Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 63, Issue 12
Hi Olaf, How do you know what I wrote considering that my message about "Why SPAM exists" has not been published? If so, why did not I get it in my mail? And Olaf, my email manager blocks all messages I receive from you. Why? ;) Marilson From: HRH Prince Sven Olaf von CyberBunker Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 8:52 PM To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net ; Marilson Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 63, Issue 12 trump is the president of the usa, not of the internet. btw. trump prefers to use 'twitter'. not 'email'. twitter does have the option to select whose tweets one wants to see, and which ones -not-. you know... basic things... every protocol should have... and every protocol around today for that matter, DOES have... except for your silly old 'email' crap. can't just put @realDonaldTrump in a From: header and start to send viagra offers on twitter to all his followers... you can on smtp. that's one of the MAIN REASONS smtp should have died a loooong time ago, and most definately does not deserve any 'special protections' against dying out even more. On 11 فبر, 2017 م 01:02, Marilson wrote: Why SPAM exists... Because ISP exists. Because in 2004 Trump was not President... Marilson From: anti-abuse-wg-request@ripe.net Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 9:00 AM To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 63, Issue 12 Send anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to anti-abuse-wg-request@ripe.net You can reach the person managing the list at anti-abuse-wg-owner@ripe.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of anti-abuse-wg digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Why SPAM exists in 2017 (ox) 2. Re: Why SPAM exists in 2017 (peter h) 3. Re: Why SPAM exists in 2017 (Richard Clayton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:11:40 +0200 From: ox mailto:andre@ox.co.za To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Why SPAM exists in 2017 Message-ID: mailto:mailman.2.1486810802.25905.anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Hello Everyone, Famously, during 2004, Bill Gates promised the world that Spam would no longer exist by 2006. More than a decade later, spam even penetrates the very best "insert whatever name here" technology. It is 2017 and apparently society does not understand why spam still exists. Of course, all of us know why there is still spam. //donning flame retardant suit (and tinfoil hat for good measure... ) For those that lurk to learn, or, for anyone with no pov on why there is still spam: ******************************** Spam exists because society does not agree on a single protocol to stop spam. (We do not all even agree on the definition of what spam is.) In society, some filter emails by DNS, some by IP number (worrying about dropping emails from co-located domains that have not updated their wordpress and are pumping out 1 legit email for every 1000 spam, etc etc - we should also discuss this sometime?) ******************************** The concern for "false positives" outrank that of sender reputation and is out of whack. (and we, society, do not want to change this) let us take a closer look at a practical (and factual) example of this imbalance: Fact: Both Google.com and Yahoo.com send out spam (unsolicited bulk email - where bulk is defined as more than one or two of the same email and unsolicited - as simply not requested or expected) Fact: We all receive many times more spam from yahoo.com as we do from google.com even though google.com transmits many times more ham than yahoo.com (Another simple truth: We all receive much more criminal activity from yahoo.com than from google.com) If you wish to dispute these simple and factual numbers you can look at the IP ranges in public data related to abuse, as the statistics report exactly the same facts that I am claiming (and experiencing)) Yet, we will be hard pressed to 'drop" incoming from yahoo.com simply based on sender score, we also do not use other RBL, that lists Google.com IP numbers, for drop. (as our users would have hissy fits if they did not get email from example@yahoo or example@gmail - in fact - they may simply move their email hosting to google... - because google/yahoo cannot be wrong, it has to be @example_of_small_isp... Our user(s) want to receive email from grandma, even though grandma has just dumped 10000 unsolicited emails asking for donations to send her old age club to the beach for "insert name of special and/or religious holiday here" Your thoughts? Andre ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 09:40:44 +0100 From: peter h mailto:peter@hk.ipsec.se To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Why SPAM exists in 2017 Message-ID: mailto:201702110940.44617.peter@hk.ipsec.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Saturday 11 February 2017 09.11, ox wrote:
Hello Everyone,
Famously, during 2004, Bill Gates promised the world that Spam would no longer exist by 2006.
<snip>
Your thoughts?
