Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #196254 > unrolled thread

Anonymous email users

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Anonymous email users <avi.e.gross@gmail.com> - 2024-06-14 18:00 -0400
    Re: Anonymous email users Sebastian Wells <sebastian@here.com.invalid> - 2024-06-23 05:58 +0000
      Re: Anonymous email users Barry Scott <barry@barrys-emacs.org> - 2024-06-24 10:51 +0100
      Re: Anonymous email users Thomas Passin <list1@tompassin.net> - 2024-06-24 13:17 -0400
      Re: Anonymous email users dn <PythonList@DancesWithMice.info> - 2024-06-25 10:29 +1200
      Re: Anonymous email users Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 08:44 +1000
        Re: Anonymous email users Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2024-06-25 12:59 +0300
          Re: Anonymous email users Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2024-06-26 04:35 +1000
      Re: Anonymous email users Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> - 2024-06-24 14:12 -0400
      Re: Anonymous email users Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 11:49 +1000
      RE: Anonymous email users <avi.e.gross@gmail.com> - 2024-06-25 00:13 -0400
      Re: Anonymous email users Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2024-06-25 12:09 +0300

#196254 — Anonymous email users

I notice that in some recent discussions, we have users who cannot be
replied to directly as their email addresses are not valid ones, and I
believe on purpose. Examples in the thread I was going to reply to are:
 
 <mailto:HenHanna@devnull.tb> HenHanna@devnull.tb
 
 <mailto:no.email@nospam.invalid> no.email@nospam.invalid
 
 <mailto:candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid (user <candycane> is
generated from /dev/urandom)
 
I know some here suggest that we only reply to the wider community and they
have a point. But I think there is a role for having some conversations
offline and especially when they are not likely to be wanted, or even
tolerated, by many in the community.
 
Using such fake or invalid emails makes it hard to answer the person
directly or perhaps politely ask them for more info on their request or
discuss unrelated common interests. Worse, when I reply, unless I use
reply-all, my mailer sends to them futilely. When I do the reply-all, I have
to edit out their name or get a rejection.
 
I understand some are concerned over getting email of the junk variety by
any who scan members of forums like this. I can see making a throwaway email
address for such purposes that can be replaced when it gets inundated. But
emails that don't work are a bit irksome to me albeit I assume perfectly
legit for many purposes.
 
The thread I posted in recently is an example where I spent a little time,
just for fun, and wrote a fairly short piece of code (almost a one-liner)
that I might have sent to the OP and not bothered others here with. I
suspect few here understand why there was a request to generate a limited
subset of three-digit numbers. I did suggest an outline of a way it could be
done, perhaps a bit wastefully but compactly. But there is no way to share
that with people who choose not to receive private email except to post
something like this here:
 
import re
[i for i in range(999) if re.match("^[1-4]0[1-3]$",str(i))]
 
*	The internet is a wild place and when it is anonymous, even wilder.
 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#196315

On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:00:37 -0400, avi.e.gross wrote:

> I notice that in some recent discussions, we have users who cannot be
> replied to directly as their email addresses are not valid ones, and I
> believe on purpose. Examples in the thread I was going to reply to are:
>  
>  <mailto:HenHanna@devnull.tb> HenHanna@devnull.tb
>  
>  <mailto:no.email@nospam.invalid> no.email@nospam.invalid
>  
>  <mailto:candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
> candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid (user <candycane> is
> generated from /dev/urandom)
>  
> I know some here suggest that we only reply to the wider community and
> they have a point. But I think there is a role for having some
> conversations offline and especially when they are not likely to be
> wanted, or even tolerated, by many in the community.
>  
> Using such fake or invalid emails makes it hard to answer the person
> directly or perhaps politely ask them for more info on their request or
> discuss unrelated common interests. Worse, when I reply, unless I use
> reply-all, my mailer sends to them futilely. When I do the reply-all, I
> have to edit out their name or get a rejection.
>  

The spammers won the spam wars, so even if you have someone's real
e-mail address, that's no guarantee that you can contact them. You
certainly wouldn't be able to contact me at my real e-mail address,
unless you also had my phone number, so you could call me and tell
me that you sent me an e-mail, and what the subject line was so I
can find it. I don't even open my e-mail inbox unless there's a
specific message I'm expecting to find there right now.

With e-mail addresses being phone-validated, it's not easy to create
a new one either. And even if I did, you can't even trust e-mail 
providers not to give your address out to spammers.

