New email address

[Jerry Springer]

As of the 25th of May I will be using



Jerry Springer

[Morgans]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May I will
be using
>
>

Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
harvest?
--
Jim in NC

[Jerry Springer]

Morgans wrote:
> "Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May I will
> be using
>

>
>
> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
> harvest?


Because I don't have a problem with spam. I can filter 99% of it out
with the right software.

Jerry

[Jerry Springer]

Morgans wrote:

> "Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May I will
> be using
>

>
>
> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
> harvest?


I have never been a paranoid computer user. I sure I have not been
online as long as some here but I have not had a problem since the days
of using my first suitcase size portable computer which was an old
CPM Osborne.

[abripl]

While it may be true that you don't have a problem with spam ("mostly")
just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up while sending you
email (that you don't "see") and your email client bouncing it back. It
slows down the whole internet for everybody.

[Jerry Springer]

abripl wrote:
> While it may be true that you don't have a problem with spam ("mostly")
> just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up while sending you
> email (that you don't "see") and your email client bouncing it back. It
> slows down the whole internet for everybody.
>
Bull ****

[Jerry Springer]

abripl wrote:

> While it may be true that you don't have a problem with spam ("mostly")
> just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up while sending you
> email (that you don't "see") and your email client bouncing it back. It
> slows down the whole internet for everybody.
>
And you are so naive that you don't know that spammers are sending spam
to your phony email address, then being bounced back?

[abripl]

Jerry Springer wrote:
> abripl wrote:
> > While it may be true that you don't have a problem with spam ("mostly")
> > just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up while sending you
> > email (that you don't "see") and your email client bouncing it back. It
> > slows down the whole internet for everybody.
> >
> Bull ****

Take it easy... Why get so excited? Lets try to reason.

Maybe you did not understand what I meant. To quote you: "I can filter
99% of it out
with the right software.." Meaning that junk mail gets to your software
and then it is rejected. Whether or not your software bounces it back -
some email clients do - the
spam generates bandwith. Taking the precaution to not publish your
email in the first place prevents the bandwith abuse and helps all of
us.

[abripl]

> Bull ****
>...you are so naive...

Why get excited? No insults were meant. Lets try to reason.

To quote you: "I can filter 99% of it out with the right
software.." Meaning that junk mail gets to your software and
then it is rejected. Whether or not your software bounces it
back (some email clients do) the spam generates bandwith.
Taking the precaution to not publish your email in the first
place prevents the bandwith abuse and helps all of us.

[Morgans]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote

> And you are so naive that you don't know that spammers are sending spam to
> your phony email address, then being bounced back?

So if you put your address down as jerry at springer dot net, the spam bots
are going to pick it up, and boounce it back?

I seriously doubt it.
--
Jim in NC

[Jerry Springer]

Morgans wrote:

> "Jerry Springer" > wrote
>
>
>>And you are so naive that you don't know that spammers are sending spam to
>>your phony email address, then being bounced back?
>
>
> So if you put your address down as jerry at springer dot net, the spam bots
> are going to pick it up, and boounce it back?
>
> I seriously doubt it.

The spam bot have figured out that one a long time ago

You don't think that the spam bot are looking at your FROM address?
They are still going to try to send spam to it whether it is a
legitimate address or not. When it does not go through it is bounced back.
Now if you are bitching because I use a real email address
and some spam bot might get my email address and send me spam
well I guess there are a lot of offenders in the newsgroups.
BTW why do you care if I get spam or not? Really not your place to
worry about me and how I use my computer.

The idiot that is worrying about me using my real email address and it
causing clutter and slowing down the net is just that an idiot.

[Roger]

On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:39:46 -0400, "Morgans"
> wrote:

>
>"Jerry Springer" > wrote
>
>> And you are so naive that you don't know that spammers are sending spam to
>> your phony email address, then being bounced back?
>
>So if you put your address down as jerry at springer dot net, the spam bots
>are going to pick it up, and boounce it back?

