>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michele Neylon :: Blacknight Solutions
>[mailto:michele@blacknight.ie]
>Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 5:05 AM
>To: 'Jeff Chan'; 'SURBL Discussion list'; 'SpamAssassin Users'
>Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Blogger attacks SURBL
>
>
>discuss-bounces(a)lists.surbl.org wrote:
>> Pardon the dramatic title, but hopefully it got your attention.
>>
>> This guy's domain got listed by Outblaze, we removed it, and
>> as thanks this guy paints us as irresponsible. Please help
>> us straighten him out, gently:
>>
>> http://blog.holtz.com/index.php/weblog/comments/blacklisting_blogs/
>>
>> I gave it my shot.
>>
>> Jeff C.
>
>I love the way his blogging software leaves the email
>addresses "naked"
>
>Mr Michele Neylon
Actually they are encrypted in the web code, but decrypted for human
readers. To me, thats about as secure as locking the door but leaving the
windows open.
--Chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 7:57 PM
>To: Joe Wein
>Cc: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
>Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] PayPal Joe-job
>
>
>On Wednesday, June 1, 2005, 8:19:20 AM, Joe Wein wrote:
>> Since I list a lot of fake company domains in
>money-forwarding scams on my
>> website (a data source of JP on multi.surbl.org), I seem to
>have offended a
>> few people.
>
>> Yesterday someone made 4 PayPal payments to my account, two
>from the US, one
>> from France and one from Australia. PayPal caught it or was
>alerted and
>> reversed all transfers, as well as suspending my account pending
>> investigation.
>
>Hmm, I just got a paypal donation (first in months it seems) from
>someone who has apparently never posted to any of the many spam
>lists I'm on. Should I be concerned?
Only if the amount ended in .37 cents :)
--Chris
Why would someone (for example, mailto:nico.prenzel@pn-systeme.de )
signup to an eMail list ... and then require authentication?
Just curious ...
IMO, if you don't want eMail, don't signup to an active eMail list.
-------- Message With Full Headers --------
From: - Tue May 31 07:28:42 2005
X-UIDL: 1117523571.M110438P38333.mx6.oct
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 10000000
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: mdiehl(a)nac.net
Received: (qmail 38071 invoked by uid 0); 31 May 2005 07:12:36 -0000
Received: from 81.169.145.166 by mx6.oct (envelope-from <>, uid 0) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (clamuko: 0.72. Clear:RC:0(81.169.145.166):. Processed in 0.244881 secs); 31 May 2005 07:12:36 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: via mx6.oct
X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.25 (Clear:RC:0(81.169.145.166):. Processed in 0.244881 secs)
Received: from unknown (HELO natnoddy.rzone.de) (81.169.145.166) by rbl-mx6.oct.nac.net with SMTP; 31 May 2005 07:12:35 -0000
Received: from szpn0002 (p213.54.179.94.tisdip.tiscali.de [213.54.179.94]) by post.webmailer.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j4V7CXPC014589 for <mdiehl(a)nac.net>; Tue, 31 May 2005 09:12:34 +0200 (MEST)
Received: by szpn0002 (Postfix) id 996CE474E0; Tue, 31 May 2005 09:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: MAILER-DAEMON(a)szpn0002.pn-systeme.de (Mail Delivery System)
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
To: mdiehl(a)nac.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="04F23A26C6.1117523126/szpn0002"
Message-Id: <20050531070526.996CE474E0@szpn0002>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on spamd2.oct
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-PrefsFile: nac.net/mdiehl
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.6 required=4.7 tests=RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100, RAZOR2_CHECK autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:05:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: MAILER-DAEMON(a)szpn0002.pn-systeme.de (Mail Delivery System)
To: mdiehl(a)nac.net
This is the Postfix program at host szpn0002.
I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be
be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>
If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
delete your own text from the attached returned message.