The only function e-mail addresses serve now is to positively identify
the sender of a Usenet posting so he can be targeted for harassment,
lawsuits, or worse.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196332

> On 23 Jun 2024, at 06:58, Sebastian Wells via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:
> 
> The spammers won the spam wars, so even if you have someone's real
> e-mail address, that's no guarantee that you can contact them. You
> certainly wouldn't be able to contact me at my real e-mail address,
> unless you also had my phone number, so you could call me and tell
> me that you sent me an e-mail, and what the subject line was so I
> can find it. I don't even open my e-mail inbox unless there's a
> specific message I'm expecting to find there right now.

My email address is well known and yes I get spam emails.

I use the wonderful python based spambayes software to detect spam and
file into a Junk folder. It works for 99.9% of the emails I get.

I am subscribed to a lot of mailing lists. I just checked and I am getting ~3,200
emails a month of which less than 200 are spam.

A few years ago the spam count was greater than a 1,000 a month.

I have been using spambayes for a very long time, 20 years I guess at this
point and bayesian categorisation has stood the test of time for me.

For me the spammers have not won, I have the tech to keep ahead of them.

Barry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196333

On 6/24/2024 5:51 AM, Barry Scott via Python-list wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 23 Jun 2024, at 06:58, Sebastian Wells via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:
>>
>> The spammers won the spam wars, so even if you have someone's real
>> e-mail address, that's no guarantee that you can contact them. You
>> certainly wouldn't be able to contact me at my real e-mail address,
>> unless you also had my phone number, so you could call me and tell
>> me that you sent me an e-mail, and what the subject line was so I
>> can find it. I don't even open my e-mail inbox unless there's a
>> specific message I'm expecting to find there right now.
> 
> My email address is well known and yes I get spam emails.
> 
> I use the wonderful python based spambayes software to detect spam and
> file into a Junk folder. It works for 99.9% of the emails I get.

I use the Thunderbird mail client and I just use its built in spam 
detector.  I don't know how it works but it's pretty darn good.  Very 
few false positives or false negatives.  And it learns each time I 
classify a message as "Junk", in case it missed one.

> I am subscribed to a lot of mailing lists. I just checked and I am getting ~3,200
> emails a month of which less than 200 are spam.
> 
> A few years ago the spam count was greater than a 1,000 a month.
> 
> I have been using spambayes for a very long time, 20 years I guess at this
> point and bayesian categorisation has stood the test of time for me.
> 
> For me the spammers have not won, I have the tech to keep ahead of them.
> 
> Barry
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196335

On 25/06/24 05:17, Thomas Passin via Python-list wrote:
> On 6/24/2024 5:51 AM, Barry Scott via Python-list wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 23 Jun 2024, at 06:58, Sebastian Wells via Python-list 
>>> <python-list@python.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> The spammers won the spam wars, so even if you have someone's real
>>> e-mail address, that's no guarantee that you can contact them. You
>>> certainly wouldn't be able to contact me at my real e-mail address,
>>> unless you also had my phone number, so you could call me and tell
>>> me that you sent me an e-mail, and what the subject line was so I
>>> can find it. I don't even open my e-mail inbox unless there's a
>>> specific message I'm expecting to find there right now.
>>
>> My email address is well known and yes I get spam emails.
>>
>> I use the wonderful python based spambayes software to detect spam and
>> file into a Junk folder. It works for 99.9% of the emails I get.
> 
> I use the Thunderbird mail client and I just use its built in spam 
> detector.  I don't know how it works but it's pretty darn good.  Very 
> few false positives or false negatives.  And it learns each time I 
> classify a message as "Junk", in case it missed one.
> 
>> I am subscribed to a lot of mailing lists. I just checked and I am 
>> getting ~3,200
>> emails a month of which less than 200 are spam.
>>
>> A few years ago the spam count was greater than a 1,000 a month.
>>
>> I have been using spambayes for a very long time, 20 years I guess at 
>> this
>> point and bayesian categorisation has stood the test of time for me.
>>
>> For me the spammers have not won, I have the tech to keep ahead of them.

Aside from the attractions of the new, and the 'shiny', what 
email-antagonists didn't anticipate, was that as fast as they moved to 
non-email messaging, the spammers, advertisers, and malcontents would 
simply do the same. Thus, a variation on whack-a-mole, as folk move from 
platform to platform trying to stay-ahead and find an illusion of 
safety. Quite how one out-runs human-nature is an issue 
philosophised-over by the (Ancient) Greeks (and was no-doubt old even-then).

Paradoxically, applying for an account elsewhere usually involves 
providing an email address. Even backing-up a cell-phone (communication 
tool) to the cloud requires an email address(!!!)

