On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 16:09 +0800, John Summerfield wrote: > Andrew Kelly wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 00:06 -0400, Ric Moore wrote: > >> On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 10:11 +0200, Andrew Kelly wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 01:33 -0500, Renich Bon Ciric wrote: > >>>> Does anybody, other than me, suffer from the same problem? > >>> Dunno. > >>> > >>> If your problem is erectile dysfunction, then yes, apparently half the > >>> planet shares your problem. Well, at least according to all the mail I > >>> get. > >> Jeeez Andy! Not you too?? I think my <ahem> "problem" was my yahoo > >> account's fault. All those ads you mentioned. I left that account open > >> for a year or so to attract and soak in just about all the goobers and > >> their spam that exist in the entire world, and I just killed it off > >> yesterday. <cackles> Sweet. > > > > I catch a ton of rubbish to an account I pretty much haven't used in > > half a dozen years. And I have to admit, some of the subject lines are > > funny as hell. There are between 200 and 500 in my junk folder every > > morning; I still can't break the habit of scanning for false positives. > > If you let your focal point slide to about 5 inches past your screen so > > that things begin to blur just the tiniest bit, let your mind wander > > (just the tiniest bit), it all begins to read like a surreal comic book. > > > > I choked on my tea the first time I read that my new penis was waiting > > for me. > > ... a riot. > > > >> Gmail makes me more "confident" you see. > > > > Gmail. > > You know, I think I'm learning that I think gmail really sucks. I've > > never actually used web-based e-mail (and I've never really understood > > why anybody who has an actual internet connection would in the first > > place), so I don't really know what it's enticing feature(s) is/are. But > > I sure can say that I get a ***t-load of spam from gmail accounts, and > > that gmail either does not have an abuse mechanism in place, or simply > > refuses to respond to it's use. > > Bear in mind that the "from:" address is supplied by the user, and can > be anything at all. > > If you look carefully at the received: headers, you can tell whether it > came via gmail's servers. Note that there typically will not be many > hops between gmail's servers and yours, and probably you "know" them all. Yeah, yeah, I on it. Before I spend the time writing a notice of abuse mail I make sure of details like that. I only make that kind of effort in special cases, and let filters handle the rest. It's been my experience that mail sent to abuse@ generally gets *at*least* an automated response of some kind. In my dealing with gmail I've never heard a single peep, not from man nor beast, so to speak. An, of course, no actions (that I could perceive, anyway) were ever taken. It's like talking to a wall. Whatever, I'll live. But I'm certainly not being presented with any opportunities to alter my personal opinions about web-based email, or the providers or (with exceptions, of course) users thereof. > > Whatever the case, gmail is the new hotmail in my admin life. In fact, > > aol has fallen to 4th place on my personal list of "The Rings of Hell". > > gmail, hotmail, yahoo, aol, in that order. > > more like .cn and .ko .ru, .es and .mx don't rate highly here either. I hear you. > I regularly firewall off great gobs of China: if I see spam or ssh from > anywhere in China, I block at least the entire /24 network entirely, > from smpt and ssh. For me that's a baby/bathwater thing. SSHD will take any amount of activity from my own networks; everybody else gets 1 try at a successful login and talks to the hand after that. For mail, I let postfix and a content scanner deal with things. If the connecting host can survive RBL and a reverse DNS lookup and wants to send mail to an actual user in a domain I'm catching for, and the mail isn't carrying anything that looks like cooties, then it's in the door as far as I'm concerned. The receiving end can worry about whether it was real mail or not. Users whine about all the crap they get, but they REALLY whine when critical mail doesn't reach them. Andy
