xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Spam on list?

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Spam on list?
From: Sami Farin <safari-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 23:29:06 +0200
In-reply-to: <45C73CB9.5000402@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Sami Farin <safari-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702040822520.14035@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <p73wt2wnbd2.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <68c491a60702050352t278e8381l72795ed9ea880029@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200702051306.34279.ak@xxxxxxx> <45C73CB9.5000402@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 08:18:33 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >On Monday 05 February 2007 12:52, Martin Schröder wrote:
> >>05 Feb 2007 11:32:25 +0100, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>:
> >>>Please don't do that. It means nothing can be cross posted
> >>>from l-k anymore, which would be pretty bad.
> >>Then set up a list admin who can approve such postings.
> >
> >That adds unacceptable latency. Also lists who spam senders
> >with bounce messages tend to be dropped quickly from cc lists.
> >
> >Also you couldn't list xfs@ as bug report address anymore because
> >bug report addresses must be available to everyone.
> >
> >In general it's a bad idea.
> >
> >-Andi
> >
> 
> Well, I agree w/ those arguments too, Andi.
> 
> I honestly don't know why oss seems to have so much more spam than, say, 
> LKML.  It is getting to a really bad level, and I sympathize with those 
> whose inboxes are bombarded, too.

Those 419 scams and phishes are caught by for example a bayesian filter.
That's what I have done since 2003.

As for the "only subscribers can post" as an anti-spam measure,
I can say that for those mailing lists where they are doing it,
the emails from non-subscribers go to /dev/null and if you
contact owner, it goes, too, because you are not subscribed (!!)
OR they just tell you to screw off.  After waiting for a week.
If they feel like it.

This is not to say that xfs ml would be doing this /dev/nulling ,
this is just my general feeling about this anti-spam measure
and its usability.  Besides, I use different (secret) subscription
email address for mailing lists than in the From header field
when I write to the list.  This way it's easy to have different
anti-spam measures for subscription email (e.g., none)
than for the email in From (e.g., I can reject out-of-office
notices and other brokeness).  If I had to use the same
email for both purposes, I couldn't for example reject
based on 419 scammers' IP addresses found in Received
etc. header fields because then I would get auto-unsubscribed
from this mailing list when ecartis thinks my email is broken.

-- 
Do what you love because life is too short for anything else.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>