From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 30 10:46:20 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB715BBE for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:46:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout03.yourhostingaccount.com (mailout03.yourhostingaccount.com [65.254.253.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83BF91E76 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:46:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailscan01.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.15.1] helo=mailscan01.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout03.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1WfRYQ-0003wE-Vx for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 06:15:55 -0400 Received: from impout02.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.55.2] helo=impout02.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan01.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1WfRYP-0003OD-D8 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 06:15:53 -0400 Received: from walauthsmtp14.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.18.14]) by impout02.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id wAFu1n0010JCsUy01AFuW1; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 06:15:54 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=XZQLPfF5 c=1 sm=1 a=MlIERbc/LeOD9IsFJ/vXKg==:17 a=EUXf4MBdpf0A:10 a=BTUk5m_ZKwEA:10 a=hq8RW5-nFdsA:10 a=oKNMHU8azEoA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=YsjP1prSAAAA:8 a=mh5cOPX7AAAA:8 a=rmQgN8h9AAAA:8 a=bdssuWuyh7r7A1bGV7cA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=rcbtdQGuPFtN9R+ZKREELQ==:117 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 10.1.18.14 X-EN-IMPSID: wAFu1n0010JCsUy01AFuW1 Received: from adsl-64-218-114-145.dsl.amrltx.swbell.net ([64.218.114.145]:42082 helo=localhost) by walauthsmtp14.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpa (Exim) id 1WfRYP-0007Y9-W7 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 06:15:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 05:15:46 -0500 From: Mike Sanders To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Spam to list participants (from openhosting.com & softcom.com) Message-ID: <20140430101545.GA931@taco-shack.cow> References: <73354.1398734218@server1.tristatelogic.com> <535F1667.1050406@soliddataservices.com> <20140429114019.0eb3ce48@X220.alogt.com> <20140429124618.06d708ba@gumby.homeunix.com> <20140429204204.2e561935@X220.alogt.com> <20140429140123.GA910@taco-shack.cow> <20140429162810.76013a19@gumby.homeunix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140429162810.76013a19@gumby.homeunix.com> X-PGP-KEY: http://freebsd.hypermart.net/gpg-key.txt User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-EN-UserInfo: 86ba54ea1171c58e9a877a5108176e6f:931c98230c6409dcc37fa7e93b490c27 X-EN-AuthUser: mike@freebsd.hypermart.net Sender: Mike Sanders X-EN-OrigIP: 64.218.114.145 X-EN-OrigHost: adsl-64-218-114-145.dsl.amrltx.swbell.net X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 10:46:20 -0000 RW wrote: > > If a policy were implemented whereby (say) the first > > two messages of new subscribers where approved/denied > > by the list-owner, this problem would end. > > It wouldn't, it's off-list. Which implies all list members email addresses are exposed to the world at large? How else would an email address be gained by spammers... If that's the case it needs to be changed. But back to the idea of a temporary quarantine for new posters, here's my thinking... . create a procmail filter that directs new posters to an appointed 'list-mom'. . list-mom reviews the first two emails that new posters submit looking for BSD related content. . obvious offenders (pizza hut anyone?) are given the boot, while legitimate posters are passed on to the list with status now upgraded as legit (removed from the procmail filter). Why would this not work? -- Mike Sanders www: http://freebsd.hypermart.net gpg: 0xD94D4C13