29 Mar
2002
29 Mar
'02
7:44 p.m.
I know a lot of y'all use Yahoo Mail....
FYI to those who use Yahoo Mail.
March 29 - Tired of spam you're getting at your free Yahoo! e-mail
account? Get ready for more. Tucked inside a privacy policy change
the company made this week was notice that more Yahoo! e-mail
marketing offers were coming "even if users had formerly indicated
they were unwanted. YAHOO! GRANTED ITSELF PERMISSION to spam by
creating a new "marketing preferences" page that lets users
pick "yes or no" to specific categories of marketing pitches. The
problem is, Yahoo! set every users' option to "yes" - even if long
ago, they indicated they never wanted any Yahoo! spam.
Users who don't want marketing offers from Yahoo have 60
days to do the following: Visit the user profile preferences page at
http://edit.my.yahoo.com/config/eval_profile select "Edit your
marketing preferences" from within the Member Information section;
and individually change selections in a series of marketing
categories from "yes" to "no."
In e-mail marketing lingo, the process is known as "opt-out."
But even performing that slightly cumbersome operation is no
guarantee that Yahoo! marketing offers won't come, since the firm
reserves the right to add marketing categories at any time.
"I'd suggest re-checking periodically," writes another
mailing list poster.
29 Mar
29 Mar
9:55 p.m.
As I understand it this isn't just people with Yahoo Mail accounts, if
you're subscribed to any mailing list hosted at Yahoo (remember they bought
out egroups), you're a target.
Zane
I know a lot of y'all use Yahoo Mail....
FYI to those who use Yahoo Mail.
March 29 - Tired of spam you're getting at your free Yahoo! e-mail
account? Get ready for more. Tucked inside a privacy policy change
the company made this week was notice that more Yahoo! e-mail
marketing offers were coming "even if users had formerly indicated
they were unwanted. YAHOO! GRANTED ITSELF PERMISSION to spam by
creating a new "marketing preferences" page that lets users
pick "yes or no" to specific categories of marketing pitches. The
problem is, Yahoo! set every users' option to "yes" - even if long
ago, they indicated they never wanted any Yahoo! spam.
Users who don't want marketing offers from Yahoo have 60
days to do the following: Visit the user profile preferences page at
http://edit.my.yahoo.com/config/eval_profile select "Edit your
marketing preferences" from within the Member Information section;
and individually change selections in a series of marketing
categories from "yes" to "no."
In e-mail marketing lingo, the process is known as "opt-out."
But even performing that slightly cumbersome operation is no
guarantee that Yahoo! marketing offers won't come, since the firm
reserves the right to add marketing categories at any time.
"I'd suggest re-checking periodically," writes another
mailing list poster.
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
11:45 p.m.
In addition to that, you'll no longer be able to get the mail from your
Yahoo! mail via POP (I get mine into Outlook rather than using the webmial
reader at mail.yahoo.com - this is unless you fork out some cash.
=> -----Original Message-----
=> From: owner-classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
=> [mailto:owner-classiccmp@classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Zane H. Healy
=> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 2:56 AM
=> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
=> Subject: Re: FYI: Yahoo Mail Account info Alert. (fwd)
=>
=>
=> As I understand it this isn't just people with Yahoo Mail accounts, if
=> you're subscribed to any mailing list hosted at Yahoo (remember
=> they bought
=> out egroups), you're a target.
=>
=> Zane
=>
=> > I know a lot of y'all use Yahoo Mail....
=> >
=> >FYI to those who use Yahoo Mail.
=> >
=> >March 29 - Tired of spam you're getting at your free Yahoo! e-mail
=> >account? Get ready for more. Tucked inside a privacy policy change
=> >the company made this week was notice that more Yahoo! e-mail
=> >marketing offers were coming "even if users had formerly indicated
=> >they were unwanted. YAHOO! GRANTED ITSELF PERMISSION to spam by
=> >creating a new "marketing preferences" page that lets users
=> >pick "yes or no" to specific categories of marketing pitches. The
=> >problem is, Yahoo! set every users' option to "yes" - even if
long
=> >ago, they indicated they never wanted any Yahoo! spam.
