THE SPAM WE GET [stop fretting and read]

[Jon Radel]

On 12/10/10 9:46 AM, Ryan Coleman wrote:
> No, this list does not.
>
> As I mentioned yesterday, this is an unmonitored, unnannyed list that accepts emails from addresses without checking authenticity... meaning I can post from 4 emails (and I have) and not be subscribed on each address.
>
> Spoofing email addresses has happened for years, and with this list's archives being publicly available online it's been happening for a while and will continue to happen until the rules may or may not be changed.
>
> --
> Ryan
>
If this discussion is about the same wave of spam I've been getting 
examples of in the last couple of days, it should be noted that the mail 
isn't coming via the mailing list at all.  Somebody is harvesting e-mail 
addresses and subject lines from a month or more ago and sending the 
spam directly.

Folks, you have to read the headers if you want to have a sensible 
discussion about specific instances of spam.  If you don't, you're 
simply sending yet more noise that's kinda sorta pretending to be signal.

My personal rule of thumb with spam is to assume that absolutely 
everything involved is a lie, this leading to a more accurate overall 
assessment than the naive thought that any of it might possible be true 
just because of some social contract.  After careful analysis, you 
*might* conclude that a few things actually are true, but that's 
different than assuming they are.  So, Subject: that look like they're 
from the FreeBSD mailing list: lie.  From: address that of somebody you 
discussed that topic with on the mailing list: lie.   Date:: lie.  All 
lies with one goal, to get you to click through on a URL that is *not* 
(another lie, get it?) in your self-interest to visit.

-- 

--Jon Radel
jon at radel.com