UOL spam issue

[Arthur Pemberton]

On 1/24/06, Tim <ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 14:00 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > This list already uses a confirmation step.
>
> I know.  I didn't sign up by magic.  ;-)  I went through the process.
> My comment was about the idea of doing it more than once, and with more
> than just the lists "from" address (since some might think to whitelist
> the list based simply on the from address, which will change when
> contributors post, rather than some other details).
>
> It occurs to me that some sort of honeypot approach might be worth it,
> too.  A few bogus members that if they ever receive spam, are used in
> some way to blacklist a member.  I did that with my mail server, it
> worked a treat for identifying spam.
>
> Also, random, challenge/response spot checks on members.  Combined with
> a honeypot source address, perhaps, that could send unique messages to
> each member to identify the real sources of problems.  It also occurs to
> me that this person mightn't be just stupidly sending crud to people,
> but be doing so as an address harvesting technique.
>
> Though the most obvious solution to me is to stop trying to be a news
> group on a mailing list, and actually be a news group.  You don't need
> to provide any e-mail address when you post to usenet.  Nobody can spam
> my mailbox from any data in my usenet posts.  News servers can wipe out
> spam, too.  And you get the added bonus of being able to get prior
> messages, not just the ones that come through after you join.  Not to
> mention all of the other things that news clients do so much better than
> mail clients.
>
>
Umm, why don't we just black list these guy's mail server?
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20060124/ed722dca/attachment-0001.htm>