Re: Recent spam

[Will Price <wprice@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Absolutely.  The spam here is totally absurd.

Again however, I submit that trying to be "smart" about rejecting spam is
not the solution.  The people who send spam will always figure out a way
around it.  The immediate solution here is to change the name of the list,
and given the urgency of the situation at this point I think we should
change the name of list to "ietf-openpgp@xxxxxxx" and ask for forgiveness later.


Paul Koning wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "wolfgang" == wolfgang  <wolfgang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>  wolfgang> ...
>  wolfgang> The recent developments (currently already more than 10
>  wolfgang> spam postings per _day_, creating a noise vs. signal ratio
>  wolfgang> of about 97% vs. 3%, and the spam volume is still
>  wolfgang> increasing!) should prove very clearly that meanwhile spam
>  wolfgang> _is_ an issue on this mailing list.
> 
> I was going along with the "just ignore it" approach last time it came
> up.  But at this point I have to agree with Wolfgang that the
> situation is getting really bad.  Enough so to be significant even
> though I have a high speed Internet link; if I had a dialup link I
> would have been forced to unsubscribe some time ago.
> 
> Wolfgang's suggestion makes sense.  Another approach that would help
> some, though presumably it wouldn't be politically acceptable, is to
> reject any mesage that has a "*.cn" hostname in its forwarding path.
> 
>         paul

-- 

Will Price, Architect/Sr. Mgr., PGP Client Products
Total Network Security Division
Network Associates, Inc.