Tim <bodysurf(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
At 08:23 PM 9/30/97 -0700, <wje(_at_)acm(_dot_)org> wrote:
process(_at_)qz(_dot_)little-neck(_dot_)ny(_dot_)us (Eli the Bearded) wrote:
What I don't understand at this point is whether Eli considers this a
problem of his, or a problem of mine.
I don't consider it a problem at all. If you had read my letter to
you, you would know why I was writing you.
... literal question to Eli: What
is the point of this rant -- is it to make you, Bill, change how you do
things to appease Eli? Eli *chooses* to receive this mailing list and your
posts are appropriate. Is your "From:" line in violation of RFC822?
It is my opinion that asking for or offering help and opinions in
Internet public forums includes an implicit agreement to get mail in
response. When people send me fake bounces saying please use such and
such passowrd it is annoying. When they state:
} To get the password, take the word tuixgulxeut and remove every
} occurrence of the letters "u" and "x".
I think they are trying to be a pain in the ass.
} Spamsters have gotten clever
} enough that I can't even type the password in the clear.
I fail to believe this at all.
Well, it bothered me that I'd get 5+ UCEs a day and blacklisting was too
much work with these idiots constantly forging headers to evade the
filters, so now I "selectively" whitelist.
I find filtering spam very easy. It is the rest of the junk mail that
causes problems.
Here is my latest refinement of that stuff I came up with for the
Biow bounce, comments on technique appreciated.
# References == In-Reply-To is used by "formail -r"
:0
* ^References:\/.*
* $ ^In-Reply-To:$\MATCH
{
BounceFilter=yes
}
# This might be too strong, time will tell.
:0
* spamgard
{
BounceFilter=yes
}
:0
* BounceFilter ?? yes
{
# VERBOSE=yes
# Each of these needs to be a nested recipe so that the $MATCH version
# is not performed if $MATCH is empty.
:0B
* 1^1 ()\/Your +(e?mail|message|letter)( +[a-z,-]+( +[a-z,-]+)?)? +(is|came)
+\
from +a +\<?(spam|U[CB]E).*site
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -2^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 1^1 ()\/(free( +(e?mail|pop3?|drop.?box))? +accounts?.*(spam|U[CB]E)|\
(spam|U[CB]E).*free( +(e?mail|pop3?|drop.?box))? +accounts?)
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -2^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 1^1 ()\/(probabl[ely]+|(look +)?like?(ly)?) +(spam|U[CB]E)
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -2^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 1^1 ()\/you +are +a +(bulk|mass) +(e?mail|spam|adverti[sz])er
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -2^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 1^1 ()\/sites? +((which +)?(is|are)|(I +)?have) +blocked
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -2^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 3^1 ()\/you +(can|may|should) +re(send|mail) +your +(e?mail|letter|message)
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -3^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 2^1 ()\/(passw(or)?d.*subject\>+(line|header)|\
subject\>+(line|header).*passw(or)?d)
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -3^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0B
* $ $=^0
* 2^1 ()\/(passw(or)?d.*(get +(past|through)|bypass).*filter|\
passw(or)?d.*filter.*(get +(past|through)|bypass)|\
(get +(past|through)|bypass).*filter.*passw(or)?d|\
(get +(past|through)|bypass).*passw(or)?d.*filter|\
filter.*passw(or)?d.*(get +(past|through)|bypass)|\
filter.*(get +(past|through)|bypass).*passw(or)?d)
{
:0B
* $ $=^0
* $ -3^1 ^>.*$\MATCH
{ }
}
:0
* $ $=^0
* 2^1 ^X-Return.*spamgard
* 1^1 ^Subject: spamgard.*in\<*effect.*try\<*again
{
}
PassWordBounceScore = $=
# Save the score for fine tuning
:0fhw
| formail -A"PassWordBounceScore: $PassWordBounceScore"
# For now, allow four points of grace.
:0:
* -4^0
* $ $PassWordBounceScore^0
$NOTES/junk-mail
# VERBOSE=no
}
William's bounce scores 7, Biow's 9.
Elijah
------
I /dev/null dupes, no need to CC list posts. It is not my responsibility to
prove to you my mail is not spam, if mail to you bounces it will not be resent.