The Postfix program
<nico.prenzel(a)pn-systeme.de>: host 192.168.101.1[192.168.101.1] said: 530
Authentication required (in reply to MAIL FROM command)
Reporting-MTA: dns; szpn0002
X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 04F23A26C6
X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; mdiehl(a)nac.net
Arrival-Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 07:59:06 +0200 (CEST)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; nico.prenzel(a)pn-systeme.de
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host 192.168.101.1[192.168.101.1] said: 530
Authentication required (in reply to MAIL FROM command)
Subject: Re: Blogger attacks SURBL
From: "Martin G. Diehl" <mdiehl(a)nac.net>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 02:02:20 -0400
To: Jeff Chan <jeffc(a)surbl.org>
CC: SURBL Discuss <discuss(a)lists.surbl.org>, SpamAssassin Users <users(a)spamassassin.apache.org>
Jeff Chan wrote:
> Pardon the dramatic title, but hopefully it got your attention.
>
> This guy's domain got listed by Outblaze, we removed it, and as
> thanks this guy paints us as irresponsible. Please help us
> straighten him out, gently:
>
> http://blog.holtz.com/index.php/weblog/comments/blacklisting_blogs/
>
> I gave it my shot.
>
> Jeff C.
> --
> Don't harm innocent bystanders.
The way I read his response is that he stands against
SPAM and in favor of anti SPAM measures ...
*provided* he is not inconvenienced.
--
Martin
Let's try that link again...
http://chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0505310158may31,1,5465703.story
> "Draft rules from the Federal Election Commission, which enforces
> campaign finance laws, would require that paid political
> advertisements
> on the Internet declare who funded the ad, as television spots do.
> Similar disclaimers would be placed on political Web sites, as well as
> on e-mails sent to people on purchased lists containing more than 500
> addresses."
I thought you (fellow) anti-spam folks would get a kick out of this...
"Draft rules from the Federal Election Commission, which enforces
campaign finance laws, would require that paid political advertisements
on the Internet declare who funded the ad, as television spots do.
Similar disclaimers would be placed on political Web sites, as well as
on e-mails sent to people on purchased lists containing more than 500
addresses."
from
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0505310158may31,1,5465703.s
tory
Matthew Wilson, MCSE (2003), MCSA-Messaging
Network Administrator
matthew(a)boomer.com
Boomer Consulting, Inc.
610 Humboldt
Manhattan, KS 66502
http://www.boomer.com <http://www.boomer.com/>
1-888-266-6375 x 17
Since I list a lot of fake company domains in money-forwarding scams on my
website (a data source of JP on multi.surbl.org), I seem to have offended a
few people.
Yesterday someone made 4 PayPal payments to my account, two from the US, one
from France and one from Australia. PayPal caught it or was alerted and
reversed all transfers, as well as suspending my account pending
investigation.
In the last two days I also received "fan mail" from Nigeria and South
Africa regarding some anti-419 data that I publish.
Just wanted to let you guys know. I take it as a sign that the scammers are
feeling some pain, which is good :-)
Joe Wein
--
joewein.de LLC
6-30 Sumiyoshidai, Aoba-ku
Yokohama, 227-0035, Japan
E-Mail: joewein(a)pobox.com
WWW: http://www.joewein.de
I believe this is the second incarnation I have seen of the email, used to
be a different domain. Its quite annoying as the previous one was in the
various surbl lists, but due to the obfuscation was not getting flagged.
-----Original Message-----
From: List Mail User [mailto:track@plectere.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 7:28 PM
To: discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
Cc: track(a)plectere.com
Subject: RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: embedded image spams
thouljthou1. com - multitrade group, now omnicorporation
New name and address though.
Paul Shupak
track(a)plectere.com
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss(a)lists.surbl.org
http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Perhaps you've seen, perhaps you haven't but here is some SPAM humor to pass
the time. Sorry if you aren't interested but as my office has taken to
referring to me as a SPAM junkie, I totally related to this cartoon and
thought some of the others would too.
WARNING: This cartoon could be considered offensive and should not be viewed
by anyone.
http://www.pccc.com/downloads/junk/cool/email_cartoon.mpg
<shun>flames</shun>
Regards,
KAM