spam traps
Anonymous
nobody ever really reads anymore a question: what, if any, fake email
addresses (or real ones) do you use on Usenet for the (almost) sole purpose
of being spamtraps--or use them primarily for that but also read through
them to check for any valid newsgroup mail if it's a valid address? Anyway,
whatever it is, if it's ever used as a spamtrap and you feel OK about
posting it here (it's a spamtrap, right?), please put it in here. It's
always refreshing to hear people talk about what spam traps they use--it
gives new Usenet members ideas of how they should set up theirs when they
get the news reader software set up (so that they don't accidentally pick a
domain that is real).
In that really long thread the subject of making a good spamtrap address was
discussed as I was trying, with some other users, to find an address that
was at a domain that really didn't exist, yet still looked sort of
appetizing so I could tease spammers who would otherwise be turned off by
"invalid...@nonexistent.com" or something like that. Isn't if fun to let
the spammers just get their own inboxes filled with some junk mail (in this
case bounced messages) for a change? :-)
So, I'm excited to hear your replies!
Anonymous
actually putting in my say. First I tried anon...@anonymous.com. But then
I realized that anonymous.com was actually out there (although I don't know
about the address mentioned above). So I tried an...@anon.com. Its domain was
existing out on the Web too. Then I tried an...@anon.tv. Someone then pointed
out a link to a page called anon.tv. Finally, I tried an...@anon.blah, which
can never be a valid address unless the ICANN makes up a .blah domain
"system" or whatever you call it. In that case I would change it to
something else. Did anyone else ever try any of the addresses above?
"Anonymous" <an...@anon.blah> wrote in message
news:jzs_d.915$hg....@news01.roc.ny...
David W. Hodgins
>> discussed as I was trying, with some other users, to find an address that
>> was at a domain that really didn't exist, yet still looked sort of
>> appetizing so I could tease spammers who would otherwise be turned off by
See my sig.
I registered nomail.afraid.org for use in usenet, back when swen first appeared.
It resolves to 127.0.0.10, so spammers and viruses will be trying to send to
the machine they're sending from.
Regards, Dave Hodgins
--
Change nomail.afraid.org to rogers.com to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specfically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
Anonymous
I can try using it in my Outlook Express newsgroup account. Maybe
pLeAsEsE...@nomail.afraid.org. That would be interesting.
"David W. Hodgins" <dhodg...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message
news:op.sntib7ekqz8bjc@localhost...
Roy Schestowitz
Why do you not create an account that you check (rather /scan/) every
week/month? This can be a GMail account, for example.
Roy
--
Roy Schestowitz
http://schestowitz.com
BearItAll
But you said you want to view the spam in case any legitimate emails are
there.
If you have your own domain, or your ISP allows you several email
addresses then,
For sites that you definitely don't want or
expect emails from you can use a blatant spam@yourdomain and have it
deleted on arrival at your ISP side.
Then for those where you expect some genuine emails, use another name,
example maybespam@yourdomain. When you receive that still pass it
through spamassassin to get rid of the more obvious spam. Then hopefully
those you actually need to manually can are very few.
I used to be picky about this stuff at work and home, looking manually
down the list of those that get filtered into the local spam box, but I
wont do that now. Even with the ISP's spam filter (which in my case is
fairly weak), my local spamassin on my mail server catches several hundred
per day. So now anything marked as spam goes straight to /dev/null.
I trust spamassassin, at the times I have manually scanned the emails in
recent years I haven't found any that were legitimate in the spam box.
Some of my own regular expressions on the other hand tended to be a little
more, erm, over zealous. Filtering out the whole of Koria when working for
an international company wasn't a terribly good idea.
It is a shame though because it used to be the case in news groups where
occasionally you would continue to help or just talk to someone in private
emails, I even telnet'ed (pre ssh) into a place in Ireland, because
someone was having troubles with their unix. But I'm afraid I would never
give a genuine email address to a news group now.
