Re: A semi on-topic note

In article <1ikvsbq.c1iguy1g70ifeN%usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Woody
<usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

jim <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Low Life bastards!

It's a shame that I'm not allowed a rocket launcher.

Don't blame the spammers - well, okay, blame the spammers - but blame
Microsoft as well for making XP so insecure that it could be easily
compromised. Most spam comes from Microsoft OS machines that have been
compromised and set up as spam relays. The people who own them don't
know this and probably just think the Internet is running a bit slowly.

And given that there are tons of XP machines spewing out this spam from
faked address, the next people to be shot are the people with
auto-responders bouncing an equivilent number of spams to people who
didn't spam them.

Oh yes! They are supposed to be the professionals! It is so easy to
check the original mailer with the originating IP address, then
silently eat the mismatches.
For a while I was checking on who the muppets were. It was so
depressing to see respected universities, the US military, large
companies, UK government agencies among them. Their servers were
running all kinds of systems, proving it is possible to be a complete
numpty, even with good tools.
Where stated in the bounce message, the original sender was always a
Windows machine.

My wall is going to be rather blood-spattered after the revolution.

I'm reserving a small place against it for the organisations who block
whole address ranges on the say-so of some dork black-listing agency in
flatlandia. Open University! It's you I'm looking at! For blocking the
whole of BT's home ADSL block.

The best bounces were the out-of-office replies I got from real people.
How many pieces of broken software did "my" spams have to get through
to elicit one of those?

--
To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248
.

Loading