Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:54:22 -0600
Reply-To: pudding man <pudding_man@MAIL.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: pudding man <pudding_man@MAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Conceal addresses against SPAM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
F. Joe,
I'm not sure an apology was needed. Folks (sometimes
my po' self) often assume 'things' are simpler than
they actually are. P'raps it is good to occasionally
hear something of the underlying complexity.
I'm guessing that administration of sas-l was a fairly
routine business some years ago.
I'm further guessing that administration of sas-l
has gotten much more difficult in recent years.
In fact, I -fear- that it has gotten to be very
frustrating. Wish there were something we could
do ...
If it's any help, there's any number of sas-l folks
out here that think you are doing a good job and very
much appreciate your efforts. "You keep us afloat!"
Zalut,
Puddin'
*******************************************************
***** Puddin' Man **** Pudding_Man-at-mail.com ********
*******************************************************;
Madman muses on "Our Wonderful World Of Technology":
Given a choice, which would you prefer?
1.) All the gold that was stored in Fort Knox between
1900 and 1990.
2.) A fair market price for every:
- cpu cycle, i/o, and bandwidth-unit
- user wait-time unit
expended since 1999 for no rational reason, thus including:
- 99+% of spam and ads
- all worm/virus idiocies
- all hardware/software activity (i.e. virus,
firewall, spam-blockers) to counter such
Note: Studies have shown that 9 out of 10 catatonics choose 1.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "F. J. Kelley" <jkelley@UGA.EDU>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:32:07 -0500
To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Conceal addresses against SPAM
> apologies. I had just been going through a great deal of
> spam. some of it the traditional variety re various body
> parts and such and some of it generated by trojans being all
> over and either sending me messages or causing mail scanning
> programs to send me messages. most (all?) of them have
> a "From:" address that is useless (sometimes a forged real
> address, sometimes a forged fake address, sometimes dev/nul,
> etc), so the prospect of posters being able to conceal with
> even greater ease did not seem a good thing.
>
>
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:50:20 -0500
> >From: ben.powell@CLA.CO.UK
> >Subject: Re: Conceal addresses against SPAM
> >To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> >
> >Don't totally understand this post. Appologies if I was
> being ignorant.
> >
> >On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 12:58:48 -0500, F. J. Kelley
> <jkelley@UGA.EDU> wrote:
> >
> >>so ....
> >>just dispense with some of the RFC-822 headers?
> >>
> >>and this would not be the same as spam because an address
> was
> >>provided? in the body of the message? and of course, if I
> >>were really concerned about spam, then I wouldn't include an
> >>address? but this would (obciously) not be the same as spam
> >>even though there was no return address because I ...uh...
> >>have good thoughts.... wouldn't send spam? .... is this
> >>serious?
> >>--Joe
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>---- Original message ----
> >>>Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:47:39 GMT
> >>>From: bogdan romocea <br44092@GAWAB.COM>
> >>>Subject: Re: Conceal addresses against SPAM
> >>>To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> >>>
> >>>Even though many lists are public, I think it is very
> >>>unsatisfactory that posters' addresses are exposed. Email
> >>>addresses should ~never ever~ be exposed for spam reasons.
> >>>Whoever would want to include the contact info in a posting
> >>>could very easily do so (signature). Besides, it would be
> >>really
> >>>easy to specify your email address in a way that would make
> >>>harvesting a much more difficult job. The spammers should
> at
> >>>least be made to work on getting the real addresses from
> the
> >>>likes of #$me#$=at=domain=dot=com=don'tincludethis.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Howard Schreier [mailto:Howard_Schreier@ITA.DOC.GOV]
> >>>Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 11:54 AM
> >>>To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> >>>Subject: Re: Conceal addresses against SPAM
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>SAS-L runs on LISTSERV, not Mailman. However, the
> >>functionality
> >>>is probably
> >>>quite similar.
> >>>
> >>>There is always going to be a distinction between the
> >>>consequences of
> >>>merely subscribing and those of posting.
> >>>
> >>>If you subscribe at uga.edu, there should be no problem.
> Joe
> >>>Kelley has
> >>>that locked down pretty well. That's not the case at the
> peer
> >>>servers
> >>>(Marist, Va. Tech, Vienna). I definitely would not
> subscribe
> >>at
> >>>Va. Tech,
> >>>where the subscriber list is public, at least not without
> >>>setting the
> >>>CONCEAL option.
> >>>
> >>>That all has to do with the possibility of subscribers' e-
> >>mail
> >>>addresses
> >>>being harvested, then spam being sent directly to
> >>individuals.
> >>>If spam is
> >>>sent to the list and not filtered, it will be seen by
> >>>subscribers.
> >>>
> >>>Posting to the list involves a different set of issues. The
> >>>SAS-L archives
> >>>and the comp.soft-sys.sas newsgroup are public, so posters'
> >>>addresses are
> >>>exposed. People have to devise their own solutions to that.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:58:28 -0500, Ben Powell
> >>><ben.powell@CLA.CO.UK> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Dear list,
> >>>>
> >>>>There have been many comments recently regarding spam
> >>related worms
> >>>>scraping this list for email addresses that return to
> haunt
> >>posters to the
> >>>>list, sometimes filling their inboxes with tsunamis of
> >>unwanted junk mail,
> >>>>often laced with worm attachments.
> >>>>
> >>>>I wondered out loud why the addresses could not be
> >>concealed? Here is an
> >>>>example of how this can be done:
> >>>>
> >>>>"Conceal yourself from subscriber list?
> >>>>When someone views the list membership, your email address
> >>is normally
> >>>>shown (in an obscured fashion to thwart spam harvesters).
> >>If you do not
> >>>>want your email address to show up on this membership
> >>roster at all, select
> >>>>Yes for this option. "
> >>>>http://www.ssc.com/mailman/options/linux-list
> >>>________________________________
> >>>15 Mbytes Free Web-based and POP3
> >>>Sign up now: http://www.gawab.com
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
| 
