>>It has to work this way, or spammers could simply >>forge a non-relaying SMTP host at the >>beginning of the message and bypass the checks."
>I don't understand what you are saying.
I mean you HAVE to check all the relays involved, because the spammer could add forged "Received From" header to the message using the name and IP of a non-relaying mailer, thus making your filter think the mail originated from a secured mailer and is OK to accept.
The problems with this approach presented elsewhere in this thread are not insurmountable. I'd like to implement this for my personal use, but I need a starting point. I just wanted to know if there was any solution out there already so I don't have to reinvent the wheel.
There's probably a way to tell if you're dealing with an Exchange server, though, right?
In the case of multiple SMTP servers, I would bounce the message if any of the intermediate SMTP servers were open relays. The person who receives the bounce may not know what to do about a relay upstream from them, but if they report it to their ISP perhaps a call from another admin might get the problem fixed. It has to work this way, or spammers could simply forge a non-relaying SMTP host at the beginning of the message and bypass the checks.
It would be a lot easier to just block incoming mail from mailservers that are open for relaying.
The MAPS RBL and the other RBL's only work if the offending site has already been reported. From my experience the sites I get spam from have not been entered, and you have to jump through some hoops to get them entered. Big deal, so the spammers use the next server on the list of open relays they scanned for in.ac.kr and.ac.jp.
Why can't I set up sendmail or whatever program to reverse-scan the intermediate mailservers for misconfiguration and bounce mail accordingly? I know I might bounce some legit mail, but I'm willing to do that, since my SMTP server only receives mail for me and no one else. At least the bounce message could tell them why their mail was refused and the sender could take it up with their sysadmin.
Is there such a method of refusing mail from _ANY_ open relays already implemented in some MTA?
All his posts are porn-spam and reference the same URL that was in the email message.
Since his homepage on intra.ru exists and is another banner ad site, I'd say probability is extremely high this is the correct email address of the spammer.
Um, how much electricity do _you_ use? 1 kilowatt is a lot of juice for one square meter... I could get over a hundred of those on my roof... I could probably power the whole neighborhood with that kind of power. The max you could run into a home is 44 kW, given 220 volts with standard 200 amp cable coming in. And nobody's going to be using 44 kW unless they're growing marijuana in the attic or something.
Of course, 100% efficiency isn't going to happen.
And the ugliest solar panel array I've seen is still better looking than the powerlines strung all over the place... maybe it's different in your town. But newer designs are incorporating the solar cells into roofing shingles, so they aren't that bad looking.
And someone mentioned batteries being a disposal problem- right! Flywheels are the answer, as soon as they can develop the right composites that don't explode when they break at 10000 rpms.
All this is exactly my point. If we would spend the money to research solar, we would come up with better efficiency, enough to make it viable outside of "hot" places. Right now photovoltaics are only converting around 13% of the sun's energy they receive. With better efficiency, (and better storage, like flywheels instead of batteries) it could be viable anywhere. The problem is the money for R&D isn't there while conventional fuel prices are cheap.
Let's not do this. We need an excuse to get rid of ugly power lines, not an excuse to keep them. We're not working fast enough on solar power alternatives as it is.
If your compile errors are related to libpng.so.1 edit the makefile in the kthememgr directory and add -lz after the -lpng and it should compile. It worked for me anyway.
When I first heard about this rumor, I wondered if it wasn't just a Microsoft PR strategy for undercover FUD. In other words, spread a story about Office for Linux, then yank the rug out in a later release.
Seems to be what happened here.
If this guy loves Microsoft's products so much, why does he "seem" pro-Linux? Why not just shut up and use M$ software on M$ operating system? The only reason I can think of is he's on M$'s payroll, paid to write "pro-Linux" articles designed to confuse the PHB's about Linux. (Star Office is "rudimentary"?)
That's much more effective than your average anti-Linux FUD.
If only M$ programmers were as innovative as their PR staff...
The internic contact for earthshoes.com is Michel Meynard, supposedly michel@mminc.com, except mminc.com doesn't resolve. Reportedly it's the site of Michel Meynard Inc. of Massachusetts.
A search on Four11 turns up the following addy for a Michel J Meynard in Massachusetts: 102414.567@compuserve.com, odds are it's him. No telling if it's still a current address though.
I can't find any direct connection between MM and Mondial, so no telling what this guy's role is. He may just be the web developer, but from the sound of "Michel Meynard Inc." he sounds just like the kind of ego-maniac that thinks he can trademark the word "Earth". That's just my opinion though.
The key to the whole reason for use of Windows NT is:
The station will use an "orbiter communication adapter," similar to the ones now used by NASA space shuttles to handle data communications with the ground. The OCA is specially designed by NASA to accept all the delays and drop outs associated with space-to-ground communications. The device will attach to the network using proprietary Windows device drivers.
Perl for Dummies is a good starter book. It was a lot more help than Learning Perl, but I still refer to both. I just picked up the Perl Cookbook, and it looks like it will also be a huge benefit. I've reinvented the wheel (badly) several times for lack of good practical examples like these.
