Re: [802SEC] Spam on email reflectors
Replies sent only to originator. Use "reply all" to reply to the list
Buzz, the working group chairs are already the gatekeepers deciding who
receives the mail sent to the reflector. If the list is closed, then only
recipients of reflector email would be able to get it directly. All others
would have to read it from the files stored on the web.
Best regards,
Robert D. Love
Chair, Resilient Packet Ring Alliance
President, LAN Connect Consultants
7105 Leveret Circle Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: 919 848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816
email: rdlove@ieee.org Fax: 720 222-0900
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rigsbee, Everett O" <Everett.Rigsbee@PSS.Boeing.com>
To: <stds-802-sec@ieee.org>; "802 Roger B. Marks" <marks@boulder.nist.gov>
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 5:40 PM
Subject: RE: [802SEC] Spam on email reflectors
>
> Replies sent only to originator. Use "reply all" to reply to the list
>
> Colleagues, There's an additional problem inherent in the closed list
which has
> not yet been mentioned, which is that someone has to agree to be the
gatekeeper
> for deciding who can and who can't be added to the list or the restriction
is rather
> meaningless (if anyone can join, the spammers will too, and throwing folks
off will
> not be a deterrent if all they need to do is rejoin). So there's a
significant extra
> administrative load involved in maintaining a closed list that may not be
worth the
> effort unless the spammers really start to get out of hand. Usually a
quick response
> to the spammer indicating that his message was not appropriate for the
reflector is
> sufficient to deter future transgressions. It is possible to block
messages from
> specific senders too, but if they are as resourceful as the spammers I see
on hotmail
> they never use the same email address more than once, so that's not much
help either.
> Let's all pray for a bit of "goodwill amongst men" (and ladies too!).
> Thanx, Buzz
> Everett O. (Buzz) Rigsbee
> Boeing SSG
> PO Box 3707, M/S: 7M-FM
> Seattle, WA 98124-2207
> ph: (425) 865-2443, fx: (425) 865-6721
> email: everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com
> > ----------
> > From: Roger B. Marks[SMTP:marks@boulder.nist.gov]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 1:04 PM
> > To: stds-802-sec@ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Spam on email reflectors
> >
> > Mike,
> > 802.16 doesn't. One major problem with restriction is that many
> > people use different return addresses, depending on their
> > circumstance when they send the note. The restricted reflector is set
> > up to accept only one of these. There will be a lot of bounces,
> > although maybe people can get used to this.
> > Another option is to set the "taboo body" parameter to auto-bounce
> > messages with certain unacceptable words. This is a crude way to
> > filter spam. I'm hesitant to start writing a list of such words.
> > Perhaps the spammers are clever enough to avoid this kind of trap
anyway.
> > I've been hoping that some creative person in the IEEE IT department
> > will find a brilliant solution.
> > Roger
> > >Replies sent only to originator. Use "reply all" to reply to the list
> > >People,
> > >I recall a recent spate of spam on the SEC reflector and the
> > >discussion on whether posting policies should be open or closed.
> > >My reflector just got spammed today and some of my members
> > >have suggested I restrict posting to members of the mailing list.
> > >Does any other group restrict access in a similar manner?
> > >cheers,
> > >mike
> > >Michael Takefman tak@cisco.com
> > >Manager HW Engineering, Cisco Systems
> > >Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
> > >2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
> > >voice: 613-271-3399 fax: 613-271-4867
> >