hi,
Am Sonntag, 14. Januar 2007 03:05 schrieb Chris McCormick:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 10:37:44AM +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Christian Klippel hat gesagt: // Christian Klippel wrote:
but an hour after my post, i start to get spam attempts to @mamalala.net !
I've given up trying to hide my email address from websites. In the long run it just doesn't seem to work.
I can recommend 'spamprobe', which is a bayesian filtering system that you can install easily via procmail. I used to get 100 spams a day or more, and now I get roughly 5 to 10 with that number going down slowly. Apt-get installable.
well, my goal is to not accept any incomming spam at all, before the DATA part starts. so far i'm down to the same number like you, but without any filtering of received mails. qmail + spamcontrol is pretty nice for that.
i see a (big) problem with post-filtering incomming mail: to the spammer it is another successfull delivery of spam, so he will continue with that. but if the mail is recjected during the smtp session already, they get back an reject error.
if all people (especially sysadmins of bigger network providers) would do that, i'm sure that we would have a much smaller spam problem than we have now. again, every accepted mail is a success for the spammer, regardless of someone filtering it afterwards. the mail just shouldnt be accepted in the first place.
with the envelope checking that spamcontrol implements, you can get rid of a lot of spams already _before_ accepting the mail (just look hoe spambots construct a mail, there are quite some thing by which you can identify a spam mail)
the rest one could do (like me) by just blocking spamming networks. kornet for example is massively involved in spamming, so just block them completely.
a big problem is that providers just dont care about the problem at all, despite them praying to the public that they take spam fighting serious. they just dont. its all just empty blah-blah phrases.
now, think a bit further: if most systems would block spams that way, even by blocking complete networks, providers would get immense pressure from their customers because of the decreased ability to send legitimate mails from their networks due to the blocks. and when customers make pressure, it means loss of $$ for the providers, the only thing that could make them move.
or do you think that providers dont get spam's as well? it would be an easy task for them to analyze the spams with a script, and kick the asses of their customers who are identified to have spamming machines. this would also make the users more aware about the problem of hacked machines used as spambots.
but as long as there is no pressure (read: potential loss of $$$), they will just not care at all. none of them!
Best,
Chris.
greets,
chris
chris@mccormick.cx http://mccormick.cx
PD-ot mailing list PD-ot@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot