WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

spam is getting worse

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#1
i'm sure you guys heard that in the US we've got a law now that "requires the senders of unsolicited advertising e-mail to provide a link by which the recipient can opt out."

the problem is, the text makes no reference to the two following criteria:

1) moments after your name is deleted, it's ok for them to re-add you
2) the 'remove me' link doesn't have to actually work.

has anyone else become the target of such crap?
 

dustinzgirl

Banned - What an Asshat!
26,094
178
0
#2
NO, becuase I use severall different email addys...all spy like and shit. I have on for biz, one for family, one for fucking around on forums, and One for registering at stupid ass websites for information so that they can spam my ass. So on the last on I just delete everything.
 

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#3
i do the same thing, but the problem is i rely too heavily on my own; it's my first name at my last name dot org, so it's really convenient. problem is, you post it once on a forum or someone links to it, and suddenly eight billion people a day are sending you netsky.

i should start using my gmail account, or the accounts bound to other domains i own. it's kinda like a snowball, though; i'd have to disable my primary account until all the spammers gave up on it.
 

pimpyobitch

Banned - What an Asshat!
412
0
0
#4
Well have the time you cant do shit about it cause its comming from like india, or some where else and america cant do shit about that. In american spam :) you have to allow people to unsubscribe but like I said if its comming from outside of america they can get around that.
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,851
3,350
487
#5
pimpyobitch said:
Well have the time you cant do shit about it cause its comming from like india, or some where else and america cant do shit about that. In american spam :) you have to allow people to unsubscribe but like I said if its comming from outside of america they can get around that.

There's always Nukes, and Bio-chemical weapons. That'll learn'em
 

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#6
absolutely true.

but there's a microsoft style solution i really don't like: ban certain IPs from your forwarding service.

now, you don't need to know the particulars about e-mail, other than this really simple breakdown:

1) mail starts at the recipient's computer
2) they click 'send' which puts it on their own SMTP mail-forwarding server.
3) it gets relayed to the recipient's mail server
4) recipient checks their mail (POP3 or IMAP are the commonly used protocols these days) and get the sender's message.

one bad fix people have implemented is to be discriminating about where the mail comes from in step 2.

my server has received messages saying "relaying denied; you are a dynamic IP" even though it's not on a dynamic IP. essentially, people are keeping lists of internet addresses that should be denied relaying, which makes it very hard to run a standard, fully compliant mail server, dependin on where you are and how your network operates.

bah, point being, mail filtering needs to happen at steps 1 and 4, not at steps 2 and 3. servers should not intrude on the mail sending and receiving process, in my opinion.

~ dan ~
 

Bullshyt

Devil Without A Cause
2,561
0
0
#7
pimpyobitch said:
Well have the time you cant do shit about it cause its comming from like india, or some where else and america cant do shit about that. In american spam :) you have to allow people to unsubscribe but like I said if its comming from outside of america they can get around that.

Unfortunately that is true.And nobody can do a fucking ting about it, it gets so damn annoying.
 

Bullshyt

Devil Without A Cause
2,561
0
0
#9
I mean, if I stay away from the internet for a week, then I return to check my emails, I'll have something like 15 emails, but I'll have 20 spam, its fucking unbelievable.
 

otepsoul

Bringer of Bees
2,732
0
100
#10
i got you beat if istay away for a week ill have over 1k messages of spam.
 

Bullshyt

Devil Without A Cause
2,561
0
0
#11
Yeah, you've got me beat by just a little. lol
 

Shurikane

Raging Hermaphrodite
250
0
0
#12
Back when Hotmail was an absolute dick, I'd get at least 60 spams per day. Most of them consisted of bras and sillicon implants.

Thinking a little, I made a new Hotmail account and put myself down as female. I was sent ads for penis enlargement.

The worst in all that is that spammers will constantly find a way around the law. Just the opt out thing. It's always a trap. If you click that, it confirms to them that someone really is using your E-Mail, and then the flood begins. One of my friends was wondering why his spam was increasing exponentially even though he systematically opted out of everything. I only answered: "0wned..."
 

