Slashdot Mirror
Looping E-mails Beat The Net Down
Staili writes "Singapore-based women's magazine caused problems when it forwarded its mails to a large list of recipients, mainly mailing lists. In addition to security@suse.com, some help and subscribe lists were included; the type of addresses that tend to send out an automatic reply confirming receipt. And the loop was ready." I'm sure anyone who's messed with mail enough
has accidentally created a loop or two in their day, but this is really
slimey.
- E-mail from the Singapore magazine
- Replies from well-intentioned SuSE list readers complaining about it
#1 is easy, just firewall the magazine. #2 is the SuSE list users' fault. You get a bunch of spam, so you spam the list about it? I guess SuSE had no choice then but to shut down the list, but I hope they send out an e-mail before they do advising people on where they should send their complaints next time this happens.There seems to be some insidious 'oh, it's those clueless Asians' thread running through so many Slashdot posts recently that I think it's time the balance was addressed.
That thread is based on the emperical experience of thousands of mail admins throughout the world (not just the US, as your slashdot bash inaccurately implies). If those whose ISPs (and in some cases, countries) are being blocked wish to demonstrate otherwise, all they have to do is administer their mail servers competently and close down their open relays.
Until then, their inaction will speak louder than your words, be they from Singapore, Korea, or wherever. As one who has travelled to those places I am reluctant to block entire countries, but my boss doesn't want his mailbox filled with SPAM and if blocking half of Asia is how I appease him, then half of Asia will be blocked, period. My personal fondness of Asia (and, for that matter, Africa, and Europe, and other places I have had the privelege of visiting in the last several years) will play absolutely no role in this decision, and no role in my opinion of the (in)competence of ISP mail adminsitrators in those locations. The only metric of any concern is how many open relays there are, and how those responsible act (or, in the case of many notorious Asian providors, particularly in Korea, don't act) when the issue is brought to their attention.
As for the differences in phone systems, you are comparing apples and oranges, and assuming one causation (lack of technical knowhow) when a completely different causation (lack of well defined, enforcable government standards resulting from a lassaiz-faire market mentality in the last several administrations) is responsible, then trying to apply the erroneous conclusion derived from your erroneous assumption back to another issue that is, in any case, completely unrelated.
Internet booths are another example of the logical fallacy you have fallen into in making this argument. In a country in which more than half the homes have their own PCs, and just about every public library is already on the net (along with many schools), internet booths would be a profound waste of money. In other words, you have brought up another completely unrelated topic and misapplied it to your original argument, namely what approaches empower the most people to use the internet under what conditions, with those conditions in Singapore quite different from the United States, which in turn is very different from the UK or the rest of Europe. Clearly that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the competency level of mail administrators in Asia, Africa, America, Antarctica, Mars, Pluto, the NGC-1 Nebula, or anywhere else for that matter.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Of course because this was sent out on a friday, so this went on all weekend.
I have never been able to figure out why so many people pull this kind of crap. Obviously they were trying something new or different than usual. Otherwise the problem would have come up earlier.
This also happens occasionally with the phone company. For some reason, the retarded assholes will make some circuit change on a Friday evening, break something, and then go home for the day (and weekend). Why not do it on Tursday morning, or some other time that allows the nitwit that made the change to fix it immediately when the customer calls in a trouble ticket? (Because all the skilled telco employees were "downsized", and only the retards are left?)
Actually, this can apply to any situation where someone makes an important change or tries something new that might have a large, unexpected effect. How about replacing a bunch of ecommerce scripts just before going on vacation? (And did you verify that your "vacation" program is working correctly?) Or how about changing your BGP filters just before leaving for the night (any night)? Or how about something more mundane, like going on a long driving trip just after changing something important, like the water pump?
I believe that this really boils down to a single factor. Does the person in question really give a shit about the consequences of his or her actions? One could argue that this person is simply too stupid to realize the potential cost of failure, but I believe that anyone who cares about his or her job will take the time to KNOW, not hope. And this person should be prepared to deal with the unexpected, and have a "worst case" fallback plan.
