Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #205558 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Web@CorrLinks.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-02-21 07:50 +0100 |
| Last post | 2019-02-21 14:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 43 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks Web@CorrLinks.com - 2019-02-21 07:50 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-21 08:40 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-02-21 09:00 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-02-21 09:40 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-02-21 09:50 +0100
What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-02-21 10:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-02-21 14:30 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-21 14:50 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-02-21 15:10 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-21 15:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-02-21 16:20 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2019-02-21 16:30 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-02-22 12:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-02-22 12:10 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-02-22 15:10 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-02-22 15:20 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-02-22 15:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2019-02-25 13:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 04:10 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-02-22 20:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-02-23 02:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 02:10 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 08:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-02-22 16:20 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-02-22 17:10 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-02-21 18:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-02-22 04:30 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-22 05:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-02-22 09:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-02-22 10:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-21 14:30 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-02-21 14:40 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-21 14:50 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-02-21 15:00 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-02-21 21:50 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-02-21 17:30 +0100
Message exchange systems (was: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks]) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2019-02-21 17:40 +0100
Re: Message exchange systems (was: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks]) <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-02-21 17:50 +0100
Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-02-22 05:10 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-02-21 17:30 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks "James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@touchtonecorp.com> - 2019-02-21 18:00 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks "James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@touchtonecorp.com> - 2019-02-21 17:30 +0100
Re: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2019-02-21 14:20 +0100
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-23 02:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xutPA-13H-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205649 |
On Fri 22 Feb 2019 at 14:16:43 (+0000), Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:08:40PM -0000, Curt wrote: > > What Linux mail user agents lack this feature, if it is uncommon? > > I thought it was uncommon, but perhaps it isn't. I'm not going to spend > my time exhaustively surveying them to be sure. Perhaps it's just not > generally a well-known feature. > > > I'd also point out that, at least in Alpine, the feature does not depend > > on or require the use of an external MTA such as sendmail, Exim, etc. > > Noted, thanks. I suspect mutt can be configured similarly. mutt can certainly do mail submission to a smarthost itself. set smtp_url="smtp://email-address:password@smarthost:port/" would be all that's typically necessary. But when I tried using this some years ago, I got bored of waiting for large attachments to get uploaded. That's why I prefer to queue it with exim, and also to have exim's logs for picking over in cases where things get delayed or blocked. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-24 02:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xuQsN-6zO-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205673 |
On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:56:50 -0600 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > On Fri 22 Feb 2019 at 14:16:43 (+0000), Jonathan Dowland wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:08:40PM -0000, Curt wrote: > > > What Linux mail user agents lack this feature, if it is uncommon? > > > > I thought it was uncommon, but perhaps it isn't. I'm not going to spend > > my time exhaustively surveying them to be sure. Perhaps it's just not > > generally a well-known feature. > > > > > I'd also point out that, at least in Alpine, the feature does not depend > > > on or require the use of an external MTA such as sendmail, Exim, etc. > > > > Noted, thanks. I suspect mutt can be configured similarly. > > mutt can certainly do mail submission to a smarthost itself. > set smtp_url="smtp://email-address:password@smarthost:port/" > would be all that's typically necessary. It will often be somewhat more complicated. Many smarthosts will refuse to accept mail if the envelope 'From' and / or the email 'From:' header do not match the user's account name with the smarthost, so address rewriting will be necessary. Celejar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-24 08:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xuWye-1Kc-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205718 |