The same is true of some seemingly legitimate web sites, I always give an
email address (I have an unlimited number) that reflect the site. For
example theaa@mydomain or mybank@mydomain. It is a sad case that a lot of
sites, despite claiming not to give your email addresses to third parties
actually do give it away and once given there is a rapid rise in spam from
many sources.
martin f krafft
http://sbserv.stahl.bau.tu-bs.de/~hildeb/postfix/postfix_spamtrap.shtml
i am sure other MTAs can also use it.
--
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
\____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
invalid/expired pgp subkeys? use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
spamtraps: alt.comp.os...@usenet.madduck.net
Roy Schestowitz
It was not him who said that, it was the OP. I think Dave intended to punish
the spammers as well as benign mail senders, which may be just a mere 0.1%.
> If you have your own domain, or your ISP allows you several email
> addresses then,
>
> For sites that you definitely don't want or
> expect emails from you can use a blatant spam@yourdomain and have it
> deleted on arrival at your ISP side.
That's exactly what I do. I divide/sort/filter E-mail by addresses.
Depending on the account, you know how hastily you can purge
uninvited/unrecognised mail.
> Then for those where you expect some genuine emails, use another name,
> example maybespam@yourdomain. When you receive that still pass it
> through spamassassin to get rid of the more obvious spam. Then hopefully
> those you actually need to manually can are very few.
>
> I used to be picky about this stuff at work and home, looking manually
> down the list of those that get filtered into the local spam box, but I
> wont do that now. Even with the ISP's spam filter (which in my case is
> fairly weak), my local spamassin on my mail server catches several hundred
> per day. So now anything marked as spam goes straight to /dev/null.
ISP filters are weak because they would get plenty or work (i.e. messages
from customers) if they killed messages that were anticipated by the
receiver.
> I trust spamassassin, at the times I have manually scanned the emails in
> recent years I haven't found any that were legitimate in the spam box.
> Some of my own regular expressions on the other hand tended to be a little
> more, erm, over zealous. Filtering out the whole of Koria when working for
> an international company wasn't a terribly good idea.
>
> It is a shame though because it used to be the case in news groups where
> occasionally you would continue to help or just talk to someone in private
> emails, I even telnet'ed (pre ssh) into a place in Ireland, because
> someone was having troubles with their unix. But I'm afraid I would never
> give a genuine email address to a news group now.
Judging by the E-mail address that I use here (newsg...@schestowitz.com),
UseNet is an invitation for nuclear spam attacks. UseNet archives are
everywhere and they expose E-mail addresses.
> The same is true of some seemingly legitimate web sites, I always give an
> email address (I have an unlimited number) that reflect the site. For
> example theaa@mydomain or mybank@mydomain. It is a sad case that a lot of
> sites, despite claiming not to give your email addresses to third parties
> actually do give it away and once given there is a rapid rise in spam from
> many sources.
That's what I use another E-mail address for. I keep my primary address open
to just family, friends and colleagues.
Hope it helps,
Wizard
You are a fucktard cunt.
Wizard
> It's me, the same person who wrote the original post.
No fucking shit?
> Except this
> time I'm actually putting in my say. First I tried
> anon...@anonymous.com. But then I realized that anonymous.com was
> actually out there (although I don't know about the address mentioned
> above). So I tried an...@anon.com. Its domain was existing out on the
> Web too. Then I tried an...@anon.tv. Someone then pointed out a link
> to a page called anon.tv. Finally, I tried an...@anon.blah, which can
> never be a valid address unless the ICANN makes up a .blah domain
> "system" or whatever you call it. In that case I would change it to
> something else. Did anyone else ever try any of the addresses above?
You're fucking mental.
Jason F.
> But I'm afraid I would never give a genuine email address to a news group now.
>
That's what genuine throwaway accounts are for. gmail's especially
convenient because if ever the torrent of spam overwhelms google's great
spamfilters, you can create another account and forward it (which is
what I do).
> The same is true of some seemingly legitimate web sites, I always give an
> email address (I have an unlimited number) that reflect the site. For
> example theaa@mydomain or mybank@mydomain. It is a sad case that a lot of
> sites, despite claiming not to give your email addresses to third parties
> actually do give it away and once given there is a rapid rise in spam from
> many sources.
>
You mean most of those "newsletters" and "email this webpage to all your
friends!" links are evil? Say it ain't so! :)