Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 21:32:40 +0300 (EEST) From: Penisoara Adrian <ady@warp.starnets.ro> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: current@hub.freebsd.org Subject: Re: UU.NET, SPAM, and Cyberpromotions (was Re: usregsite.com) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970715210951.1877C-100000@ady.warp.starnets.ro> In-Reply-To: <199707151723.KAA03690@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 15 Jul 1997, Terry Lambert wrote: > Well, this is old... I know, things never change :) > > [ ... a discussion of SPAM ensues ... ] > [...also some msgs...] > > Yes. UUnet is providing dialup ISP services for these people. > > This was the recent SPAM to the FreeBSD lists, I assume... Hmmm, not sure, right now I'm reviewing my >1000 msgs queue (and damn, I'm so tired). The message I received apparently has nothing to do with FreeBSD's lists; what about yours ? I might be mistakin' though. > > [snip] > > That's precisely why they are doing it. People pay them to do it, > it's not illegal, they do it. If this (spamming) is made legal, then we're gone... if we're not going to change people's point of view, which is so hard in today's environement, there will be mayhem in the cyberspace. > > > > > Since then, for every intermediate host their program has used as a > > > relay to get to my host, I've made a (1 month time limited) offer of > > > free assistance in preventing use as a mail relay by all by approved > > > hosts. I've helped 6 sites so far. > > > > Has that number been changed by now ? > > 21 sites, so far. I assume it's still growing ? > > Well, this host's MTA (as you can see it's post.office v2.0) didn't > > handle this spam; maybe we (?) should warn them... > > Notify them that they need to update to Post.Office 3.2. The 3.2 > version supports SPAM filtering. OK, I'll do that, I'll even send'em the message's header to convince them. Would you like to add some link to your work ? > > > BTW, shouldn't sendmail/smail/etc be made SPAM proof right in the > > sources ? > > Take this up with the maintainer. There is no pat answer. They > may be afraid of "restraint of trade" prosecution, or "racketeering" > charges under the RICO act. Oops, I believe this is true for commercial packages, what about the 'free sources' ones ? Or maybe I screwed it up ? (BTW, "What's RICO act", asks one absent minded, namely me). > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org > --- > Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present > or previous employers. Ah, that reminds me of another sig saw on a FreeBSD list: "I don't speak in the name of my employers, they don't pay me enogh for that" (Who's ? I don't remember) > Ady (@warp.starnets.ro) P.S. This keyboard is killing me ; I'm gonna get rid of it as soon as possible.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970715210951.1877C-100000>