Very easy to parse. I'd use look up tables, but it could be done with
IFTHEN statements.

We were doing more complicated stuff than that by the second year in
CS.

OTOH Many years back I had an address that suddenly started getting a
lot of spam. virtually nothing one day and the next I noticed
something was wrong with my e-mail. It appeared to be downloading, but
I wasn't seeing any results. So I logged into the server to look at my
account. It still had well over 400 messages to go. I deleted the
account without bothering to sort it. Last Fall (after a few years) I
thought I'd try that old address. The first day I activated it there
were something like 20 to 30 messages and none legit. I again deleted
that account.

Most of the spam that gets to my filters is either to this address
after it's fixed, or to one specific reflector which is the only place
I use that address. My filters just mark it read and put it into a
folder I can check for false positives.

One of the 7 deadly Internet sins is bouncing mail back. It does
absolutely nothing to the spammer.For a while there were a number of
programs that were doing that which resulted in many millions of
bounced e-mails a day.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>I seriously doubt it.

[Roger]

On Wed, 24 May 2006 12:34:40 GMT, Jerry Springer >
wrote:

>Morgans wrote:
>
>> "Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May I will
>> be using
>>

>>
>>
>> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
>> harvest?
>
>
>I have never been a paranoid computer user. I sure I have not been
>online as long as some here but I have not had a problem since the days
>of using my first suitcase size portable computer which was an old
>CPM Osborne.

Jerry, you really are old! <:-))

I think that Osborne is the reason I have back problems. At least I
never had to take it on the airlines.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[John Ousterhout]

Roger Halstead wrote:

> Jerry Springer wrote:
>> my first suitcase size portable computer which was an old CPM Osborne.


> Jerry, you really are old! <:-))


If Jerry is old then you are ancient Roger :-)


- John (had a KayPro Luggable CP/M computer once) Ousterhout -

[cavelamb]

Jerry Springer wrote:
> Roger wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 24 May 2006 12:34:40 GMT, Jerry Springer >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Morgans wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May
>>>> I will be using
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots
>>>> to harvest?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have never been a paranoid computer user. I sure I have not been
>>> online as long as some here but I have not had a problem since the
>>> days of using my first suitcase size portable computer which was an old
>>> CPM Osborne.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jerry, you really are old! <:-))
>>
>> I think that Osborne is the reason I have back problems. At least I
>> never had to take it on the airlines.
>>
>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>> www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>
> I still have that Osborne I got it out a while back and fired it up
> still works. :-)
>
> Jerry

Jerry,
I believe I still have a pretty complete collection of CP/M software.
It's all in Kaypro format, and I can not rear the disks from this
Windoze box.

I'd like to find some way to get it all transfered to a CDR so it would
be readable.

Any Ideas?

Richard

[Jerry Springer]

cavelamb wrote:
> Jerry Springer wrote:
>
>> Roger wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 24 May 2006 12:34:40 GMT, Jerry Springer >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Morgans wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May
>>>>> I will be using
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam
>>>>> bots to harvest?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have never been a paranoid computer user. I sure I have not been
>>>> online as long as some here but I have not had a problem since the
>>>> days of using my first suitcase size portable computer which was an old
>>>> CPM Osborne.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jerry, you really are old! <:-))
>>>
>>> I think that Osborne is the reason I have back problems. At least I
>>> never had to take it on the airlines.
>>>
>>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>>> www.rogerhalstead.com
>>
>>
>>
>> I still have that Osborne I got it out a while back and fired it up
>> still works. :-)
>>
>> Jerry
>
>
> Jerry,
> I believe I still have a pretty complete collection of CP/M software.
> It's all in Kaypro format, and I can not rear the disks from this
> Windoze box.
>
> I'd like to find some way to get it all transfered to a CDR so it would
> be readable.
>
> Any Ideas?
>
> Richard
>
>
Richard, I have not had a need to transfer any of my old data so have
not researched a way to do that. Maybe Roger has an answer.

