Re: Idiot spam attack on sci.lang

In message <331ff761-8bb0-448d-81dd-34c1e41767b5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, richard01 <richardparker01@xxxxxxxxx> writes
On 24 Jan, 21:50, Richard Herring <junk@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
In message
<94111ff3-ef36-4417-a877-0f1b5d938...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
richard01 <richardparke...@xxxxxxxxx> writes

>I don't know how whoever is doing it does it, but it doesn't seem to
>have any real object at all:

It's collateral damage from an attack on sci.crypt - groups that have
appeared in crossposts to sci.crypt are getting some of the fallout.

Thanks for that - I really have no great interest in how the internet
works, except that I think it's wonderful, and occasionally prone to
problems like this. None of the other Usenet groups I belong to has
had quite the same problem.

http://groups.google.com/group/news.admin.net-abuse.policy/browse_frm...
ead/afbf6dde24f62208/

[...]



>Google Groups and Usenet have got to get their acts together to stop
>this stuff. (Usenet not so much because they don't make any money from
>it, but Google? - certainly).

How do you think Google could be in a position to do anything about
this?

Google are gatekeepers - I pay them by glancing at the ads that turn
up on their sites, so they have an obligation not to let crap through
the gate.

Fine. Now define "crap" in a way that allows them to filter it by some automatic process.

Who on earth do you think "Usenet" are?

Usenet is an amorphous network 'thing', apparently, but if it didn't
have some kind of administration it would have fallen apart years ago.

It hasn't, and it didn't. No server in the network needs to know about anything beyond its nearest neighbours. All they have to do is to pass on anything that's sent to them to any of those neighbours who haven't already seen it. No top-level administration is needed, and none exists.

>They protect his identity, and enable him to put out this crap. You
>can't do a WHOIS serach on the ***.

The hundreds of misconfigured open servers he posts through, run by
often clueless administrators who in any case have more important calls
on their time, are what protects his identity. Good luck with tracking
all of them down and persuading them to tighten their security.

When I post on their site, Google warns me that I give my email
address to the world, yet they only give out a restricted version of
my email address. They show the same respect to this spammer, so it's
impossible to find him and spam him right back.

He doesn't post through Google, he abuses misconfigured open servers that don't know his email address. The address that Google are "restricting" is forged anyway, so knowing it wouldn't help you in the slightest.

>This *** has been sending stuff around to everybody:

>His Profile:

Who's the "he" you think you're describing?

I looked up 'Nick'' or 'Mark's' profile I think. Certainly not Peter
T Daniels, who is beyond reproach.

It is trivially easy to forge the identity of a poster (and of course the sporger does so), so whoever "Nick" or "Mark" really are (if they exist at all), they are not responsible for these postings.

--
Richard Herring
.

Quantcast