Did you have to mention that person Leythos? Now it's going to figure out how to turn its computer back on and the noise to signal ratio will go up again. Heck it's high enough with this thread alone. :)
I think were safe, at least with VB around and his minions, claiming that there is no protection when using Firewalls.
The day the two of you will offer your first source code for a security problem yourself, the day you'll understand what the ".invalid" domain is, this day I will not think of you as poor eaters and morons any more.
And I'm pretty sure, this day will be the day after hell freezes.
You're even too dumb to understand, that a mail sent to a non-existing domain abusing an SMTP server with an open relay will generate a bounce.
"Two things are infinite... With the universe I'm not sure." (Albert Einstein)
VB.
Which flavor of UNIX/Linux would you recommend for my 80 year old parents? She does a little web surfing, he does online stock trading.
He is nearly blind, so she needs to do the OS admin duties. Is there a flavor of UNIX/Linux that that she could easily install, debug, and maintain and do security upgrades to the kernel when necessary?
Well said VB, just what I would expect from someone like Debbie or someone with about as much knowledge as she had.
You keep saying that Firewalls don't provide security, yet, every day you are proven wrong, how are you going to explain away that little fact?
Fedora Core 3 or 4 installed on an elderly relatives computer, without my help, and she's over 60, not technical in any manner, and was up and running in a couple hours (since it required a lot of updates).
She's been happy with it for a long time.
You may find this hard to believe Volker but I actually agree with you, to some degree, on many of your points. Yes whitelists are a temp solution and won't work forever, doesn't mean you don't try though. It's that old locking the car analogy that you hate so much.
Does our using an invalid address contribute to spam? No, it can however contribute to bad addrees bounces though, will I create yet another bloody email account just to use on usenet? Again the answer is no, how about we tackle the real problem which isn't an .invalid but the spammers themselves. I know you won't like that as you'd rather complain about our invalid address.
You can try where you may actually achieve a lot, the why the analogy is so bad.
He's tackling that invalid addresses aren't a solution to spam either. Spam filters are.
IIRC the spam folder automatically deleted stuff after a certain time pretty much from the beginning - and that's where most of the spam automatically ends up (at least in my account, YMMV).
Juergen Nieveler
This is the kind of people I am talking about when I mention people who use newgroups to further their weak ego from not being picked first in school, or wetting themselves in class around pretty girls...
look man, I am sorry that happened to you, but dont try to make yourself feel better by calling me ignorant and offering no solutions...
Ok you owe me a new monitor and keyboard Jazz, that much food will never come off.
Jason
On its way... I was refering to Sebastian Gottschalk when he said in reference to me:
"It sounds like he believes in his success, which obviously must correlate with his inability to detect failure. "
Who allowed you to crawl back out of my killfile and add more noise to this thread?
*re-plonk*cu
59cobalt
I love how you and others like you have the need to announce when you kill file someone. Like anyone gives a damn.
Why should I? I use my Gmail account for other reasons, not as a spam throw away address. If an email admin cannot configure his email server properly, resulting it to collect bounces from spam, that is not my fault.
Your argument is the same as asking others to walk around naked because the color of their clothing bothers someone out there.
The you was referring the sys admin, or in this case, the email server admin.
There are some serious flaws in this argument that you and "Volker" presented.
No spamming software would send a message to an invalid email address like snipped-for-privacy@nospam.nospam, or snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.lan, and therefore, even if the sender was setting his From: address as " snipped-for-privacy@microsoft.com", it would not bounce back, because the sending software would not accept addresses like snipped-for-privacy@nospam.nospam, or snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.lan, and even if they did, email servers won't parse any headers with invalid addresses in the From:, To: and the Reply-To: headers, unless they are misconfigured, and if that is the case, then they are the ones to be blamed, not the users who are protecting themselves.
He's trying to get back at me because I kill filed his sorry ass for his weak trolling and for using sock puppets.
He's not the first and won't be the last uneducated person with fragile ego on usenet.
That Volker character seems to think that .nospam and .invalid are actually valid TLDs.
He also missed this.
Why not? You really think a spammer would bother to filter out that stuff?
He just dumps a few thousand emails at an open relay and doesn't care wether some of the adresses don't work.
Juergen Nieveler
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.