From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jun 26 4:12: 5 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from empty1.ekahuna.com (empty1.ekahuna.com [198.144.200.196]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5839D37B408 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 04:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc-02 (pc02.ekahuna.com [198.144.200.197]) by empty1.ekahuna.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-0U10L2S100V35) with ESMTP id com; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 04:11:42 -0700 From: "Philip J. Koenig" Organization: The Electric Kahuna Organization To: Kevin Golding Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 04:11:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: I hate to bring it up again (spamming) Reply-To: pjklist@ekahuna.com Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: References: <20020626101156585.AAA781@empty1.ekahuna.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Message-ID: <20020626111142993.AAA791@empty1.ekahuna.com@pc02.ekahuna.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 26 Jun 2002, at 11:34, Kevin Golding boldly uttered: > Someone, quite probably Philip J. Koenig, once wrote: > >On 26 Jun 2002, at 9:22, Mark Rowlands boldly uttered: > > > >> On Wednesday 26 June 2002 1:00 am, Philip J. Koenig wrote: > >> > As pointed out before, the problem is exacerbated by the unusual > >> > scenario of 1) not requiring membership to post and 2) not blocking > >> > file attachments by default. > >> > >> I rather think the presumption is that if your are smart enough to subscribe > >> to freebsd-questions, you're smart enough to employ some local method to deal > >> with spam. :-) > > > > > >Actually you are making some incorrect assumptions, ie that everyone > >is receiving individual messages, not digests. (I almost always > >subscribe to list digests rather than individual messages) > > No idea if it's even possible but how about stripping attachments just > from the digest? > > True it wouldn't eradicate the problem but surely that would at least > reduce the load for digest users who can't filter spam. You mean at the listserver side? Good question, but if I were to hazard a guess I'd think that would require some sort of special customization, the manpower for which may not be available. Whereas it would seem that simply adding some rules to the existing filtering scheme to reject messages with attachment filenames ending in .scr|.pif|.bat|.com|.exe|.vbs would be relatively trivial, for example. (and I can't imagine why any such attachments would have much usefulness in this list) Neither does blocking attachments to digest subscribers address all the extra gigabytes of junk being spread around the world to non- digest subscribers every time someone sends another few 100k viruses to the list. (1GB for every 5 100k viruses sent to the list, assuming only 50% of the reputed ~4000 list subscribers are receiving separate messages) -- Philip J. Koenig pjklist@ekahuna.com Electric Kahuna Systems -- Computers & Communications for the New Millenium To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message