A dingo ate my sig...
Just read the article, reminds me of when sometimes you apply to participate in a beta testing of something, and 2 weeks later you're putted on a mailing list with no warning other than the message, and there's always some newbies (and total idiots) that put their email addresses everywhere and wonder why "out loud" after.
:)
You start receiving message from people that are asking "WTF" and then people replying to get out of the list and the gazillion "me too" posts and then the bitching following because they aren't putted out and receiving another million of people bitching at the last million emails...then a moderator jumps in, exmplain the situation, then you get another bunch of emails because people didn't read it, and it goes on until the moderator +M the list.
What's the mistake?
1. not taking the people for complete idiots
Not meant in a insulting way, but rather that taking for granted that people will understand X and Y and Z, it's not because they signed up for a beta, or whatever, that they are mature people or good with internet/communicating/netiquette. So if you take for granted that you will operate a bunch of monkeys for a start, you won't get this problem, and the more you see how the list is, the more slack you can cut off.
Basically it's like a server, if you open all access to everything, and cut after, it's hell with the users. If you start strick and cut some slack, it's always better (best example being the quota, people flood your drives, and blam!. the other way around is people manage their space, and welcome the added storage). This is a stretched example but the concept can apply to a mailing list when all the posts needs to be moderated (pain in the ass and you don't get instant feedback) versus when they go freely in the list, to people that KNOW they will receive the email and will react correctly.
2. The lack of experience at managing mailing list.
Just go to egroups and looks at all the flame/crap going around in some mailing lists... sometimes it goes out of control and gets ugly, a good moderator knows when to jump in and how to so nobody gets offended and people drop it willingly instead of being forced to.
3. Lack of technical expertise and lack of communication
Something lame, but if you setup a mailing list for your customers for example, and you don't know what the "digest versus individual email" mode does, and you don't even bother to check, (well this is a lame example again but you get the idea) well if you have an average 20 emails a day for lets say, update on a product or different security patches for different modules and some will concern everyone some won't but you send them anyways, maybe you should be sure of every switch you'll turn on on the mailing list software, and be sure to ask the customers over the phone if they'd like an email for every fixes or a batch in 1 email every day for example (or better, give them the option and explain it clearly).
And also, never forget that you are dealing with human being, this might sound stupid, but everyone here that ever ran a BBS, or a mailing list, knows what this means and the implications (flame, mistakes, etc).
Sometimes Mailing list are a good thing, most time, people tend to forget that FORUMS can do as much and even better (search, no need to give out email addresses, etc). A counter-example would be to issue security alerts, for this, email rules. You have to weight the for and against for the project you are working on, and if you are to be moderator, be sure you know exactly what you are dealing with, both the software and the target people, and setup with these previous raw guidelines in mind, and unless you make a big mistake, it should go fine.
My $0.02
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
Excellent example of the insidious nature I mentioned. This topic isn't even about open relays - it's about a mailing loop.
The two are related, as any rudimentary understanding of how mail systems work will make clear. Without the open relays the SPAM could not be sent to the mailing lists with their header information forged and hiding the sender's online identity. The offending messages resulting in these mail loops are originating from open relays, most of which are in Asia.
But be that as it may, you miss the point entirely (perhaps willfully?).
It's ridiculous.
No, its the only option the Asian providors are leaving us. Making a "newbie" mistake, as you misleadingly put it, is one thing. Willfully refusing to fix the problem when it is brought to your attention is something else again. Those "western" sites you refer to either fix their open relays (the most common response) or get blocked themselves.
What is more, for the last half decade almost all mail servers come with open relaying shut off by default, which means these "clueless newbies" almost certainly had to turn open relaying on, deliberately.
It is not unreasonable to infer from two deliberate actions, namely turning on open relaying in the first place, then refusing to fix the problem when it is abused and people complain, that the administrators of these sites are either appallingly incompetent or obscenely complacent. In either event we can be certain of one thing: if we want to stop receiving SPAM from these sites, we have to filter them. Period.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy