|
Grex > Coop13 > #376: The problems with Grex, e-mail and spam | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 480 responses total. |
krj
|
|
response 68 of 480:
| 
Nov 17 20:56 UTC 2006 |
Here's a background article discussing a recent group of "spambots"
which are behind the recent surge in spam activity:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2060235,00.asp
Headline:
"Pump-and-Dump" Spam Surge Linked to Russian Bot Herders"
(pump-and-dump is a type of stock market scam)
Ultimately the current spam problem is Bill Gates' fault, because
the vast majority of Windows 2000 and XP computers are not properly
secured -- and cannot be secured given the skill levels of their
owners. (That's not a joke; I recall articles in the trade press
predicting that the release of Windows 2000 was going to be a disaster
for network security.) There was a fundamental assumption when
the Internet e-mail protocols were designed: nearly every computer
on the network would have a benign and competent administrator.
|
gull
|
|
response 69 of 480:
|
Nov 17 21:23 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:67: If you had spent some time on email lists of groups that
are trying to come up with ways to fight spam, as I have, you'd know
that that's not the case. People aren't complacent about this. They
know the cost is huge. They're desperately searching for solutions.
But there's no simple way to solve it. Many simplistic attempts, like
challenge-response systems, actually ended up making the problem worse.
This is a complicated issue and the way forward is not easy.
Please give other people a little credit, for once.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 70 of 480:
|
Nov 17 22:17 UTC 2006 |
Show some progress, for once.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 71 of 480:
|
Nov 17 22:27 UTC 2006 |
You wouldn't be able to see any progress from your viewpoint. You have no
idea how many spams you didn't get because professionals have been trying out
solutions that worked.
I suspect the fact that I can still use my grex email account that is more
than 10 years old and has fewer than 10 spam messages a day is because
professionals have been making progres.
Would you care to devise an experiment that proves they haven't made any
progress?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 72 of 480:
|
Nov 17 22:34 UTC 2006 |
I look at my Grex inbox, with ca. 40 spams a day, and I see no progress in
slowing it. Almost all the spam I'm getting now is in the same format, e.g.:
Nov 17 Christa Rhodes (1849) Rhodes message
Why hasn't all of these been filtered out from incoming mail to Grex?
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 73 of 480:
|
Nov 17 22:38 UTC 2006 |
Because you haven't set up your spam filter?
I don't filter my emails. In spite of the exponential growth in spam, I still
see about the same amount as last year. Seems to me that the rate that spam
is increasing is far higher than the rate that spam fills my mailbox.
|
tsty
|
|
response 74 of 480:
|
Nov 18 00:01 UTC 2006 |
This response has been erased.
|
slynne
|
|
response 75 of 480:
|
Nov 18 00:24 UTC 2006 |
Yeah, maybe we should make filtering of tsty the default? No...I am not
seriously suggesting that but Geez-o-peets.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 76 of 480:
|
Nov 18 00:50 UTC 2006 |
He is becoming a system problem, however. I suppose it's his naive "the
squeaky wheel gets the grease" logic.
|
naftee
|
|
response 77 of 480:
|
Nov 18 01:24 UTC 2006 |
i think peats has a system problem
i mean tsty
|
denise
|
|
response 78 of 480:
|
Nov 18 01:36 UTC 2006 |
He's looking for attention; too bad for us he has to be obnoxious about it.
|
bru
|
|
response 79 of 480:
|
Nov 18 02:33 UTC 2006 |
so why don't you guys complain this much about herasleftnut, who is the
instigator of this.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 80 of 480:
|
Nov 18 03:05 UTC 2006 |
When is the last time he crapped up the cf? I'm sorry ts has somehow got a
problem blocking messages. Hopefully someone will have some helpful ideas.
I thought some had been posted already.
|
bru
|
|
response 81 of 480:
|
Nov 18 03:15 UTC 2006 |
yeah, I have a problem blocking messages as well, and staff is unable to tell m
me how to fix it. If they can't fix my conferencing problems, why can't tehy a
do something about people who abuse the system.
|
naftee
|
|
response 82 of 480:
|
Nov 18 04:24 UTC 2006 |
you type mesg n, bru. just make sure you don't write him back
|
bru
|
|
response 83 of 480:
|
Nov 19 14:00 UTC 2006 |
can't. it screwz up my whole tel session.
|
gull
|
|
response 84 of 480:
|
Nov 22 00:52 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:70: This is like asking physicists why they haven't shown some
progress towards unifying General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, or
asking why world hunger hasn't been solved yet. This is a complex
problem. Spammers are constantly changing their techniques to evade
filters, which are trying to block spam without blocking legitimate
messages. Additionally, the volume of spam being sent is continually
growing, so even if filters are effective, they often only slow the
rate of increase.