Celejar wrote: > It will often be somewhat more complicated. Many smarthosts will refuse > to accept mail if the envelope 'From' and / or the email 'From:' header > do not match the user's account name with the smarthost, so address > rewriting will be necessary. >From what I know is that sooner or later everybody will activate their DKIM policies and only authorized hosts will be able to send. IMO if gmane implements DKIM properly the problems will be reduced significantly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 16:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xukMh-4k6-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205645 |
Hi. On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 02:08:40PM -0000, Curt wrote: > On 2019-02-22, Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 09:37:06AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > >>> (2) Mutt has a feature that lets you send an EXACT copy of a message > >>> to a different address, preserving all of the headers and content > >>> verbatim. Mutt calls this "bouncing". > >> > >>If this is such a good feature, why is mutt the only agent doing it? > > > > It isn't. But it's not a common feature, in common mailers. It's > > analogous to a power tool. All mutt is really doing is feeding the mail > > to /usr/bin/sendmail, and specifying the address to which you want it > > sent on the sendmail command-line. It relies upon you having a properly > > configured /usr/bin/sendmail interface (which is provided by, for > > example, Exim — not just Sendmail). The same result can be achieved with > > a procmail recipe, or a shell script, if you have access to the raw > > mail. > > What Linux mail user agents lack this feature, if it is uncommon? Let's see. kmail, balsa, evolution - basically anything that's either shipped with DE, or written with "Modern App" approach in mind. > I'd also point out that, at least in Alpine, the feature does not depend > on or require the use of an external MTA such as sendmail, Exim, etc. mutt's happy to bounce without /usr/bin/sendmail too. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 17:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xulyF-4OH-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205654 |
On 2019-02-22, Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> wrote:
>>
>> What Linux mail user agents lack this feature, if it is uncommon?
>
> Let's see.
> kmail, balsa, evolution - basically anything that's either shipped with
> DE, or written with "Modern App" approach in mind.
Kmail has it:
https://docs.kde.org/trunk5/en/pim/kmail2/kmail2.pdf
Redirect To
This will redirect the message as-is to another email address.
(I'm reading that to mean "bounce" in the sense we mean it here.)
Apparently Evolution has a 'Forward as redirect' feature, too.
I admire your conviction, though.
>> I'd also point out that, at least in Alpine, the feature does not depend
>> on or require the use of an external MTA such as sendmail, Exim, etc.
>
> mutt's happy to bounce without /usr/bin/sendmail too.
>
> Reco
>
>
--
When you have fever you are heavy and light, you are small and swollen, you
climb endlessly a ladder which turns like a wheel.
Jean Rhys, Voyage in the Dark
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rhkramer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 18:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xu0ud-y2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205585 |
On Thursday, February 21, 2019 09:01:04 AM Greg Wooledge wrote: > (2) Mutt has a feature that lets you send an EXACT copy of a message to > a different address, preserving all of the headers and content > verbatim. Mutt calls this "bouncing". I'm just coming in from left field (without having kept up with the content or intent of the discussion), but: I'm guessing that the behavior you describe can be mimic'ed in kmail by pressing T on a(n open) received email, changing the address, and then pressing send. I guess what I haven't paid attention to is whether that is a useful behavior. (Of course, I assume things like the time sent are changed in the headers, and presumably all the Received: headers (at the new recipient).) > > It's different from "forwarding", which strips out all the headers and > generates a whole new message with your own regular outgoing headers. > > See the documentation at > <http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/#sending-intro> and > <http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/#forwarding-mail>.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 04:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xu9Hb-681-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205582 |
On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 08:40:28 -0500 Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> wrote: > On Thursday 21 February 2019 08:25:54 Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. > > > > Forwarding and bouncing are completely different operations. If you > > aren't using mutt/neomutt and don't have a literal bounce feature, > > then please just ignore this part. > > I am not using mutt. TDE version of kmail. And I'd point out that the > threat of a list unsubscribe is blamed on a "bounce". That specific > word. > > And as far as I know, fetchmail has no ability/facility to bounce a > message. Fetchmail-6.3.26 IIRC. Locally built from tarball. 'Bouncing' a message is typically done by a MUA (Kmail, in your case), not the MDA (fetchmail, in your case). Other MUAs besides mutt/neomutt do have 'bounce' options (although they may not always be called that), e.g., in Sylpheed, it's Message -> Redirect. Celejar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 05:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xuaad-6i2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205627 |
On Thursday 21 February 2019 09:59:53 Celejar wrote: > On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 08:40:28 -0500 > > Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> wrote: > > On Thursday 21 February 2019 08:25:54 Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > > > > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. > > > > > > Forwarding and bouncing are completely different operations. If > > > you aren't using mutt/neomutt and don't have a literal bounce > > > feature, then please just ignore this part. > > > > I am not using mutt. TDE version of kmail. And I'd point out that > > the threat of a list unsubscribe is blamed on a "bounce". That > > specific word. > > > > And as far as I know, fetchmail has no ability/facility to bounce a > > message. Fetchmail-6.3.26 IIRC. Locally built from tarball. > > 'Bouncing' a message is typically done by a MUA (Kmail, in your case), > not the MDA (fetchmail, in your case). Other MUAs besides mutt/neomutt > do have 'bounce' options (although they may not always be called > that), e.g., in Sylpheed, it's Message -> Redirect. > > Celejar kmail has that. I should learn to use it, at least once/ Thanks. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curt <curty@free.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 09:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xuexc-xG-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205627 |
On 2019-02-21, Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> And as far as I know, fetchmail has no ability/facility to bounce a >> message. Fetchmail-6.3.26 IIRC. Locally built from tarball. > > 'Bouncing' a message is typically done by a MUA (Kmail, in your case), > not the MDA (fetchmail, in your case). Other MUAs besides mutt/neomutt > do have 'bounce' options (although they may not always be called that), > e.g., in Sylpheed, it's Message -> Redirect. > > Celejar > > Whoever came up with the idea of calling the redirection of a message a bounce, when the term was already in use for 'Return to sender/Address unknown/No such number/No such zone' (hi Elvis!) should be sent to bed with no dessert.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 10:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xueQx-DW-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205635 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 08:36:06AM -0000, Curt wrote: [...] > Whoever came up with the idea of calling the redirection of a message a > bounce, when the term was already in use for 'Return to sender/Address > unknown/No such number/No such zone' (hi Elvis!) should be sent to bed > with no dessert. I can see how that happened: bounce is just a special case of redirection, and using the special case to mean the general /is/ a recurring (human) language pattern, after all. Perhaps that's how it happened in MUAs. First there was just a lever "bounce" -- then, programmers, as they tend to be thought "hey, we can make this much more useful if we let the user enter the address to 'bounce to'" and *poof* you got mess :-) But you're right -- in technical realms this tends to cause some confusion... Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 14:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xtWAi-6FI-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205566 |
On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > [...] > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > Thanks > -- t This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My incoming chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, then divert to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to forward to that address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed often enough to get my attention several years ago, resulted in its being bounced back to me Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam filtering is far better then debians. I get very little spam from them because they do active bouncing, using barracuda I believe, or they'll put it in a spam folder, but thats rare, 4 to 10 msgs a day. When I moved my server from my former employers server because the facility had been sold and my lifetime account was going away, I had to call the tech people at Shentel and compose a whitelist. Putting debian on that whitelist raised the spam content around 10% here. My incoming spam gets fed to sa-learn at about 1 am, and the folder copied to a 1 day save in case I need to retrieve something. Its coming up on 8 am local, and only 3 more have been caught by SA. I'll have maybe 15 by the end of the collection day. I thank my ISP for their active filtering as its caught hundreds I don't have to even waste the bandwidth to download. I could probably, with some study, have procmail forward that stuff to the above address in near real time. But if all it generates is bounces, why bother? That just serves to prove to me that debian has zero interest in containing UCE. Since I don't set the rules, or write the checks for debian, that just how it is. Thats a choice debian has made as its the least manpower choice, and I grok that. But redirecting the blame to me or my ISP because debians filtering is poor, is poor form in any language. I go look at every message that I get threatening messages from your server over because my ISP bounced it, and there have been no exceptions in 2 years, every time you got a bounce from my ISP, it was blatantly UCE that the debian server should have sent to /dev/null, and I'll not apologize for that. I do not consider its me or my ISP's problem. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 14:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xtWJY-6J0-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205575 |
Hi. On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My incoming > chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, then divert > to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to forward to that > address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed often enough to get > my attention several years ago, resulted in its being bounced back to me There's a difference between 'Forward' and 'Bounce'. That e-mail is for bounces. > Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam filtering > is far better ... using barracuda LOL. Did you mean *this* Barracuda - [1]? The thing's a best possible example of how you *do not* filter spam *ever*. > I believe, or they'll put it in > a spam folder, but thats rare, 4 to 10 msgs a day. Here (office, not this MTA) we have 1 (that's 'one') per week if we're lucky (and on unlucky weeks it's exactly 0). And yes, it's Amavisd + SpamAssassin + Greylistd. Reco [1] http://www.dontbouncespam.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 14:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xtWTD-6Mm-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205579 |
On Thursday 21 February 2019 08:32:18 Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My > > incoming chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, > > then divert to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to > > forward to that address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed > > often enough to get my attention several years ago, resulted in its > > being bounced back to me > > There's a difference between 'Forward' and 'Bounce'. That e-mail is > for bounces. > > > Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam > > filtering is far better ... using barracuda > > LOL. Did you mean *this* Barracuda - [1]? > The thing's a best possible example of how you *do not* filter spam > *ever*. > Maybe, but it works. > > I believe, or they'll put it in > > a spam folder, but thats rare, 4 to 10 msgs a day. > > Here (office, not this MTA) we have 1 (that's 'one') per week if we're > lucky (and on unlucky weeks it's exactly 0). And yes, it's Amavisd + > SpamAssassin + Greylistd. > > > Reco > > [1] http://www.dontbouncespam.org/ Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 15:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xtX3j-6Ps-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205581 |
Hi. On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:43:47AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 21 February 2019 08:32:18 Reco wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My > > > incoming chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, > > > then divert to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to > > > forward to that address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed > > > often enough to get my attention several years ago, resulted in its > > > being bounced back to me > > > > There's a difference between 'Forward' and 'Bounce'. That e-mail is > > for bounces. > > > > > Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam > > > filtering is far better ... using barracuda > > > > LOL. Did you mean *this* Barracuda - [1]? > > The thing's a best possible example of how you *do not* filter spam > > *ever*. > > > Maybe, but it works. You haven't read the link, haven't you? You ISP's parody for spam filtering will kick you out the list. Just because it's written in such way. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 21:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xu3s6-2l6-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205579 |
