[linux-elitists] speaking of hunting/defeating spammers...

Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com
Wed May 2 11:24:19 PDT 2001

on Wed, May 02, 2001 at 04:30:21AM -0400, Joseph S. Barrera III (joe@barrera.org) wrote:
> Also sprach Karsten M. Self:
> > I believe this is an echo of Aaron Lehmann's response above.
> > Essentially, you're telling the spammers "you're so successful that I'm
> > going to change my behavior in strange, unusual, and inconvenient ways".
> "I see the truth in it."
> However, one could argue (but I won't, not here and now) that the same
> argument could be used against locks in your house and car. Are you
> going to let theives inconvenience you by forcing you to carry keys?

I don't have to:

  - Move every week to keep the robbers from figuring out where I'm at.
  - Carry everything I own with me all the time.

Keys and filters are roughly equivalent.  They let the good guys in with
minimal inconvenience, but keep the bad guys out.

> > Invest in an effective set of spam filtering tools instead.  I have
> > a very public, six year old, widely distributed, email address.  I
> > received an average of 3.8 spams a day for the past month (I archive
> > them all).  Most wind up in my Spam-Filter folder.  A very few end
> > up in a "greylist" folder for unknown mail sources but not too
> > likely to be spam.  
> > 
> > I use a set of automated tools to report the mail to ISPs, and the
> > IPs to the ORBS open relay list.  Takes a few seconds per item, but
> > I can deal with the whole lot of them at once.
> Sounds very cool. Are there FAQs or cookbooks on doing this?
> Do you have your setup described or on view somewhere?

Freshmeat.  I use ricochet.  spam.pl is another tool I've looked at.

> > Complex systems of address obscuring, switching, rotating, one-time
> > use, or one-recipient use, are IMO sorely misguided.
> I buy this line of reasoning... for my own address. However, there are
> people out there who are (1) worth having as part of a list and the
> discussions on same; (2) don't have the time/energy/means/knowlege to
> set up effective spam filtering; (3) won't post to an archived list
> because they don't want their address harvested.
> Now I can live with losing such people from list discussions, but it
> would be nice if I didn't have to.

...and every time you want to reply to one of them from list you have to
deal with their munged address.  I find this bloody inconvenient.

Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>    http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?       There is no K5 cabal
  http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/         http://www.kuro5hin.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20010502/dce2d9dd/attachment.pgp 

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list