There's never going to be a complete solution to the spam problem
unless people can be convinced to completely abandon email as it exists
today and use something else. That seems unlikely to happen any time
soon.
For that matter, the problem of junk mail in real mail boxes has been
around even longer, and no one has solved that one yet, either.
Stop assuming that everyone in the world except you is incompetent.
|
keesan
|
|
response 85 of 480:
|
Nov 22 01:08 UTC 2006 |
It costs money to send paper junk mail, so there is much less of it, and most
of it comes from real and mostly reputable companies, who will take you off
their junk mail lists if you ask, or tell you where they bought their lists
so you can argue with the list supplier about it. Companies will also stop
sending you unwanted emails (don't give them your address when they ask for
it) but spammers will not, and it costs them almost nothing to send out 50
spams per recipient per day.
|
gull
|
|
response 86 of 480:
|
Nov 22 01:18 UTC 2006 |
And yet, in spite of this differences, people still get junk mail. I
tried putting my name on one of the no-junk-mail lists, and it was
marginally effective at best. So even in that easier scenario, there
isn't a perfect solution.
|
tsty
|
|
response 87 of 480:
|
Nov 22 03:18 UTC 2006 |
crucifying the messenger is soooooooooooooooooo much easier.
there is an exploit, apparently:
tsty: spew arrives.... how sweet the smell
herasleftnut: blocks dont work if I suspsend the shell during the flood
herasleftnut: its a long spanding bug
herasleftnut: that steve is stupid to fix
herasleftnut: .honkey
|
marcvh
|
|
response 88 of 480:
|
Nov 22 06:06 UTC 2006 |
Physical junk mail is very different from spam. Comparing them is
not particularly helpful.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 89 of 480:
|
Nov 22 06:29 UTC 2006 |
No, it isn't. Just like comparing it to telephone advertising isn't
helpful at all either.
"But what if we had a national do-not-spam list???"
AUGH.
|
tsty
|
|
response 90 of 480:
|
Nov 22 10:41 UTC 2006 |
T R I P L E T S !!!!
grex% f -m shutthefuckupkarenz
Login: shutthefuckupkarenz Name: la la la
Directory: /a/s/h/shutthefuckupkarenz Shell: /bin/csh
Last login Tue Nov 21 17:08 (EST) on ttypb from 66-52-181-171.oak.dasdial.com
No Mail.
No Plan.
grex% f -m herasleftnut
Login: herasleftnut Name: Dr Kim L
Directory: /a/h/e/herasleftnut Shell: /bin/csh
Last login Tue Nov 21 21:24 (EST) on ttypf from 66-52-181-187.oak.dasdial.com
Mail last read Tue Nov 21 22:23 2006 (EST)
No Plan.
grex% f -m krjsucksdick
Login: krjsucksdick Name: da
Directory: /a/k/r/krjsucksdick Shell: /bin/csh
Last login Tue Nov 21 16:16 (EST) on ttyp5 from 66-52-181-171.oak.dasdial.com
No Mail.
No Plan.
grex%
and WITH a plan:
Dear fatass nigger (aka aliz),
Unlike your homosexual ass that does nothing but waste bandwidth on grex, I
use this place to continue to abuse Jan's tel message. My final goal is get
to the point where I can totally break this fucking pos system. In some
respects I've been slowed up because of the funky learning curve associated
with C and Unix.
Here is what I'm working on:
1)I made the code more modular so it's easier to add and delete shit.
2)I came with up an alternate method to bypass the 4 tels and delay shit. I
say alternate because it is only in the concept stage.
3)I also have a crude but working method to bypass .nowrite.
|
tsty
|
|
response 91 of 480:
|
Nov 23 11:44 UTC 2006 |
denise ("you ignorant slut," SaturdayNightLive) ... you are next.
|
tsty
|
|
response 92 of 480:
|
Nov 24 05:15 UTC 2006 |
thre was supposed to be a <g!> up thre in #91 ...oops
|