Andre
Spam exists as ISP across the world, with some excemptions, don't do even the most basic procedures to detect and stop spam from their networks. Shame on them ( but it is cheap ) -- Peter H?kanson There's never money to do it right, but always money to do it again ... and again ... and again ... and again. ( Det ?r billigare att g?ra r?tt. Det ?r dyrt att laga fel. ) ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:31:32 +0000 From: Richard Clayton mailto:richard@highwayman.com To: ox mailto:andre@ox.co.za Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Why SPAM exists in 2017 Message-ID: mailto:TJ9nk8EEgunYFAxS@highwayman.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In message , ox mailto:andre@ox.co.za writes
Famously, during 2004, Bill Gates promised the world that Spam would no longer exist by 2006.
he believed that the "Penny Black" scheme would work... he was wrong, the bad guys have more resources to hand than the good guys and so a system based on proof-of-work could not be effective some of us explained this at the time ... http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/proofwork2.pdf - -- richard Richard Clayton They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 iQA/AwUBWJ7oBDu8z1Kouez7EQJJPgCfeXB+CvbraOtUzHi5FVPmio9x6XsAn2xS XzUinA/Dr9A0/PMQfqR6LFuu =hLfY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- End of anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 63, Issue 12 *********************************************
Marilson,
How do you know what I wrote considering that my message about "Why SPAM exists" has not been published? If so, why did not I get it in my mail?
Either we are all exceptionally good at extra-sensory perception, or your emails are coming through to the list. However, you appear to be subscribed to the ‘digest’ version rather than the main discussion list, which will result in a delay to you (and the rest of the subscribers) receiving your own messages, and often makes it difficult to understand which message in particular you’re replying to. You can, of course, manage your subscription: <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg> Regards, Rob
Hi Rob,
you appear to be subscribed to the ‘digest’ version rather than the main discussion list, which will result in a delay to you
Oh really! I thought there was no favoritism here. I heard that three times last week, offlist. As you wrote I must be subscribed to the DIGEST version, if it exists. At least the subject of all messages that I receive is [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg DIGEST, Vol xx, Issue xx I answer using the same subject but the professor of Cambridge wrote that I am using the wrong subject and said that I'm confounding the other members. Professor, no one wants to read what I write with my wonderful English. When it's not Harvard, it's Cambridge. Thank you Rob Marilson From: Rob Evans Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 8:20 AM To: Marilson Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 63, Issue 12 Marilson,
How do you know what I wrote considering that my message about "Why SPAM exists" has not been published? If so, why did not I get it in my mail?
Either we are all exceptionally good at extra-sensory perception, or your emails are coming through to the list. However, you appear to be subscribed to the ‘digest’ version rather than the main discussion list, which will result in a delay to you (and the rest of the subscribers) receiving your own messages, and often makes it difficult to understand which message in particular you’re replying to. You can, of course, manage your subscription: <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg> Regards, Rob
Afternoon, I should clarify, the subscription change was not made by the WG Chairs nor the NCC. It's possible you made it by accident, but I think the change happened sometime around early October 2015. I've determined this from looking at when your responses changed to be responding to the Digest. You can change your subscription back at the link Rob indicated. Then you will begin to receive each individual mail again. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE Anti-Abuse WG Marilson wrote on 13/02/2017 13:42:
Hi Rob,
you appear to be subscribed to the ‘digest’ version rather than the main discussion list, which will result in a delay to you
Oh really! I thought there was no favoritism here. I heard that three times last week, offlist.
As you wrote I must be subscribed to the DIGEST version, if it exists.
At least the subject of all messages that I receive is [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg DIGEST, Vol xx, Issue xx
I answer using the same subject but the professor of Cambridge wrote that I am using the wrong subject and said that I'm confounding the other members. Professor, no one wants to read what I write with my wonderful English.
When it's not Harvard, it's Cambridge.
Thank you Rob
Marilson
*From:* Rob Evans <mailto:rhe@nosc.ja.net> *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2017 8:20 AM *To:* Marilson <mailto:marilson.mapa@gmail.com> *Cc:* anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> *Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 63, Issue 12
Marilson,
How do you know what I wrote considering that my message about "Why SPAM exists" has not been published? If so, why did not I get it in my mail?
Either we are all exceptionally good at extra-sensory perception, or your emails are coming through to the list. However, you appear to be subscribed to the ‘digest’ version rather than the main discussion list, which will result in a delay to you (and the rest of the subscribers) receiving your own messages, and often makes it difficult to understand which message in particular you’re replying to.
You can, of course, manage your subscription: <https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg>
Regards, Rob
participants (3)
-
Brian Nisbet -
Marilson -
Rob Evans