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#15
no; server-side e-mail management is evil!

~ dan ~
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,851
3,350
487
#16
Makes my life easier when I don't have to deal with 300 screaming idiots. Where they give out their email addresses when they sign up for stuff, then each one gets 200 spams a day. Besides, It's my network, I get to decide what goes in and out. Technically their email no matter what the content is company property.

 

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#17
that's actually entirely untrue.

the internet privacy act of 1995 puts very precise labels on e-mail and other electronic property rights.

it is YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY if one of these three conditions apply:

1) it is to you
2) it is from you
3) it is about you.

thus, email addressed to you, even at your company domain, is YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY until you authorize someone else to look at it.

regardless, when servers reject my mail server it unnerves me; because it's on an ISP's list of dynamic IPs does not mean it is automatically a spamhost.

that's the problem, to be frank. the solution is intelligent, learning client-side filters.

~ dan ~
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,851
3,350
487
#18
Can't find anything on that one sounds fishy. I've always been told the opposit? Is this a cali law?
 

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#19
hm; it could be, but i always THOUGHT it was a federal deal. i've been sued over electronic property and won for exactly this reason. i intercepted a document that was about me and used it to get a guy i worked with at a consulting firm fired; he sued me and the employer and lost because since his message was about me, i was entitled to distribute it however i saw fit and the consequence was that he got fired for trashing a team member's decision to a client.

~ dan ~
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,851
3,350
487
#20
morelos said:
that's actually entirely untrue.

the internet privacy act of 1995 puts very precise labels on e-mail and other electronic property rights.

it is YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY if one of these three conditions apply:

1) it is to you
2) it is from you
3) it is about you.

thus, email addressed to you, even at your company domain, is YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY until you authorize someone else to look at it.

regardless, when servers reject my mail server it unnerves me; because it's on an ISP's list of dynamic IPs does not mean it is automatically a spamhost.

that's the problem, to be frank. the solution is intelligent, learning client-side filters.

~ dan ~
You made me think. Maybe all those seminars and security discussions were in error with their take on the legal "ownership"; for lack of a better term, of and email sent through a company owned server.

Turns out it is Not an easy question. There are grey areas. The best I can tell we're both right.

Quoting my company's attorney: "The email message content remains the property of the author,
even if the email file becomes the property of the company."

Specifically regarding the filtering mail for spam (or any other reason: Filtering is considered intervention, on the level of what happens to the file, therefore it's OK to do. There are no laws in place that require a company to allow it's employees to send or receive any particular email. In other words, if I choose to I may legally filter email crossing my company's resources, (network, servers, etc.) in any manner or for any reason. Which makes sense, because the network resources are property of the company. The only thing I may not do is Intercept and alter, publish or redistribute the email content without permission of the owner of the content.

The really scary thing that we all need to be aware of is that, so far, there's no federal law that requires employers to notify employees that their communications are being monitored. Legislation was introduced in Congress in 1991 by Sen. Paul Simon, D-Ill., that would have required advance notification to both employees and customers of electronic monitoring. The bill, known as The Privacy for Consumers and Workers Act, prohibited undisclosed monitoring of rest rooms and dressing-room and locker-room facilities, except when the employer suspected illegal conduct. The bill, which was never passed, would have provided for fines for violations and permitted injured employees to sue for compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys' fees.

So as far as the general issues, we can both say we're right, but specifically regarding what I was talking about in this thread, which is spam filtering; I have every right to do it.
To be honest if anyone complained, I would put their email account in the bypass file so it doesn't get filtered. Then you'll see how quickly they come crawling back to me.

As far as server side filtering, for anything other than a small business; it's the only way. To have a separate spam-filtering app on each of my company's workstations is ridiculous. Why don’t I just throw out my PIX and install ZoneAlarm on 300 or so workstations and 11 servers? It's the same philosophy.

Any way moleros, Thanks for making me think, and look at things from a different prospective. We need to keep tabs on our privacy, or no one else will.