23 software programs for $30.00

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:12:12 +0100, Viper <venomx RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:

 > Charles Sweeney wrote:
  >> Viper wrote
  >>
   >>> Charles Sweeney wrote:
   >>>> Viper wrote
   >>>>
   >>>>> The more reports the better
   >>>>
   >>>> And the more wasted network traffic. Wasted admin time. Increased
   >>>> costs for ISPs.
   >>>>
   >>>> Have you noticed a reduction in spam in the years you have been
   >>>> reporting individuals?
   >>>
   >>> If you IPTables all of China Russia and India and all proxies yep!
  >>
  >> 99.9% of my spam is American. But we know you are a racist (among
  >> many other despicable things).
 >
 > Then block proxies and IPs that should NOT be a mail server.

and how exactly do you determine which IP should not be a mail server?
Just had an issue this week. A developer working on a project with me is
unable to receive mails from applications on our development server
because the ISP has a draconian blocking filter in place.

I got a great idea (not) let's just shut down port 25 and only speak to
ourselves.

As if I haven't got enough to do....

--
Opera 8 - not quite a desktop replacement (yet)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

Viper wrote:

 > Charles Sweeney wrote:

   >>>If you IPTables all of China Russia and India and all proxies yep!
  >>
  >>99.9% of my spam is American. But we know you are a racist (among
  >>many other despicable things).
 >
 > Then block proxies and IPs that should NOT be a mail server. Its easy
 > chuckie...

Holy Shit.

I agree with Viper *and* Charles Sweeney on a spam issue.

Folks, this will never, ever happen again.

Charles, you're absolutely 1000% correct that the vast majority of spam still
comes from -- rather, ORIGINATES IN -- the US.

Snakey, you hit the nail on the head. Blocking China will still block a ton of
spam. The spammers steal services by routing through open proxies, primarily,
these days. A lot of those are on broadband connections in Western countries,
but there are still a ton in Asia too.

Spamhaus (www.spamhaus.org) is a great place to get the real lowdown on where
spam's coming from, especially their Roster of Known Spam Operations (ROKSO).

**SJS (god, my head hurts now... gotta go lie down)

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://JustThe.net/" target="_blank">http://JustThe.net/</a> - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol.TakeThisOut@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
--New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

William Tasso wrote

 > and how exactly do you determine which IP should not be a mail server?

I wondered about that too. Also (as with all these methods) you need to
make your check, do your lookup for EVERY spam email. There's all your
extra network traffic cluttering up the internet.

For now the best solution that adds ZERO network traffic, and has the
lowest cost, is to simply delete it.

--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">http://CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

Heidi wrote

 > Yes. If you had read the group FAQ: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.aww-faq.org/" target="_blank">http://www.aww-faq.org/</a> before you
 > posted

Wot? Like everyone here did when they first posted??

)

--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">http://CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

Once upon a time, far far away Charles Sweeney <me RemoveThis @charlessweeney.com>
spluttered

 >Heidi wrote
 >
  >> Yes. If you had read the group FAQ: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.aww-faq.org/" target="_blank">http://www.aww-faq.org/</a> before you
  >> posted
 >
 >Wot? Like everyone here did when they first posted??
 >

Yes, a little common sense shouldn't go amiss.

A young kid, with little experience, posting a single message that
someone considers spam might warrant an email from said offended
individual.

It's not quite the same as a large, professional, anonymous company
flooding a newsgroup with masses of adverts - which reporting never
does any good anyway!

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com" target="_blank">http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

William Tasso wrote:
 > On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:12:12 +0100, Viper <venomx.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
 >
  >> Charles Sweeney wrote:
   >>> Viper wrote
   >>>
   >>>> Charles Sweeney wrote:
   >>>>> Viper wrote
   >>>>>
   >>>>>> The more reports the better
   >>>>>
   >>>>> And the more wasted network traffic. Wasted admin time. Increased
   >>>>> costs for ISPs.
   >>>>>
   >>>>> Have you noticed a reduction in spam in the years you have been
   >>>>> reporting individuals?
   >>>>
   >>>> If you IPTables all of China Russia and India and all proxies yep!
   >>>
   >>> 99.9% of my spam is American. But we know you are a racist (among
   >>> many other despicable things).
  >>
  >> Then block proxies and IPs that should NOT be a mail server.
 >
 > and how exactly do you determine which IP should not be a mail server?
 > Just had an issue this week. A developer working on a project with
 > me is unable to receive mails from applications on our development
 > server because the ISP has a draconian blocking filter in place.

Well for Comcast *.client.comcast.net shouldnt be sending you emails.

 > I got a great idea (not) let's just shut down port 25 and only speak
 > to ourselves.
 >
 > As if I haven't got enough to do....

Lots of ISPs are doing this. I know my brother used NetZero for a few months
when he moved to Arizona and had to use a different port to check his emails
on my server, which I setup for him.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

Charles Sweeney wrote:
 > William Tasso wrote
 >
  >> and how exactly do you determine which IP should not be a mail
  >> server?
 >
 > I wondered about that too. Also (as with all these methods) you need
 > to make your check, do your lookup for EVERY spam email. There's all
 > your extra network traffic cluttering up the internet.
 >
 > For now the best solution that adds ZERO network traffic, and has the
 > lowest cost, is to simply delete it.

Which supports the spammer so he can keep flooding millions of others. JHD
went out back in the 90's Chuckie. Please get with the times.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

Viper wrote

 > JHD went out back in the 90's Chuckie.

Ah, the good old days...

--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">http://CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:47:41 +0100, Viper <venomx.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:

 > William Tasso wrote:
  >> On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:12:12 +0100, Viper <venomx.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
   >>> ...
   >>> Then block proxies and IPs that should NOT be a mail server.
  >>
  >> and how exactly do you determine which IP should not be a mail server?
  >> Just had an issue this week. A developer working on a project with
  >> me is unable to receive mails from applications on our development
  >> server because the ISP has a draconian blocking filter in place.
 >
 > Well for Comcast *.client.comcast.net shouldnt be sending you emails.

I know nothing about Comcast or their services. My ISP is a connectivity
ISP, they provide the wire and the bandwidth with no restrictions on how I
use it other than the usual legal and spam constraints. Many SMEs run
their own mail server on the end of these links.

  >> I got a great idea (not) let's just shut down port 25 and only speak
  >> to ourselves.
  >>
  >> As if I haven't got enough to do....
 >
 > Lots of ISPs are doing this.

Frankly I'd like to see these ISPs publicly humiliated. The issue needs
wider publicity so that end users can vote with their wallets.

 > I know my brother used NetZero for a few months when he moved to Arizona
 > and had to use a different port to checkhis emails on my server, which I
 > setup for him.

Oh good - lets have a 'free for all' with every server and service running
on a completely arbitrary port. This is not a solution to spam, but does
show the futility of blocking the port in the first place.

--
Opera 8 - not quite a desktop replacement (yet)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, William Tasso wrote:

 > On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:47:41 +0100, Viper <venomx RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
  > > I know my brother used NetZero for a few months when he moved to Arizona
  > > and had to use a different port to checkhis emails on my server, which I
  > > setup for him.
 >
 > Oh good - lets have a 'free for all' with every server and service running
 > on a completely arbitrary port. This is not a solution to spam, but does
 > show the futility of blocking the port in the first place.

It's not "a completely arbitrary port". Port 587 is specifically reserved
for email submission.

"RFC 2476 - Message Submission"
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2476.txt" target="_blank">http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2476.txt</a>

The difference is that authentication is *required* for port 587
so that worms or spammers can't abuse it (or at least can't abuse it
without getting someone else's username and password first).

--
">> consider moving away from Front Page...."
">To what? Any suggestions?"
"Naked bungee-jumping. It's less humiliating <g>"
-- Matt Probert in alt.www.webmaster, March 20, 2005<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:32:25 +0100, Charles Sweeney
<me.TakeThisOut@charlessweeney.com> wrote:

 > Viper wrote
  >> ...
  >> If you IPTables all of China Russia and India and all proxies yep!
 >
 > 99.9% of my spam is American.


"More than a third of all spam e-mails originate in the US, according to a
survey by security firm Sophos."

"PCs in China sent almost 10% of spam, said the survey, while countries
including France, Spain and the UK were each responsible for between one
and three percent of spam e-mails."

source: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/technology/4420161.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/technology/4420161.stm</a>

--
Opera 8 - not quite a desktop replacement (yet)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

Once upon a time, far far away "William Tasso"
<SpamBlocked RemoveThis @tbdata.com> spluttered

 >On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:32:25 +0100, Charles Sweeney
 ><me RemoveThis @charlessweeney.com> wrote:
 >
  >> Viper wrote
   >>> ...
   >>> If you IPTables all of China Russia and India and all proxies yep!
  >>
  >> 99.9% of my spam is American.
 >
 >
 >"More than a third of all spam e-mails originate in the US, according to a
 >survey by security firm Sophos."
 >
 >"PCs in China sent almost 10% of spam, said the survey, while countries
 >including France, Spain and the UK were each responsible for between one
 >and three percent of spam e-mails."

And most embarrasingly, guess where almost all the "Nigeria Scam"
emails come from ? Yes, the UK.

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com" target="_blank">http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00 

On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Matt Probert wrote:

 > Once upon a time, far far away "William Tasso"
 > <SpamBlocked.DeleteThis@tbdata.com> spluttered
 >
  > >On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:32:25 +0100, Charles Sweeney
  > ><me.DeleteThis@charlessweeney.com> wrote:
  > >
   > >> Viper wrote
   > >>> ...
   > >>> If you IPTables all of China Russia and India and all proxies yep!
   > >>
   > >> 99.9% of my spam is American.
  > >
  > >
  > >"More than a third of all spam e-mails originate in the US, according to a
  > >survey by security firm Sophos."
  > >
  > >"PCs in China sent almost 10% of spam, said the survey, while countries
  > >including France, Spain and the UK were each responsible for between one
  > >and three percent of spam e-mails."
 >
 > And most embarrasingly, guess where almost all the "Nigeria Scam"
 > emails come from ? Yes, the UK.

The Netherlands and the UK are running about neck-and-neck as far as
my inbox is concerned. Spain is running about third (for a while they
were a major source of the Lottery versions of the 419 scams.)

I got my first German 419 scam this week. And a couple of French ones.

--
">> consider moving away from Front Page...."
">To what? Any suggestions?"
"Naked bungee-jumping. It's less humiliating <g>"
-- Matt Probert in alt.www.webmaster, March 20, 2005<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 23 software programs for $30.00