Most of the non-email platforms are provided by organisations who have 
'other uses' for your personal-data (and not forgetting GMail and MSFT's 
email services).

Python mailing-lists are covered by the Code of Conduct and monitored by 
ListAdmins. Thus, there are controls which limit the impact which 
advertisers and others with non-pythonic aims might otherwise exert!

-- 
Regards,
=dn

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196336

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 at 08:31, dn via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:
> Python mailing-lists are covered by the Code of Conduct and monitored by
> ListAdmins. Thus, there are controls which limit the impact which
> advertisers and others with non-pythonic aims might otherwise exert!
>

So long as there's a newsgroup gateway, those controls are toothless.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196341

Chris Angelico to dn:

> > Python mailing-lists are covered by the Code of Conduct
> > and monitored by ListAdmins. Thus, there are controls
> > which limit the impact which advertisers and others with
> > non-pythonic aims might otherwise exert!
>
> So long as there's a newsgroup gateway, those controls are
> toothless.

The gateway operator can have the usual anti-spam software
installed, and of course there is Gmane:

  <https://gmane.io/>

which actually subscribes users to mailing lists (on their
behalf).  Gmane's NNTP server is: news.gmane.io .

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196342

On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 at 03:40, Anton Shepelev via Python-list
<python-list@python.org> wrote:
>
> Chris Angelico to dn:
>
> > > Python mailing-lists are covered by the Code of Conduct
> > > and monitored by ListAdmins. Thus, there are controls
> > > which limit the impact which advertisers and others with
> > > non-pythonic aims might otherwise exert!
> >
> > So long as there's a newsgroup gateway, those controls are
> > toothless.
>
> The gateway operator can have the usual anti-spam software
> installed

Anti-spam is not the same as CoC and admins, though. Without putting
an actual moderation barrier in there, it's still toothless.

(Yes, there are a scant few posters who've been blocked from the
gateway, but it's rare.)

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196337

On 2024-06-24, Barry Scott via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:
>> On 23 Jun 2024, at 06:58, Sebastian Wells via Python-list <python-list@python.org> wrote:
>> 
>> The spammers won the spam wars, so even if you have someone's real
>> e-mail address, that's no guarantee that you can contact them. [...]
>
> My email address is well known and yes I get spam emails.

I've been puzzled by this for a long time. Many people talk about how
they get so much spam e-mail that there's little chance they'll notice
if I send them an e-mail.

I've been using the same e-mail address for about 20 years. I've use
that e-mail address with probably close to 100 retailers, charities,
open-source projects, media sites, and various other organizations.

I get at most a few spam emails per week [I just checked my spam
folder: 8 in the past 30 days]. And Gmail is very, very close to 100%
accurate at filtering them out.  I can't remember the last time I
actually got a spam message in my inbox.

> A few years ago the spam count was greater than a 1,000 a month.

I'm baffled.  Is Gmail silently rejecting that much junk before it
even gets to the filter that puts stuff into my "spam" folder?

--
Grant

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196338

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 at 11:41, Grant Edwards via Python-list
<python-list@python.org> wrote:
> I've been using the same e-mail address for about 20 years. I've use
> that e-mail address with probably close to 100 retailers, charities,
> open-source projects, media sites, and various other organizations.

Mostly the same, although in my case, I've had multiple email
addresses for different purposes (and still kept all of them for
decades).

> I get at most a few spam emails per week [I just checked my spam
> folder: 8 in the past 30 days]. And Gmail is very, very close to 100%
> accurate at filtering them out.  I can't remember the last time I
> actually got a spam message in my inbox.
>
> > A few years ago the spam count was greater than a 1,000 a month.
>
> I'm baffled.  Is Gmail silently rejecting that much junk before it
> even gets to the filter that puts stuff into my "spam" folder?
>

It really depends on how you count. On my mail server (can't get stats
for Gmail), I have a number of anti-spam and anti-abuse rules that
apply prior to the Bayesian filtering (for example, protocol
violations), and any spam that gets blocked by those rules isn't shown
in my stats. And then I have a further set of rules that nuke some of
the most blatant spam, and finally the regular trainable filter. I
should probably keep better stats on the stuff I don't keep, but at
the moment, all I actually track is the ones that the filter sees -
which is roughly 25-50 a day.

So.... yeah, Gmail is probably rejecting that much junk, but most of
it for protocol violations.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196339

This discussion has wandered far from my original mention that I found it
hard to reply to people using an invalid email address. I see no real
connection to python except insofar as at least one spam-filter mentioned is
written in python!

