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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #180335 > unrolled thread

debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password "No Reply" <deJonge@t-online.de> - 2017-04-20 18:30 +0200
    Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in  Progress Verify Password Mr Smiley <mr_smiley_home@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-20 20:50 +0200
      Re: Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox  in Progress Verify Password Mr Smiley <mr_smiley_home@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-20 20:50 +0200
        Re: Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading  MailBox in Progress Verify Password Norbert Kiszka <norbert@linux.pl> - 2017-04-20 21:20 +0200
      Actually -- Re: Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org:  Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password fc <fc@AreYouForThePeople.org> - 2017-04-20 21:10 +0200
        Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually) Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de> - 2017-04-20 22:50 +0200
          Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually) Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 23:10 +0200
          Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually) Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2017-04-21 00:00 +0200
            Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually) Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-21 00:30 +0200
              Re: Spam on Debian lists Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-04-21 01:20 +0200
            Re: Spam on Debian lists Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-04-21 01:10 +0200
            Re: Spam on Debian lists Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> - 2017-04-21 02:30 +0200
              Re: Spam on Debian lists Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com> - 2017-04-21 04:20 +0200
                Re: Spam on Debian lists Michael Fothergill <michael.fothergill@gmail.com> - 2017-04-22 14:10 +0200
            Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-21 09:30 +0200
            Re: Spam on Debian lists Dan Norton <dnorton@mindspring.com> - 2017-04-21 23:50 +0200

#180335 — debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Dear debian-user@lists.debian.org, 
 We receive an authority from you to close down your mailbox account which is in progress within 48hrs. 
 note you will loose all your valuable mails in your inbox and sent folder, If you will like to continue using your mailbox you have this opportunity to cancel this request. 
 CLICK HERE TO CANCEL CLOSURE REQUEST NOW 
 If you fail to cancel this request before 48hrs you will not have access to you mailbox and it will be close down. 
 Thanks for your co-operation. Request Team.  
 This mail was sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org and can not be reply.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#180339 — Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

I hope none of you are falling for this crap

Original sender is       xxx_deJonge@t-online.de

and the link points to

xxx_http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org

i added the xxx's to avoid mail automatic enabled click-able links



On 20/04/17 17:06, No Reply wrote:
> Dear debian-user@lists.debian.org,
>
> We receive an authority from you to close down your mailbox account 
> which is in progress within 48hrs.
>
> note you will loose all your valuable mails in your inbox and sent 
> folder, If you will like to continue using your mailbox you have this 
> opportunity to cancel this request.
>
> *CLICK HERE TO CANCEL CLOSURE REQUEST NOW* 
> <http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org>
>
> If you fail to cancel this request before 48hrs you will not have 
> access to you mailbox and it will be close down.
>
> Thanks for your co-operation.
> Request Team.
>
> This mail was sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org and can not be reply.

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

#180340 — Re: Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Well the xxx's didn't disable highlighted links :o( so don't click on them


On 20/04/17 19:41, Mr Smiley wrote:
> I hope none of you are falling for this crap
>
> Original sender is xxx_deJonge@t-online.de
>
> and the link points to
>
> xxx_http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> i added the xxx's to avoid mail automatic enabled click-able links
>
>
>
> On 20/04/17 17:06, No Reply wrote:
>> Dear debian-user@lists.debian.org,
>>
>> We receive an authority from you to close down your mailbox account 
>> which is in progress within 48hrs.
>>
>> note you will loose all your valuable mails in your inbox and sent 
>> folder, If you will like to continue using your mailbox you have this 
>> opportunity to cancel this request.
>>
>> *CLICK HERE TO CANCEL CLOSURE REQUEST NOW* 
>> <http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org>
>>
>> If you fail to cancel this request before 48hrs you will not have 
>> access to you mailbox and it will be close down.
>>
>> Thanks for your co-operation.
>> Request Team.
>>
>> This mail was sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org and can not be reply.
>
>

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

#180343 — Re: Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password

Next time, try to replace http with xxx or something.



Dnia 2017-04-20, czw o godzinie 19:45 +0100, Mr Smiley pisze:
> Well the xxx's didn't disable highlighted links :o( so don't click on
> them
> 
> 
> On 20/04/17 19:41, Mr Smiley wrote:
> 
> > I hope none of you are falling for this crap 
> > 
> > Original sender is       xxx_deJonge@t-online.de
> > 
> > and the link points to 
> > 
> > xxx_http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org
> > 
> > i added the xxx's to avoid mail automatic enabled click-able links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 20/04/17 17:06, No Reply wrote:
> > 
> > > Dear debian-user@lists.debian.org,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We receive an authority from you to close down your mailbox
> > > account which is in progress within 48hrs.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > note you will loose all your valuable mails in your inbox and sent
> > > folder, If you will like to continue using your mailbox you have
> > > this opportunity to cancel this request.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > CLICK HERE TO CANCEL CLOSURE REQUEST NOW
> > > 
> > > 
> > > If you fail to cancel this request before 48hrs you will not have
> > > access to you mailbox and it will be close down.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks for your co-operation.
> > > Request Team. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This mail was sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org and can not be
> > > reply.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

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

#180342 — Actually -- Re: Warning ---- Re: debian-user@lists.debian.org: Upgrading MailBox in Progress Verify Password

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?

I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1 delete on 
the front end could prevent a lot of woe.

*Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this list?

Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?

Thanks
Bill

On 4/20/2017 2:41 PM, Mr Smiley wrote:
> I hope none of you are falling for this crap
>
> Original sender is xxx_deJonge@t-online.de
>
> and the link points to
>
> xxx_http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
> i added the xxx's to avoid mail automatic enabled click-able links
>
>
>
> On 20/04/17 17:06, No Reply wrote:
>> Dear debian-user@lists.debian.org,
>>
>> We receive an authority from you to close down your mailbox account 
>> which is in progress within 48hrs.
>>
>> note you will loose all your valuable mails in your inbox and sent 
>> folder, If you will like to continue using your mailbox you have this 
>> opportunity to cancel this request.
>>
>> *CLICK HERE TO CANCEL CLOSURE REQUEST NOW* 
>> <http://webrealmarketing.com/hh/all/index.php?username=debian-user@lists.debian.org>
>>
>> If you fail to cancel this request before 48hrs you will not have 
>> access to you mailbox and it will be close down.
>>
>> Thanks for your co-operation.
>> Request Team.
>>
>> This mail was sent to debian-user@lists.debian.org and can not be reply.
>
>

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

#180346 — Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

fc:
>
> Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?

You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300 Debian
lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.

> I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1 delete on the
> front end could prevent a lot of woe.

Your help is appreciated:
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam

Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job that
anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).

> *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this list?
> 
> Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?

Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
masters.

J.
-- 
I wish I had been aware enough to enjoy my time as a toddler.
[Agree]   [Disagree]
                 <http://archive.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>

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

#180347 — Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 20 April 2017 at 21:40, Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de> wrote:

> fc:
> >
> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>
> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300 Debian
> lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>
> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1 delete on
> the
> > front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>
> Your help is appreciated:
> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>
> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job that
> anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>
> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this list?
> >
> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>
> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> masters.
>

​Especially queries about the relative merits of sysinit vs systemd in
Debian.....

MF​


>
> J.
> --
> I wish I had been aware enough to enjoy my time as a toddler.
> [Agree]   [Disagree]
>                  <http://archive.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/
> data_enter2.html>
>

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

#180349 — Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
wrote:

> fc:
> >
> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
> 
> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
> 
> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
> 
> Your help is appreciated:
> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
> 
> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
> 
> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
> > list?
> > 
> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> 
> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> masters.
 
Like what?

Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
One list I used required annual renewal..

B

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

#180350 — Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
>
>> fc:
>> >
>> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>>
>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>>
>> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>>
>> Your help is appreciated:
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>>
>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>>
>> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>> > list?
>> >
>> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>>
>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> masters.
>
> Like what?
>
> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
> One list I used required annual renewal..

How do you limit posts to subscribers?

Login?
Subscriber list?

What happens when you need an answer, but you don't have access to a
functional machine that you can trust?

Also, I think there is a web forum that functions more or less as you describe:

http://forums.debian.net/

-- 
Joel Rees

I'm imagining I'm a novelist:
http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html
More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html

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

#180356 — Re: Spam on Debian lists

Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> fc:
>>> >
>>> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>>>
>>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>>>
>>> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>>> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>>>
>>> Your help is appreciated:
>>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>>>
>>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>>>
>>> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>>> > list?
>>> >
>>> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>>>
>>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>>> masters.
>>
>> Like what?
>>
>> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
>> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
>> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
>> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
>> One list I used required annual renewal..
>
> How do you limit posts to subscribers?
>
> Login?
> Subscriber list?

Yes, that's easily done -- check the From: against the subscriber list.

That isn't perfect; a list I administer gets occasional spam from the
forged email address of a subscriber; the list is so incredibly low
volume that it's OK for me to just moderate it.  That wouldn't be the
case here.

> What happens when you need an answer, but you don't have access to a
> functional machine that you can trust?
>
> Also, I think there is a web forum that functions more or less as you describe:
>
> http://forums.debian.net/

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

#180355 — Re: Spam on Debian lists

Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
>
>> fc:
>> >
>> > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>> 
>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>> 
>> > I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>> > delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>> 
>> Your help is appreciated:
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>> 
>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>> 
>> > *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>> > list?
>> > 
>> > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>> 
>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> masters.
>  
> Like what?
>
> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
> One list I used required annual renewal..

That would preclude those of us who still read it on usenet.

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

#180358 — Re: Spam on Debian lists

Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
>
> > fc:
> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> > 
> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> > masters.
>
> Like what?

I can't speak for the list masters, but I can speak for use cases that
would exclude that I find valid:

* Posting from a service (such as a mailing list aggregator) which
  presents a single interface accessible without an email client.

* Posting by people who we want to participate in the discussion, but
  who do not (yet) see the benefit to themselves of going through a
  subscription process.