Jerry

[Roger]

On Fri, 26 May 2006 14:16:00 GMT, John Ousterhout
> wrote:

>Roger Halstead wrote:
>
>> Jerry Springer wrote:
>>> my first suitcase size portable computer which was an old CPM Osborne.
>
>
>> Jerry, you really are old! <:-))
>
>
>If Jerry is old then you are ancient Roger :-)
>
When I talk about ancient history my kids used to think it was a first
hand account. Some of it was.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>- John (had a KayPro Luggable CP/M computer once) Ousterhout -

[[email protected]]

Morgans wrote:
> "Jerry Springer" > wrote> As of the 25th of May I will
> be using
> >
> >
>
> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
> harvest?

It has been observed that spammers generally harvest from the headers
rather than from the body of Usenet traffic. That said, a fair number
of
Usenet newsgroups are gated to webpages.

Regardless, I use a proper email address in the headers of my Usenet
articles because doing otherwise breaks an important useful feature
of NNTP.

What gound I do yield to spammers I yield grudgingly and never without
a fight.

I would guess that the number of spammers who have lost accounts
because of the complaints I have sent could be counted on my fingers
and toes. But that number is greater than zero.

--

FF

[Modelflyer]

>> Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
>> harvest?
>
> It has been observed that spammers generally harvest from the headers
> rather than from the body of Usenet traffic. That said, a fair number
> of
> Usenet newsgroups are gated to webpages.
>
> Regardless, I use a proper email address in the headers of my Usenet
> articles because doing otherwise breaks an important useful feature
> of NNTP.

I used to do that, I looked at any message as useful communication. Then the
spam got to be a little excessive, it got to the stage where I was deleting
over 99% of messages, so I changed my email address. About three months
later I checked my old address and found over 120 thousand messages, all
spam except for about 100 that were genuine. Went back to using that address
as my ISP has installed anti spam software, but I still don't use my real
address in the reply address option box.

If somebody want's to send me a "private" e-mail, I'll send them my address.
It's so easy to harvest addresses that it's foolhardy to leave oneself
exposed like that.
--
..
..
Cheers,
Model Flyer

>
> What gound I do yield to spammers I yield grudgingly and never without
> a fight.
>
> I would guess that the number of spammers who have lost accounts
> because of the complaints I have sent could be counted on my fingers
> and toes. But that number is greater than zero.
>
> --
>
> FF
>

[Jerry Springer]

Modelflyer wrote:
>>>Just curious, but why do you post the real thing here, for spam bots to
>>>harvest?
>>
>>It has been observed that spammers generally harvest from the headers
>>rather than from the body of Usenet traffic. That said, a fair number
>>of
>>Usenet newsgroups are gated to webpages.
>>
>>Regardless, I use a proper email address in the headers of my Usenet
>>articles because doing otherwise breaks an important useful feature
>>of NNTP.
>
>
> I used to do that, I looked at any message as useful communication. Then the
> spam got to be a little excessive, it got to the stage where I was deleting
> over 99% of messages, so I changed my email address. About three months
> later I checked my old address and found over 120 thousand messages, all
> spam except for about 100 that were genuine. Went back to using that address
> as my ISP has installed anti spam software, but I still don't use my real
> address in the reply address option box.
>
> If somebody want's to send me a "private" e-mail, I'll send them my address.
> It's so easy to harvest addresses that it's foolhardy to leave oneself
> exposed like that.

Foolhardy? nonsense, just because you do not know how to manage your
email program.
If you send your email address to someone you are just as likly to get
spammed from that as you are anywhere else. Anyone that puts your email
address in their address folder is setting you up for virus' and spam.

Jerry (not afraid of spammers or virus or to use my real email address)

[[email protected]]

Jerry Springer wrote:
> ...
> If you send your email address to someone you are just as likly to get
> spammed from that as you are anywhere else. Anyone that puts your email
> address in their address folder is setting you up for virus' and spam.
>
> ...