On Thu 21 Feb 2019 at 16:32:18 (+0300), Reco wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My incoming > > chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, then divert > > to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to forward to that > > address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed often enough to get > > my attention several years ago, resulted in its being bounced back to me > > There's a difference between 'Forward' and 'Bounce'. That e-mail is for bounces. > > > Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam filtering > > is far better ... using barracuda > > LOL. Did you mean *this* Barracuda - [1]? > The thing's a best possible example of how you *do not* filter spam > *ever*. My mail hosting service uses that, and I think they might have overreacted to its past (and present?) woes. They filter mail *from* me between their mail submission host and their gateway host (which sends it out to the Internet). Recently it has sometimes taken a couple of days for random emails to make that passage, and in several instances, emails got stuck. When I complained about non-delivery, they sent me a listing showing them sitting in a queue, "Blocked". Now, if they are refusing to send them out, the service should be sending them back to me as a rejection with reasons, but I guess they're afraid of bouncing them at all. They know they came from me, they host my domain, and they know the emails are legitimate because they just authenticated the submission. But they just throw their hands in the air, saying "We didn't write the rules, we have no control over them." > [1] http://www.dontbouncespam.org/ BTW I got an email only the other day from this outfit (corr), asking me if I would become a "friend of a convict". As it was sent to my deblis address, they had presumably harvested it. I would have examined it more closely had this item arrived earlier. The outfit looks relatively local on the scale of this place (IA). Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 17:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xtZou-8jd-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205575 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > > Thanks > > -- t > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My incoming > chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, then divert > to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to forward to that > address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed often enough to get > my attention several years ago, resulted in its being bounced back to me I do it all the time (perhaps twice a week). No problems so far. > Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam filtering > is far better then debians. This only shows that you still have much to learn about spam :-) Filtering for an open list with roughly 600 subscribers is far more difficult than filtering for one person, since the breadth of topics and styles for non-spam is significantly higher. This is a real challenge for statistical filters. I think that, given the constraints, Debian list spam filters aren't bad. "The Debian Listmasters do their best to stop as many such emails as possible from reaching the lists. On a typical day, over 40,000 such messages are blocked." [1] > I get very little spam from them because they do active bouncing, > using barracuda I believe, *spit* A couple of times I had the "honor". Dunno whether it was a bad sysadmin or barracuda itself. Not a nice souvenir, mind you. [...] > But if all it generates is bounces, why bother? That just serves to prove > to me that debian has zero interest in containing UCE. Since I don't set > the rules, or write the checks for debian, that just how it is. See above. If you go to the below reference, you even get to propose SpamAssassin rules to the Debian list masters. I'm sure they can use some help. They're volunteers, after all. Saying they have "zero interest" (even if they not only do the heavy lifting of filtering out 40K spams /a day/, but also document what they are doing, for your and my reading convenience, all at no cost, on a volunteer basis) is offensive. > But redirecting the blame to me or my ISP because debians filtering is > poor [...] Repeat with me: - you don't bounce spam at all, because you're bouncing to the wrong address anyway, thus just enhancing the problem. (There is still a reason to bounce a (legitimate) mail, but NEVER-EVER when you think it's spam). - you don't reject to mailing lists: they'll conclude that you have delivery problems and unsubscribe you. This is common consensus, and for a reason. If your provider isn't doing that, they ain't pros and are just pissing in our common well. Sorry for being so clear, but I feel strongly about mail: it's the last means of communication left where I have the choice of client software, the other stuff being "antisocial networks", where some random web designer gets to decide what I see and how. I hope I die before this dystopia is upon us (I'm old, mind you). Cheers [1] https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#ads -- tomás
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 17:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Message exchange systems (was: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks]) |
| Message-ID | <xtZya-8mf-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205592 |
> Sorry for being so clear, but I feel strongly about mail: it's the last
> means of communication left where I have the choice of client software,
Mostly true. It does suffer from a terrible design w.r.t encryption, tho.
The other existing mediums (with a choice of clients) I'm aware of are
XMPP and Matrix.
XMPP has many more clients than Matrix, but has the downside that it was
designed for instant messages where delivery either happens "immediately"
or not at all, so it's not a great choice as a replacement for email
(although IIUC they have designed various patches on top of the design to
try and provide more-or-less reliable delivery even is some of the
machines along the way are or go offline at an inopportune moment).
I use Matrix on my phone (i.e. to exchange brief messages and pictures),
but not (yet) for email-like communications (where I need a real
keyboard).
