Board index » cppbuilder » Doug McFarlane

Doug McFarlane


2003-11-18 10:06:29 AM
cppbuilder38
Is anybody else getting spammed to death by this turkey? Always advertising
computer positions that do not relate in any way to anybody's resumés.
 
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

Rhys Sage wrote:
Quote
Is anybody else getting spammed to death by this turkey? Always
advertising
computer positions that do not relate in any way to anybody's resumés.
No.
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

make a message rule that forwards his email back to him,
along with all your other spam. <g>
"Rhys Sage" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Is anybody else getting spammed to death by this turkey?
Always advertising computer positions that do not relate in any way to
anybody's resumés.
 

{smallsort}

Re:Doug McFarlane

Hi Stephan,
Quote
make a message rule that forwards his email back to him,
along with all your other spam. <g>
That might only "validate" your e-mail address, making you receptive to
even more spam...
Groetjes,
Bob Swart (aka Dr.Bob - www.DrBob42.com)
--
Bob Swart Training & Consultancy (eBob42) Borland Technology Partner
webmaster UK Borland User Group (BUG) & DotNet Developers Group (DDG)
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

Hi,
I've heard that doing an "auto reply" to incoming mail would cause many
spam engines to drop your address, essentially fooling them into thinking
that they are emailing an invalid address and getting a response from the
mail server.
Of course, I haven't tried this and don't know if it works.
"Bob Swart" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Hi Stephan,
Quote
make a message rule that forwards his email back to him,
along with all your other spam. <g>
That might only "validate" your e-mail address, making you receptive to
even more spam...
Groetjes,
Bob Swart (aka Dr.Bob - www.DrBob42.com)
--
Bob Swart Training & Consultancy (eBob42) Borland Technology Partner
webmaster UK Borland User Group (BUG) & DotNet Developers Group (DDG)
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

"Stephan" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
make a message rule that forwards his email back to him,
along with all your other spam. <g>
Also, spammers oftentimes "steal" someone else's email id, so this is
almost certainly an innocent bystander. Can you imagine any real
spammer giving out their email address?
I'm sure that this person is getting inundated with bounced messages
that were sent in his name, but he probably is more a victim than any
recipient of the spam.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

"Stephan" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
Hi,
I've heard that doing an "auto reply" to incoming mail would cause many
spam engines to drop your address, essentially fooling them into thinking
that they are emailing an invalid address and getting a response from the
mail server.
Of course, I haven't tried this and don't know if it works.
An auto reply won't work, it is validation that the email *works*.
You'd have to have the mail server reject the mail to spoof an invalid
address, but the mail server would have to somehow recognize that it's
spam. Besides, most spammers don't have any valid return addresses,
so bouncing spam does nothing to stop the problem, but does use
internet resources.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

Couldn't one look at the email internal links to see
if the reply address looks valid?
such as a reply address of XXXX@XXXXX.COM and
an internal link in the email of www.mycompany.com/sayhi.html
"Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
"Stephan" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
make a message rule that forwards his email back to him,
along with all your other spam. <g>
spammers oftentimes "steal" someone else's email id
Can you imagine any real spammer giving out their email address?
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

I guess there's no point in trying it then.
"Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
"Stephan" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
Of course, I haven't tried this and don't know if it works.
You'd have to have the mail server reject the mail to spoof an invalid
address
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

The best I've come up with so far is to send the junk back via SpamCop. The
only realistic method of stopping spam would have to be done on a source by
source basis. If email users were to contribute say a dollar a day then
sufficient funds would build up to enable the permanant retention of a set
of roadworkers who could inadvertantly cut through the spammer's power, gas,
water and phone connections on a daily basis. Personally, I'd be more
inclined to hire a baseball team to teach the spammer some manners - lol.
Rhys
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

"Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote

An auto reply won't work, it is validation that the email *works*.
You'd have to have the mail server reject the mail to spoof an invalid
address, but the mail server would have to somehow recognize that it's
spam. Besides, most spammers don't have any valid return addresses,
so bouncing spam does nothing to stop the problem, but does use
internet resources.
This is the way MailWasher works and it does a pretty good job.
I'd say that probably 25% of the email addresses I get are rejected as
invalid
when it sends the invalid address message back.
Mike
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

I get a bit narked by bouncebacks. I get a few fake bouncebacks and
bouncebacks from spam that people send using my email address as the alleged
sender. My Yahoo account was chock full of bouncebacks one day.
Rhys
"Mike Mormando" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
This is the way MailWasher works and it does a pretty good job.
I'd say that probably 25% of the email addresses I get are rejected as
invalid
when it sends the invalid address message back.
Mike


 

Re:Doug McFarlane

"Mike Mormando" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
This is the way MailWasher works and it does a pretty good job.
I'd say that probably 25% of the email addresses I get are rejected as
invalid
when it sends the invalid address message back.
Which probably means that almost all of the other 75% are valid
addresses. But given that they're spam, how many of those do you think
are the spammers' addresses? I'd guess, almost none.
In other words, for every 100 spams that reach you, you're sending out
maybe 70 yourself.
Alan Bellingham
--
Team Mongolian Wok
<url:www.borland.com/newsgroups/>Borland newsgroup descriptions
<url:www.borland.com/newsgroups/netiquette.html>netiquette
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

Well, NTL seems to be the source of the spam. I fired off two spam reports
via spamcop - one from one spammed account and one from another. 24 hours
later, he's spamming again from NTL again. I fired off another spamcop
report. Obviously, if this does not work then NTL is either not reading
spamcop reports or is in the spammers' pockets.
 

Re:Doug McFarlane

Quote
I get a bit narked by bouncebacks. I get a few fake bouncebacks and
bouncebacks from spam that people send using my email address as the
alleged
sender. My Yahoo account was chock full of bouncebacks one day.
Say a spammer faked an address at btinternet.com and sent it to a recipient
at XXXX@XXXXX.COM . Yahoo would return the mail to btinternet saying
that the address doesn't exist. Since the address at btinternet never
existed, btinternet then would bounce the email back to yahoo.com, ad
infinitum?
Would it?
G.