Just to add an observation, the people writing here have obviously had many
different experiences with their email addresses and whether yours is
hijacked in some way, and made less useful, can even just become down to
random luck. 

But SPAM filters can also be manipulated and cause you to lose mail. I think
some people have been reporting email from a source they do not favor, such
as for political reasons, that then ends up being junked for people who
would welcome the messages. And, I can well imagine how something like a
post about python programs can start being filtered out because some key
words commonly use end up being used a lot in some kind of SPAM and the
filter "learns" to filter those out. Imagine of "python" appeared in lots of
actual SPAM messages as the war moved on, such as in the metadata designed
to make it look legit.

Email addresses can go bad for many reasons. My wife had a nice simple
address like jane.smith@gmail.com that was messed up probably by
well-meaning people when another Jane Smith had an email address like
smith.jane or janesmith123 and they or others typed in the more
straightforward ones. It seems we ended up getting odd email from many
continents such as e-tickets for airplanes, initial estimates or bills from
vendors for products in places we have never been for services rendered in
say Tennessee or South Africa (well, I've been in Tennessee, but) and
subscriptions to internet magazines or groups that sent lots of messages, or
conversations between lots of people (all To: or Cc:) that included her
email address wrongly and even when she replied to ask to be taken off, the
conversations continued for months as many kept hitting reply-all, ...)

And, obviously, with so many people using the address wrongly, SPAM
followed.

Of course, choosing a strange name designed not to be typed by accident, has
it's own disadvantages.

But for those who want me to CALL their unspecified phone number and tell
them the subject line and then maybe you will look for my message,
FUGGEDABOUTIT! I have a cousin who does a trick  with her phone service
where she never answers and I have to run some gauntlet to identify myself
and then wait for a call back. After a few times, I solved the problem and
simply never call her.

Admittedly, making it hard for an email address to be abused in a forum like
this is understandable. Making it very hard to reach you legitimately when
the message is that your house is burning or just that your appointment is
canceled, may not work as well as you think.

And, FYI, I check my junkmail regularly and I have a fairly high rate of
finding things, including posts on forums like this one, that are NOT in my
opinion junk as I ordered them and they are on topic and not easily visible
as having committed some kind of sin. And as I use many email services, I
still find a high rate of false negatives everywhere.

It would not surprise me if a phrase like "not SPAM" gets this message
dumped into /dev/null


-----Original Message-----
From: Python-list <python-list-bounces+avi.e.gross=gmail.com@python.org> On
Behalf Of Chris Angelico via Python-list
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 9:49 PM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: Anonymous email users

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 at 11:41, Grant Edwards via Python-list
<python-list@python.org> wrote:
> I've been using the same e-mail address for about 20 years. I've use
> that e-mail address with probably close to 100 retailers, charities,
> open-source projects, media sites, and various other organizations.

Mostly the same, although in my case, I've had multiple email
addresses for different purposes (and still kept all of them for
decades).

> I get at most a few spam emails per week [I just checked my spam
> folder: 8 in the past 30 days]. And Gmail is very, very close to 100%
> accurate at filtering them out.  I can't remember the last time I
> actually got a spam message in my inbox.
>
> > A few years ago the spam count was greater than a 1,000 a month.
>
> I'm baffled.  Is Gmail silently rejecting that much junk before it
> even gets to the filter that puts stuff into my "spam" folder?
>

It really depends on how you count. On my mail server (can't get stats
for Gmail), I have a number of anti-spam and anti-abuse rules that
apply prior to the Bayesian filtering (for example, protocol
violations), and any spam that gets blocked by those rules isn't shown
in my stats. And then I have a further set of rules that nuke some of
the most blatant spam, and finally the regular trainable filter. I
should probably keep better stats on the stuff I don't keep, but at
the moment, all I actually track is the ones that the filter sees -
which is roughly 25-50 a day.

So.... yeah, Gmail is probably rejecting that much junk, but most of
it for protocol violations.

ChrisA
-- 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#196340

Sebastian Wells:

> The spammers won the spam wars, so even if you have
> someone's real e-mail address, that's no guarantee that
> you can contact them.

No so with me.  My e-mail address here is munged, but in a
very obvious way, and no, my mailbox is not overwhelmed with
spam.

I make a habit of reporting spam via:

  1.  https://www.spamcop.net/anonsignup.shtml
  2.  https://submit.spamhaus.org/submit/

They maintain blacklists of e-mail providers or notify them
of spam e-mails.  It helps.

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web