Nonsense.

That's like saying tha tyou are as likely to crash flying in clear,
windless weather at noon as you are flying through the eye of a
tornado. While it is posible to crash either way the latter is
a certainty.

Either way

An email address on someone's PC might be compromised but one that
is posted in UseNet headers is certain to be harvested repeatedly.

--

FF

[Modelflyer]

>
> Nonsense.
>
> That's like saying tha tyou are as likely to crash flying in clear,
> windless weather at noon as you are flying through the eye of a
> tornado. While it is posible to crash either way the latter is
> a certainty.
>
> Either way
>
> An email address on someone's PC might be compromised but one that
> is posted in UseNet headers is certain to be harvested repeatedly.
>

Thank's for backing me up, Jerry sounds like he knows it all, I'd just like
to know how much he really knows.
--
..
..
Cheers,
Model Flyer
MS880B EI-BFR


> --
>
> FF
>

[Modelflyer]

>> It's so easy to harvest addresses that it's foolhardy to leave oneself
>> exposed like that.
>
> Foolhardy? nonsense, just because you do not know how to manage your email
> program.

Perhaps Jerry, you would care to enlighten me, tell me how to set-up Outlook
Express to prevent spam. My ISP now provides an anti spam service, but I
don't see any function within OE to effectivly block spam.
--
..
..
Cheers,
Model Flyer
MS880B EI-BFR

> If you send your email address to someone you are just as likly to get
> spammed from that as you are anywhere else. Anyone that puts your email
> address in their address folder is setting you up for virus' and spam.
>
> Jerry (not afraid of spammers or virus or to use my real email address)

[Montblack]

("Modelflyer" wrote)
> Perhaps Jerry, you would care to enlighten me, tell me how to set-up
> Outlook Express to prevent spam. My ISP now provides an anti spam service,
> but I don't see any function within OE to effectivly block spam.


[Spam Filter]
OE 6.0/ Tools/ Message Rules/ Mail... or News...

[Disguise your e-mail addy]
OE 6.0/ Tools/ Accounts... / News/ Properties/ E-mail address:

My ISP uses Postini to filter spam. We are very, very satisfied with
Postini!
http://www.postini.com/


Montblack

[[email protected]]

abripl wrote:
> While it may be true that you don't have a problem with spam ("mostly")
> just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up while sending you
> email (that you don't "see") and your email client bouncing it back. It
> slows down the whole internet for everybody.

Uh, if you are going to post with a false email
address could you at least use an invalid domain
name, or one of the domain names reserved for
testing?

Just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up
while sending you email (that you don't "see") and your
host's SMTP server bouncing it back if you post a
false email address using a REAL domain name
like hotmail.com. It just slows down the internet
for everybody.

--

FF

[Jerry Springer]

Modelflyer wrote:

>
> Thank's for backing me up, Jerry sounds like he knows it all, I'd just like
> to know how much he really knows.



I know enough to not be afraid to use my real email address and not get
bombarded with spam. Beyond that you guys do whatever makes you feel
comfortable. I also know enough not to use Outlook Express which you
mentioned in another post. I am not going to try to compete with all of
you that know so much about how email address are harvested and how spam
is sent. I know what works for me I get one or maybe two spams a day, I
can live with that. I have been using my real email address in RAH for
years, probably since 1990 or there abouts.

Jerry

[Modelflyer]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Modelflyer" wrote)
>> Perhaps Jerry, you would care to enlighten me, tell me how to set-up
>> Outlook Express to prevent spam. My ISP now provides an anti spam
>> service,
>> but I don't see any function within OE to effectivly block spam.
>
>
> [Spam Filter]
> OE 6.0/ Tools/ Message Rules/ Mail... or News...

