramble code. > ["AQNmZQxkAmcmL2u3LKW0rxOuL20ho3WaByWurJ1iozDj"] > ...obviously, the "scramble code" part of that URL (after the "a2?") > must be unique for each sender. > (for each instance of challenging something). > > I do not know how much money "http://www.spamarrest.com/" charges > (it is probably explained on their site) > but it sounds like this guy Chip uses them, > so it must be worth it, for him. > > Just a comment, > from I believe that's what's known as Tagged Message Delivery Agent (TMDA - http://tmda.net/). Too much user involvement for my taste. My impression is that greylisting is essentially just as effective without the user involvement. -- -Eric 'shubes' --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss