So I've been getting a new slew of Spam lately ([censored] and/or penie pills, mostly), with these goofy "From:" and "Subject:" names. Guess it's the latest strategy to get past filters 'n stuff.
ANYWAY, just got back from a ride, and there's an e-mail from "Gallivanting G. Goathead". If I wasn't worried about catching something from just replying to the scumbags, I'd send 'em your close-up picture of a thorn and tell 'em where they might stick it.
Easily entertained (apparently), Bill S.
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
"S o r n i" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
So I've been getting a new slew of Spam lately ([censored] and/or penie pills, mostly), with these goofy "From:" and "Subject:" names. Guess it's the latest strategy to get past filters 'n stuff.
ANYWAY, just got back from a ride, and there's an e-mail from
"Gallivanting
Quoted message said:
G. Goathead". If I wasn't worried about catching something from just replying to the scumbags, I'd send 'em your close-up picture of a thorn
and
Quoted message said:
tell 'em where they might stick it.
Easily entertained (apparently), Bill S.
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
HA! I usually get over 100 a day like that! My record in the morning is 48, plus any 1 get during the course of the day, I am sure I am well over 100. And yeah they come up with some interesting names and subject line to get passed the filters. Ken
I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there?
Yes. Definately a Bad Idea. I estimate my personal legacy from that practice to be 200-300 spams per day out of the 7,500-8,000 spams I get every day. (the rest seem tb dictionary attacks aimed at the domain name) -- PeteCresswell
I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there?
Yes. Definately a Bad Idea. I estimate my personal legacy from that practice to be 200-300 spams per day out of the 7,500-8,000 spams I get every day. (the rest seem tb dictionary attacks aimed at the domain name)
I seem to recieve very little spam as a result of usenet. For example, at this address, which I have used for the last three months only for usenet, I have recieved a total of 10 spams.
On the other hand, I filled out the fields on one of those phake ebay phishing messages once with phake info but a real email and that account started to get 100-200 spams per day. Those trickeled off to only a couple a day after a few months of not responding and not loading images from the html spam emails. It was a lot of work to read all those messages every day for those first few months.
I still wouldn't use my "real" email on usenet though.
So I've been getting a new slew of Spam lately ([censored] and/or penie pills, mostly), with these goofy "From:" and "Subject:" names. Guess it's the latest strategy to get past filters 'n stuff.
most likely someone else that has your address has been "botted" & their outlook addresses extracted.
Quoted message said:
ANYWAY, just got back from a ride, and there's an e-mail from "Gallivanting G. Goathead". If I wasn't worried about catching something from just replying to the scumbags, I'd send 'em your close-up picture of a thorn and tell 'em where they might stick it.
Easily entertained (apparently), Bill S.
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there?
It's not the real name but the return address from which you posted the item that is used. They don't read your postings or sig, they fetch the header and extract the return address. Just the same, I get little spam and all that that contains some key words or no title is trapped by my ISP SpamAssasin. The anonymity we see here has nothing to do with spam. You can sign your real name to your responses and never get spammed because they don't have your address.
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
More likely the spam is deriving from some spammer figuring out that the first subdomain field in many addresses shown in usenet headers is a server name qualifier which should be deleted from the address. (This used to be the case for one very large ISP, and when I tipped that provider to the fact that spammers had been routinely flagging their spam by inclusion of that field in the To: addresses, they immediately began filtering for it...and achieved a huge reduction in spam in one change.) With *.rr.com addresses, anything prior to the city/region field is automatically bogus. You may have noticed that my address munger uses an infix string that's not commonly associated with spam prevention techniques. There are several reasons for my choice of method.
-- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
What do Squarest B. Postorder, Classify N. Boarded, and Bergson G. Plumpness have in common? They've all gotten their FREE spam name, the alternate identity to make you happier, healthier, and more compliant with Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress!
"Werehatrack" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
S o r n i said:
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and
more.
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed,
Sam
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Smith)
More likely the spam is deriving from some spammer figuring out that the first subdomain field in many addresses shown in usenet headers is a server name qualifier which should be deleted from the address. (This used to be the case for one very large ISP, and when I tipped that provider to the fact that spammers had been routinely flagging their spam by inclusion of that field in the To: addresses, they immediately began filtering for it...and achieved a huge reduction in spam in one change.) With *.rr.com addresses, anything prior to the city/region field is automatically bogus. You may have noticed that my address munger uses an infix string that's not commonly associated with spam prevention techniques. There are several reasons for my choice of method.
-- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
So you are saying that I should remove that rr that I have in my email addy or should I leave it there?? Ken
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:30:13 -0800, LioNiNoiL_a t_Y a h 0 0_d 0 t_c 0
m said:
Sorni wrote about:
Quoted message said:
an e-mail from "Gallivanting G. Goathead".
Fight back by getting your own "spam name":
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
What do Squarest B. Postorder, Classify N. Boarded, and Bergson G. Plumpness have in common? They've all gotten their FREE spam name, the alternate identity to make you happier, healthier, and more compliant with Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress!
You are an Evil Being. Keep up the work. -- Typoes are a feature, not a bug. Some gardening required to reply via email. Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
"S o r n i" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
So I've been getting a new slew of Spam lately ([censored] and/or penie pills, mostly), with these goofy "From:" and "Subject:" names. Guess it's the latest strategy to get past filters 'n stuff.
ANYWAY, just got back from a ride, and there's an e-mail from "Gallivanting G. Goathead". If I wasn't worried about catching something from just replying to the scumbags, I'd send 'em your close-up picture of a thorn and tell 'em where they might stick it.
Easily entertained (apparently), Bill S.
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
Dear Bill,
Eventually I might feel that the sentence is too harsh, but right now this falls into the category of the nicest thing that I've read all day:
That was my original thought, but then I see where he bilked witless consumers out of millions of dollars for non-existent products and services. I think the bum got off light, personally.
If it was just spam for the sake of advertising, I think 8.5 years would be about right. ;-)
"S o r n i" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
So I've been getting a new slew of Spam lately ([censored] and/or penie pills, mostly), with these goofy "From:" and "Subject:" names. Guess it's the latest strategy to get past filters 'n stuff.
ANYWAY, just got back from a ride, and there's an e-mail from "Gallivanting G. Goathead". If I wasn't worried about catching something from just replying to the scumbags, I'd send 'em your close-up picture of a thorn and tell 'em where they might stick it.
Easily entertained (apparently), Bill S.
PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
Dear Bill,
Eventually I might feel that the sentence is too harsh, but right now this falls into the category of the nicest thing that I've read all day:
"S o r n i" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
> So I've been getting a new slew of Spam lately ([censored] and/or penie > pills, mostly), with these goofy "From:" and "Subject:" names. > Guess it's the latest strategy to get past filters 'n stuff. > > ANYWAY, just got back from a ride, and there's an e-mail from > "Gallivanting G. Goathead". If I wasn't worried about catching > something from just replying to the scumbags, I'd send 'em your > close-up picture of a thorn and tell 'em where they might stick it. > > Easily entertained (apparently), Bill S. > > PS: I used to get virtually ZERO spam, but last few months more > and more. Probably from letting my "real" name out there? Oh, > well... (Signed, Sam Smith)
Dear Bill,
Eventually I might feel that the sentence is too harsh, but right now this falls into the category of the nicest thing that I've read all day:
