AFAIK (IDK how either) this hasn't been a big issue in the past few years.
Is it really worth worrying about? I notified the MARC admin and it was
removed there within a few hours too - a dozen easily tracked messages in a
few hours and a few hours after that, it's done (or more like, filteres).
N
What's needed is 20 (pick a number) trusted volunteer admins with the
mailman password whose only capacity is to (make a list: put the list
into moderation mode, disable an acct).
Obviously it would be nice if the software could help with this
(limited privileges, logging) but it could be done ju
On 10/26/2015 5:15 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
And the first person who says “who has seen $URL” or similar in a message gets
bounced, then bitches about “operational nature” of NANOG.
I think it is probably not a great idea to add things like URI checkers to NANOG.
We can bitch & moan about
Please stop using this as an opportunity to spam your commercial
anti-spam list ffs
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
> On 10/26/2015 12:06 PM, Job Snijders wrote:
>>
>> I expect some protection mechanisms will be implemented,
>> rather sooner then later, to prevent this sty
> If you really are a NANOG admin, I suggest adding some kind of URI filtering
> for blocking the message based on the the domains/IPs found in the clickable
> links in the body of the message.
And the first person who says “who has seen $URL” or similar in a message gets
bounced, then bitches
5 matches
Mail list logo
