Hi everyone,
Periodically there is a discussion on this list about whether having your key
on a keyserver will result in more spam. My feeling on this is that you might
get more spam, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to the usual onslaught
that streams in daily.
That being said, I just
I've never gotten any keyserver related spam so far and my public keys with a
valid mail address were published year ago.
I think it's more likely you will get spam because you are posting to a
mailing list which does have a html archive (liks this one).
If you want to get rid of most spam, jus
> On Thursday 10 June 2010 16:00:18 David Shaw wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Periodically there is a discussion on this list about whether having your
>> key on a keyserver will result in more spam. My feeling on this is that
>> you might get more spam, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to th
I never said this particular spam message was not caused by someone scanning
the keyserver. I only stated it isn't that common and never happened to me.
The chance someone harvesting your email address through keyserver scanning is
less common than harvesting archives of mailing lists.
Keyserve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Thursday 10 June 2010 at 3:35:34 PM, in
, Joke de Buhr wrote:
> I've never gotten any keyserver related spam so far and
> my public keys with a valid mail address were published
> year ago.
In order to *know* you have never received any ke
Hi Joke--
On 06/10/2010 11:22 AM, Joke de Buhr wrote:
> I never said this particular spam message was not caused by someone scanning
> the keyserver. I only stated it isn't that common and never happened to me.
>
> The chance someone harvesting your email address through keyserver scanning
> is
Am Donnerstag 10 Juni 2010 16:00:18 schrieb David Shaw:
> Periodically there is a discussion on this list about whether having your
> key on a keyserver will result in more spam. My feeling on this is that
> you might get more spam, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to the
> usual onslaug
On Thursday 10 June 2010 17:29:18 MFPA wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Thursday 10 June 2010 at 3:35:34 PM, in
>
> , Joke de Buhr wrote:
> > I've never gotten any keyserver related spam so far and
> > my public keys with a valid mail address were published
> > year ago.
>
> In order to *know* you have nev
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:32:05 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor
wrote:
> And i should probably add that it is indeed an infinitesimal drop in the
> bucket compared to the other spam i receive; i'm not concerned about it.
Not to mention that the bother of a couple of extra spams is completely
dwarfed by
On 06/10/2010 11:57 AM, Joke de Buhr wrote:
> You do not sacrifice legitimate incoming mail because there is an RFC that
> clearly states mailservers do not operate from dynamic IP addresses.
> Therefore
> they can not be considered valid.
Please cite this RFC. All IP addresses are "dynamic" i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Thursday 10 June 2010 at 4:57:50 PM, in
, Joke de Buhr wrote:
> One of the addresses of my key is totally unprotected
> against spam. Nothing is blocked or scanned there. And
> it doesn't get any spam at all.
Fair enough.
> As far as I
Speaking of spam, I'm getting more spam from some sort of automated
ticketing system that seems to be subscribed to this list that I ever
have from a keyserver. The mail seems to come from:
secure.mpcustomer.com
and it often sets the From: to be from someone else. This is totally
uncool. Is th
Am Donnerstag 10 Juni 2010 18:39:25 schrieb Jameson Rollins:
> Speaking of spam, I'm getting more spam from some sort of automated
> ticketing system that seems to be subscribed to this list that I ever
> have from a keyserver. The mail seems to come from:
>
> secure.mpcustomer.com
>
> and it of
On -10/01/37 20:59, Joke de Buhr wrote:
> You do not sacrifice legitimate incoming mail because there is an RFC that
> clearly states mailservers do not operate from dynamic IP addresses.
> Therefore
> they can not be considered valid.
Which RFC would this be?
I could not find the word "dynami
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi
On Thursday 10 June 2010 at 6:04:37 PM, in
, Hauke Laging
wrote:
> Am Donnerstag 10 Juni 2010 18:39:25 schrieb Jameson
> Rollins:
>> Speaking of spam, I'm getting more spam from some sort of automated
>> ticketing system that seems to be subsc
On 6/10/2010 8:16 PM, MFPA wrote:
> Whenever I post to this list these days I get one of their
> auto-replies, and they always spoof the from address to whatever I had
> in the "to" field of my message to the list.
[lots of discussion deleted]
I think it's safe to say the list moderators are now
16 matches
Mail list logo