=> >
=> >Users who don't want marketing offers from Yahoo have 60
=> >days to do the following: Visit the user profile preferences page at
=> >http://edit.my.yahoo.com/config/eval_profile select "Edit your
=> >marketing preferences" from within the Member Information section;
=> >and individually change selections in a series of marketing
=> >categories from "yes" to "no."
=> >
=> >In e-mail marketing lingo, the process is known as "opt-out."
=> >But even performing that slightly cumbersome operation is no
=> >guarantee that Yahoo! marketing offers won't come, since the firm
=> >reserves the right to add marketing categories at any time.
=> >
=> >"I'd suggest re-checking periodically," writes another
=> >mailing list poster.
=>
=> --
=> | Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
=> | healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
=> | | Classic Computer Collector |
=> +----------------------------------+----------------------------+
=> | Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
=> | PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
=> | http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
=>
30 Mar
30 Mar
3:54 a.m.
Hehehehehe...
Most of the spam I get nowadays comes from yahoo.uk... Why shouldn't
yahoo join in the fun... Just get them added to the global no-spam
list :)
clint
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Doc Shipley wrote:
I know a lot of y'all use Yahoo Mail....
FYI to those who use Yahoo Mail.
March 29 - Tired of spam you're getting at your free Yahoo! e-mail
account? Get ready for more. Tucked inside a privacy policy change
the company made this week was notice that more Yahoo! e-mail
marketing offers were coming "even if users had formerly indicated
they were unwanted. YAHOO! GRANTED ITSELF PERMISSION to spam by
creating a new "marketing preferences" page that lets users
pick "yes or no" to specific categories of marketing pitches. The
problem is, Yahoo! set every users' option to "yes" - even if long
ago, they indicated they never wanted any Yahoo! spam.
Users who don't want marketing offers from Yahoo have 60
days to do the following: Visit the user profile preferences page at
http://edit.my.yahoo.com/config/eval_profile select "Edit your
marketing preferences" from within the Member Information section;
and individually change selections in a series of marketing
categories from "yes" to "no."
In e-mail marketing lingo, the process is known as "opt-out."
But even performing that slightly cumbersome operation is no
guarantee that Yahoo! marketing offers won't come, since the firm
reserves the right to add marketing categories at any time.
"I'd suggest re-checking periodically," writes another
mailing list poster.
4:43 a.m.
If enough folks simply block all emails from the Yahoo.com domain, a lot of
SPAM will go away. It's the same for mindspring, Hotmail, MSN, AOL, etc. It
isn't convenient if you occasionally communicate with folks at these domains,
but it's the fact that they give away free webmail services for the asking
that makes them attractive origins for SPAM, since one cannot do any good by
blocking a single email address, thanks to the fact that spammers can get a
new email address for the asking, the only option is to isolate the commercial
domains that support SPAM in this way.
Sooner or later the forces of economics, thanks to the ridiculous consumption
of unpaid bandwidth by spammers, we're going to have to pay for our use of the
'net. The choice is between whether we pay for our own use or whether we pay
for the SPAM too. What's going to have to be sacrificed in the interest of
paying only for the traffic one generates rather than what one receives, is
the anonymity. If people who, ultimately, will be asked to pay for their use
of the infrastructure, insist that they are to be required to pay only for
what they transmit, as they do with the USPS-provided junk mail, for example,
they must insist that the genuine originator name and physical address, etc.
of the sender be incorportated in the email that's sent. Right now, the
SPAMmer spoofs a sender address. writes a single message with 6.23*10**23
destination addresses, and sends the thing, letting the intermediate routers
deal with the problem of distributing the message to each destination. This
costs him nothing, yet consumes a huge proportion of the bandwidth. If the
cost per bit were severely skewed, so that the guy sending 10 MB/month got his
service free, while the guy sending 10 MB/hour had to pay $100K per bit,
starting with the first bit, the use of that bandwidth would change. Now
that's extreme, but you get the picture.
Until senders (1) are prevented from sending a single message to multiple
destinations, and (2) are required to pay, say, 2**n! bucks per bit per month
for their bandwidth, we're all running the risk of having to pay for what we
receive as well as what we generate.
Think about it!
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clint Wolff (VAX collector)" <vaxman(a)earthlink.net>
To: "Classic Computers" <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: FYI: Yahoo Mail Account info Alert. (fwd)
Hehehehehe...
Most of the spam I get nowadays comes from yahoo.uk... Why shouldn't
yahoo join in the fun... Just get them added to the global no-spam
list :)
clint
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Doc Shipley wrote:
I know a lot of y'all use Yahoo Mail....
FYI to those who use Yahoo Mail.
March 29 - Tired of spam you're getting at your free Yahoo! e-mail
account? Get ready for more. Tucked inside a privacy policy change
the company made this week was notice that more Yahoo! e-mail
marketing offers were coming "even if users had formerly indicated
they were unwanted. YAHOO! GRANTED ITSELF PERMISSION to spam by
creating a new "marketing preferences" page that lets users
pick "yes or no" to specific categories of marketing pitches. The
problem is, Yahoo! set every users' option to "yes" - even if long
ago, they indicated they never wanted any Yahoo! spam.
Users who don't want marketing offers from Yahoo have 60
days to do the following: Visit the user profile preferences page at
http://edit.my.yahoo.com/config/eval_profile select "Edit your
marketing preferences" from within the Member Information section;
and individually change selections in a series of marketing
categories from "yes" to "no."
In e-mail marketing lingo, the process is known as "opt-out."
But even performing that slightly cumbersome operation is no
guarantee that Yahoo! marketing offers won't come, since the firm
reserves the right to add marketing categories at any time.
"I'd suggest re-checking periodically," writes another
mailing list poster.
7:53 a.m.
Richard Erlacher wrote:
If enough folks simply block all emails from the
Yahoo.com domain, a lot of
SPAM will go away. It's the same for mindspring, Hotmail, MSN, AOL, etc. It
isn't convenient if you occasionally communicate with folks at these domains,
but it's the fact that they give away free webmail services for the asking
that makes them attractive origins for SPAM, since one cannot do any good by
blocking a single email address, thanks to the fact that spammers can get a
new email address for the asking, the only option is to isolate the commercial
domains that support SPAM in this way.
Sooner or later the forces of economics, thanks to the ridiculous consumption
of unpaid bandwidth by spammers, we're going to have to pay for our use of the
'net. The choice is between whether we pay for our own use or whether we pay
for the SPAM too. What's going to have to be sacrificed in the interest of
paying only for the traffic one generates rather than what one receives, is
the anonymity. If people who, ultimately, will be asked to pay for their use
of the infrastructure, insist that they are to be required to pay only for
what they transmit, as they do with the USPS-provided junk mail, for example,
they must insist that the genuine originator name and physical address, etc.
of the sender be incorportated in the email that's sent. Right now, the
SPAMmer spoofs a sender address. writes a single message with 6.23*10**23
destination addresses, and sends the thing, letting the intermediate routers
deal with the problem of distributing the message to each destination. This
costs him nothing, yet consumes a huge proportion of the bandwidth. If the
cost per bit were severely skewed, so that the guy sending 10 MB/month got his
service free, while the guy sending 10 MB/hour had to pay $100K per bit,
starting with the first bit, the use of that bandwidth would change. Now
that's extreme, but you get the picture.
Until senders (1) are prevented from sending a single message to multiple
destinations, and (2) are required to pay, say, 2**n! bucks per bit per month
for their bandwidth, we're all running the risk of having to pay for what we
receive as well as what we generate.
Think about it!
Dick
Jerome Fine replies:
While I agree with most of what Dick says, in the short
run I have found what may be a much easier solution.
By being prepared to change my e-mail address as frequently
as necessary, I now have the ability to completely block
spam except where it originates directly from a list membership
like with yahoo. And if that ever gets out of hand, I will
just stop subscribing to the "infected" list and change my
e-mail address again.
Up until the middle of March, 2002, the e-mail was getting
very annoying. Now it has been contained. And since I
had to change my ISP (and therefore my e-mail address
in any case), I took the opportunity.
Up until now, no one on this list has responded in public
although I have had a few private comments. I take this
to mean that changing one's e-mail address is considered
surrender, but is it really any different than a business or
person moving to a new address? I agree that I would
probably have been stubborn myself if the move had not
been forced due to the ISP change, but now that I have
made the switch, I must say that it was not as bad as I
thought it would be. I agree that some overlap with the
old e-mail address is needed, but after I canceled the two
most frequent lists (this one and one other), 90% of the
e-mail on the old e-mail address is now spam.
What I don't know is what the old ISP will do with the
spam once the old e-mail address is no longer valid.