* Cross-posting on multiple forums when a discussion involves parties
  outside Debian, and we don't want the discussion balkanised with some
  people's responses rejected.

There are likely others, but that seems enough to answer the question.

-- 
 \       “The apparent lesson of the Inquisition is that insistence on |
  `\         uniformity of belief is fatal to intellectual, moral, and |
_o__)    spiritual health.” —_The Uses Of The Past_, Herbert J. Muller |
Ben Finney

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

#180359 — Re: Spam on Debian lists

On 4/20/17, Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> wrote:
> Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > fc:
>> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>> >
>> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> > masters.
>>
>> Like what?
>
> I can't speak for the list masters, but I can speak for use cases that
> would exclude that I find valid:
>
> * Posting from a service (such as a mailing list aggregator) which
>   presents a single interface accessible without an email client.
>
> * Posting by people who we want to participate in the discussion, but
>   who do not (yet) see the benefit to themselves of going through a
>   subscription process.
>
> * Cross-posting on multiple forums when a discussion involves parties
>   outside Debian, and we don't want the discussion balkanised with some
>   people's responses rejected.


I can't point to real World examples, but I've seen multiple instances
of that last one occurring. Those not subscribed bore email addresses
from extremely.... "top tier" tech companies....

The topics varied, but it would be conversations regarding things such
as attempting to obtain more universal compatibility between Debian
and non-free hardware. *Something* like that....

Just thinking out loud... :)

Cindy

-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *

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

#180390 — Re: Spam on Debian lists

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 21 April 2017 at 03:11, Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 4/20/17, Ben Finney <bignose@debian.org> wrote:
> > Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > fc:
> >> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> >> >
> >> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> >> > masters.
> >>
> >> Like what?
> >
> > I can't speak for the list masters, but I can speak for use cases that
> > would exclude that I find valid:
> >
> > * Posting from a service (such as a mailing list aggregator) which
> >   presents a single interface accessible without an email client.
> >
> > * Posting by people who we want to participate in the discussion, but
> >   who do not (yet) see the benefit to themselves of going through a
> >   subscription process.
>

​E.g. a post from Linus Torvalds, Lennart Poettering or a closed source
processed meat canned foods manufacturer that wanted to make a donation  to
the Debian Foundation.

Point Taken

MF​


> >
> > * Cross-posting on multiple forums when a discussion involves parties
> >   outside Debian, and we don't want the discussion balkanised with some
> >   people's responses rejected.
>
>
> I can't point to real World examples, but I've seen multiple instances
> of that last one occurring. Those not subscribed bore email addresses
> from extremely.... "top tier" tech companies....
>
> The topics varied, but it would be conversations regarding things such
> as attempting to obtain more universal compatibility between Debian
> and non-free hardware. *Something* like that....
>
> Just thinking out loud... :)
>
> Cindy
>
> --
> Cindy-Sue Causey
> Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA
>
> * runs with duct tape *
>
>

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

#180363 — Re: Spam on Debian lists (was: Actually)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:52:39PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
> 
> > fc:
> > >
> > > Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
> > 
> > You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
> > masters [...]

(not the OP, but -- thanks for that, BTW!)

> > > Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
> > 
> > Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
> > masters.
>  
> Like what?
> 
> Why not this:  [...]

You'd think this hasn't all been discussed. But it has. Extensively.
*If* you want to re-hash it here, then please, please: do some
homework first. Use your favourite search engine and try to dig up
some previous discussion.

The list's openness is *by design*, not by mistake. It's not because
all of "them" didn't come up with the Right Idea(TM)

Yes, sounds a bit harsh and all. But if you don't do some research
we're stuck in an endless loop.

Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlj5tMYACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYYagCdFiuHX7DqllpZmIEpMsRTjvP1
ELUAn06Idn8t0fUNYuwRjUN051OtrubY
=o+Za
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

#180377 — Re: Spam on Debian lists

On 04/20/2017 05:52 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 22:40:56 +0200 Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de>
> wrote:
>
>> fc:
>>> Actually -- does anyone monitor this list for this type of stuff?
>> You have no idea *how much* spam is blocked by the work of the list
>> masters. But it's not that anybody monitors all of the almost 300
>> Debian lists¹ with thousands of posts each day.
>>
>>> I see these types of things come through periodically -- and 1
>>> delete on the front end could prevent a lot of woe.
>> Your help is appreciated:
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/ListArchiveSpam
>>
>> Obviously, this only affects the archive after all subscribers already
>> received the spam message. Moderating all Debian lists is not a job
>> that anybody wants to do (and it wouldn't even be appreciated).
>>
>>> *Even more so* -- it seems like unauthorized users can email this
>>> list?
>>>
>>> Why not just restrict it to people who have subscribed?
>> Because this excludes use cases that are deemed valid by the list
>> masters.
>   
> Like what?
>
> Why not this:  To post or reply to the list, you must be
> a subscriber; but to read/browse (even search archives, etc.), you
> do not. This is the way most of the lists I've been involved with have
> been set up.  Works quite well controlling spurious posting by 'bots.
> One list I used required annual renewal..
>
> B
>

+ 1

  - Dan

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web