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 17:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Message exchange systems (was: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks]) |
| Message-ID | <xtZHP-8pt-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205596 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:38:50AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Sorry for being so clear, but I feel strongly about mail: it's the last > > means of communication left where I have the choice of client software, > > Mostly true. It does suffer from a terrible design w.r.t encryption, tho. > > The other existing mediums (with a choice of clients) I'm aware of are > XMPP and Matrix. [...] Thanks. I might live longer, then. No idea whether some might read that as a menace ;-P Cheers -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-22 05:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What to do about spam in debian-user [was: Your Password Reset Link from CorrLinks] |
| Message-ID | <xuajT-6Bc-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205592 |
On Thursday 21 February 2019 11:20:52 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:21:00AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 21 February 2019 03:59:37 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > You can also help us by bouncing (as in mutt) spam to > > > > report-listspam@lists.debian.org > > > > > > Thanks > > > -- t > > > > This _might_ be a good idea, if that address took forwards. My > > incoming chain does not include the ability to do other than accept, > > then divert to /var/mail/virii or /dev/null. But my one attempt to > > forward to that address when debians poor spam/viri filters failed > > often enough to get my attention several years ago, resulted in its > > being bounced back to me > > I do it all the time (perhaps twice a week). No problems so far. > > > Don't give me, or my current ISP a hard time because their spam > > filtering is far better then debians. > > This only shows that you still have much to learn about spam :-) > > Filtering for an open list with roughly 600 subscribers is far more > difficult than filtering for one person, since the breadth of topics > and styles for non-spam is significantly higher. This is a real > challenge for statistical filters. > > I think that, given the constraints, Debian list spam filters aren't > bad. > > "The Debian Listmasters do their best to stop as many such > emails as possible from reaching the lists. On a typical day, > over 40,000 such messages are blocked." [1] > > > I get very little spam from them because they do active bouncing, > > using barracuda I believe, > > *spit* > > A couple of times I had the "honor". Dunno whether it was a bad > sysadmin or barracuda itself. Not a nice souvenir, mind you. > > [...] > > > But if all it generates is bounces, why bother? That just serves to > > prove to me that debian has zero interest in containing UCE. Since I > > don't set the rules, or write the checks for debian, that just how > > it is. > > See above. If you go to the below reference, you even get to > propose SpamAssassin rules to the Debian list masters. I'm > sure they can use some help. They're volunteers, after all. > > Saying they have "zero interest" (even if they not only do the > heavy lifting of filtering out 40K spams /a day/, but also document > what they are doing, for your and my reading convenience, all at > no cost, on a volunteer basis) is offensive. > > > But redirecting the blame to me or my ISP because debians filtering > > is poor [...] > > Repeat with me: > - you don't bounce spam at all, because you're bouncing to > the wrong address anyway, thus just enhancing the problem. > Spam should be sent to /dev/null. I've no argument with that at all. > (There is still a reason to bounce a (legitimate) mail, > but NEVER-EVER when you think it's spam). > > - you don't reject to mailing lists: they'll conclude that > you have delivery problems and unsubscribe you. Tell that to Shentel.net, I gotten hoarse just trying to make them let fetchmail nuke what its pulled. But too many dummies use the same via imap, and get pissed when their message disappears, so us fetchmail users take it on the chin by being forced to login in with a browser daily and cleaning house. > This is common consensus, and for a reason. If your provider isn't > doing that, they ain't pros and are just pissing in our common well. > > Sorry for being so clear, but I feel strongly about mail: it's the > last means of communication left where I have the choice of client > software, the other stuff being "antisocial networks", where some > random web designer gets to decide what I see and how. I hope I die > before this dystopia is upon us (I'm old, mind you). So am I tomas, currently 84 TBE. > > Cheers > > [1] https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#ads > -- tomás Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-21 17:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xtZot-8jd-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #205564 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 08:20:23AM -0800, James H. H. Lampert wrote: > On 2/21/19, 12:38 AM, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > >You shouldn't /bounce/ spam anyway: where are you going to bounce it > >to? To a most probably spoofed address, i.e. to a totally innocent > >victim? Thus generating reflected spam, aka Joe Jobs? > > That depends. Some spammers don't see themselves as spammers, and > therefore aren't spoofing other addresses. They just either (1) fail to > honor unsubscribe requests, (2) don't put unsubscribe links in the plain > text, or (3) omit either the unsubscribe link or the plain text (or > both) entirely. Well, if /you are sure/ they havent spoofed the From:, or Reply-To: then go ahead. But you just /can't be sure/, so don't do it. Never received bounce spam aka backscatter spam? Remember that time (perhaps 1-2 years ago) where this very list was plagued by an especially evil form of backscatter involving the useful idiot at the other end of some smartphone? Cheers [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_spam -- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web