If the e-mail gets bounced, will that eventually result
in the spam being discontinued or will they just keep
on sending?
By the way, does everyone understand my "replacement"
paragraph at the end? Of course if everyone chose the
same replacement algorithm, then harvesting an e-mail
address would again be simple. But there must be many
such "replacement" methods that are just as simple.
If anyone wants feedback on how successful this method
is and how frequently I need to change, please ask?
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
--
If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail
address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk
e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be
obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the
'at' with the four digits of the current year.
2 p.m.
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 08:43:47AM -0700, Richard Erlacher wrote:
If enough folks simply block all emails from the
Yahoo.com domain, a lot of
SPAM will go away. It's the same for mindspring, Hotmail, MSN, AOL, etc.
I get a fair amount of spam, and I can't remember the last time I got
any that was actually sent to my machine from Yahoo, Hotmail, MSN, or
AOL. Sure, I get *LOTS* of spam that claims to come from one of them,
but most of the time these days it actually came from a middle school
in Korea. (Whoever put Korea schools in the internet left open relays
at every one.)
The key is reading e-mail headers. For example, here are the complete
headers from a recent spam I received:
From adultdvdr3324m53(a)yahoo.com Wed Mar 06 09:27:00 2002
Return-Path: <adultdvdr3324m53(a)yahoo.com>
Delivered-To: kentborg(a)borg.org
Received: (qmail 6080 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2002 09:26:57 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO yahoo.com) (211.114.161.1)
by borg.org with SMTP; 6 Mar 2002 09:26:57 -0000
Reply-To: <adultdvdr3324m53(a)yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001c47c48bdc$6178b2d1$2eb87db3@thdlsp>
From: <adultdvdr3324m53(a)yahoo.com>
To: adultdvd(a)yahoo.com
Subject: Discount Erotic DVD's, TOYS & VHS --- Over 7,000 ITEMS!!!
MiME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1275
Lines: 23
It is the "Received:" lines that are most interesting. In this case I
look at the one that says "HELO yahoo.com". The yahoo.com part is
what the sending machine was programmed to say, and it could be lying.
But the 211.114.161.1 was the IP address that actually made a
connection to borg.org. Let's look at where 211.114.161.1 lives, on
my Linux machine:
$ whois -h whois.arin.net 211.114.161.1
And a lot of stuff spits back, most notably that this is an
Asia-Pacific address. So:
$ whois -h whois.apnic.net 211.114.161.1
And more stuff spits out, notably that block 211.114.161.0 -
211.114.161.63 is held by KOORONG ELEMETARY SCHOOL, 144 KUCHONRI
YONGSANMYUN YOUNGDONGKUN, CHUNGBUK, 370-910, KR.
Nothing to do with Yahoo.
Looking at the body of the e-mail and it promotes the IP address
209.203.170.146, which, doing a similar backtrace, is held by
giantweb.com. Again, nothing to do with Yahoo.
So I blocked the Korean school that doesn't know what it is doing and
I sent a complaint to abuse(a)giantweb.com that their customer is
possibly responsible for the spam. Then I grumble and move on.
But Yahoo had nothing to do with it.
-kb
4:56 p.m.
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Kent Borg wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 08:43:47AM -0700, Richard
Erlacher wrote:
True, to a certain extent. But I do get quite a lot of spam with
either the Reply To: address or a reply addy embedded in the body that
IS a Yahoo account. Or Hotmail, or recently mostly MSN
I've long since quit looking at where the crap came from, and started
targetting where they want me to *answer*. Their whole point is to sell
you something, so they have to give you a real point of contact. That's
where the real trail starts.
Doc
If enough folks simply block all emails from the
Yahoo.com domain, a lot of
SPAM will go away. It's the same for mindspring, Hotmail, MSN, AOL, etc.
I get a fair amount of spam, and I can't remember the last time I got
any that was actually sent to my machine from Yahoo, Hotmail, MSN, or
AOL. Sure, I get *LOTS* of spam that claims to come from one of them,
but most of the time these days it actually came from a middle school
in Korea. (Whoever put Korea schools in the internet left open relays
at every one.)
8155
days inactive
8155
days old
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
jhfinepw4z＠compsys.to -
kentborg＠borg.org -
rhb57＠vol.com -
vaxman＠earthlink.net