Not very effective as spammers only have to change one digit in the senders
address and they overcome your blocked senders list, one could block all
using the domain, however that would also block legit mail.

>
> [Disguise your e-mail addy]
> OE 6.0/ Tools/ Accounts... / News/ Properties/ E-mail address:

That's the method I use and it's does keep my present address spam free or
almost spam free.

>
> My ISP uses Postini to filter spam. We are very, very satisfied with
> Postini!
> http://www.postini.com/

My ISP now does the same, however the 120,000 within three months figure was
before they introduced the anti spam service.
--
..
..
Cheers,
Model Flyer
MS880B EI-BFR
>
>
> Montblack
>
>

[Modelflyer]

Hi fred,

> address could you at least use an invalid domain
> name, or one of the domain names reserved for
> testing?
>

I now use an invalid domain, I cheked to make sure that it was invalid. Now
I find that some twit has registered the domain so I've had to change to
another invalid domain. I've used for the last couple of
years.:-) some one has now registered null.net. I used to use test.com and
testtest.com for testing, I now find those are registered, can't think of
the company name but it no longer replies, perhaps uld was different it's
been several years since I've had to send a test mail, if I send one now I
just use the address I have on another domain.

> Just think of all the bandwidth the spammers clog up
> while sending you email (that you don't "see") and your

But at least I don't see it.:-)
--
..
..
Cheers,
Model Flyer
MS880B EI-BFR

> host's SMTP server bouncing it back if you post a
> false email address using a REAL domain name
> like hotmail.com. It just slows down the internet
> for everybody.
>
> --
>
> FF
>

[[email protected]]

Modelflyer wrote:
> >> It's so easy to harvest addresses that it's foolhardy to leave oneself
> >> exposed like that.
> >
> > Foolhardy? nonsense, just because you do not know how to manage your email
> > program.
>
> Perhaps Jerry, you would care to enlighten me, tell me how to set-up Outlook
> Express to prevent spam. My ISP now provides an anti spam service, but I
> don't see any function within OE to effectivly block spam.
>

You install all of the security upgrades provided for free by
Microsoft.

That should prevent all spam being sent from your copy of OE, unless
you deliberately send it.

_Blocking_ spam at the receiving end does not _prevent_ it...

It is possible, though messy, to prevent others from sending spam:

http://slashdot.org/it/99/10/30/0841215.shtml

--

FF

[[email protected]]

Jerry Springer wrote:
> Morgans wrote:
>
> > "Jerry Springer" > wrote
> >
> >
> >>And you are so naive that you don't know that spammers are sending spam to
> >>your phony email address, then being bounced back?
> >
> >
> > So if you put your address down as jerry at springer dot net, the spam bots
> > are going to pick it up, and boounce it back?
> >
> > I seriously doubt it.
>
> The spam bot have figured out that one a long time ago
>
> You don't think that the spam bot are looking at your FROM address?

I don't know the proper way to describe the protocol but SMTP
provides a feature that allow a connecting client to ask if a
partricular email address is valid on that server and the server
replies with a yes/no. This is done without sending an email.

Typically email address harvesting spamware will immediately
check a harvested address in this manner and reject any
that are invalid--so that more typically the "reality check" is
the only traffic sent when an invalid address is harvested.

HOWEVER, some sysadimns report tha tthe "reality check"
traffic alone is so heavy it would crash their servers if they
did not use blacklisting to refuse connnections from large
parts of netspace.

And of course _some_ spammers illustrate rule #3 in spades
and do send to invalid email addresses.

I used to munge my username to "
on LARTs sent from my work address. Sometimes I mispelt it.
Before long I was getting spam at my work address with
, ,
and a few others in the "Cc: "

>
> The idiot that is worrying about me using my real email address and it
> causing clutter and slowing down the net is just that an idiot.

Agreed.

If spammers didn't harvest my email adress and send me spam I
couldn't have their IP space added to the SpamCop blacklist.

--

FF