The Harmony Project was a coordinated effort to get all the Linux users in the world to sing a single note on New Year's Eve 1999 at midnight UTC, thus ringing in the year 2000 in "Harmony".
Everyone was also supposed to stand facing Redmond Washington, so the effective resonance of the millions of voices would cause Microsoft's office windows to shatter.
However, no one in the Linux community could agree on which note to sing, so the project was abandoned.
Slashdot Mirror
They can have my GD library when they rm it from my cold dead server!
I predict the Internet will interpret taxation
as damage, and route around it.
>>It has to work this way, or spammers could simply
>>forge a non-relaying SMTP host at the
>>beginning of the message and bypass the checks."
>I don't understand what you are saying.
I mean you HAVE to check all the relays involved, because the spammer could add forged "Received From" header to the message using the name and IP of a non-relaying mailer, thus making your filter think the mail originated from a secured mailer
and is OK to accept.
The problems with this approach presented elsewhere in this thread are not insurmountable.
I'd like to implement this for my personal use, but I need a starting point. I just wanted to know if there was any solution out there already so I don't have to reinvent the wheel.
There's probably a way to tell if you're dealing with an Exchange server, though, right?
In the case of multiple SMTP servers, I would
bounce the message if any of the intermediate
SMTP servers were open relays. The person who
receives the bounce may not know what to do about
a relay upstream from them, but if they report
it to their ISP perhaps a call from another
admin might get the problem fixed.
It has to work this way, or spammers could simply
forge a non-relaying SMTP host at the beginning
of the message and bypass the checks.
It would be a lot easier to just block incoming
.ac.kr and .ac.jp.
mail from mailservers that are open for relaying.
The MAPS RBL and the other RBL's only work if the
offending site has already been reported. From
my experience the sites I get spam from have not
been entered, and you have to jump through some
hoops to get them entered. Big deal, so the
spammers use the next server on the list of open
relays they scanned for in
Why can't I set up sendmail or whatever program
to reverse-scan the intermediate mailservers for
misconfiguration and bounce mail accordingly?
I know I might bounce some legit mail, but I'm
willing to do that, since my SMTP server only
receives mail for me and no one else. At least
the bounce message could tell them why their
mail was refused and the sender could take it up
with their sysadmin.
Is there such a method of refusing mail from
_ANY_ open relays already implemented in some MTA?
Great concept; dumb name.
http://www.deja.com/pro file.xp?author=alexgurry%40intra.ru
All his posts are porn-spam and reference the same URL that was in the email message.
Since his homepage on intra.ru exists and is another banner ad site, I'd say probability is extremely high this is the correct email address of the spammer.
Um, how much electricity do _you_ use?
1 kilowatt is a lot of juice for one square meter... I could get over a hundred of those
on my roof... I could probably power the whole
neighborhood with that kind of power. The max
you could run into a home is 44 kW, given 220 volts with standard 200 amp cable coming in.
And nobody's going to be using 44 kW unless they're growing marijuana in the attic or something.
Of course, 100% efficiency isn't going to happen.
And the ugliest solar panel array I've seen is
still better looking than the powerlines strung
all over the place... maybe it's different in
your town. But newer designs are incorporating
the solar cells into roofing shingles, so they
aren't that bad looking.
And someone mentioned batteries being a disposal
problem- right! Flywheels are the answer, as soon
as they can develop the right composites that
don't explode when they break at 10000 rpms.
All this is exactly my point. If we would spend
the money to research solar, we would come up with
better efficiency, enough to make it viable outside of "hot" places. Right now photovoltaics
are only converting around 13% of the sun's energy they receive. With better efficiency, (and better storage, like flywheels instead of batteries) it could be viable anywhere. The problem is the
money for R&D isn't there while conventional fuel prices are cheap.
Although fusion is also a nice alternative too...
Let's not do this. We need an excuse to get
rid of ugly power lines, not an excuse to keep
them. We're not working fast enough on solar
power alternatives as it is.
If your compile errors are related to libpng.so.1
edit the makefile in the kthememgr directory
and add -lz after the -lpng and it should compile.
It worked for me anyway.
When I first heard about this rumor, I wondered if
it wasn't just a Microsoft PR strategy for undercover FUD.
In other words, spread a story about Office for Linux, then yank the rug out in a later release.
Seems to be what happened here.
If this guy loves Microsoft's products so much, why does he "seem" pro-Linux? Why not just shut up and use M$ software on M$ operating system? The only reason I can think of is he's on M$'s payroll, paid to write "pro-Linux" articles designed to confuse the PHB's about Linux. (Star Office is "rudimentary"?)
That's much more effective than your average anti-Linux FUD.
If only M$ programmers were as innovative as their PR staff...
Sure it's faster when comparing it on different
hardware.
But where's the comparison between OS X and
MKLinux running on the same system?
A search on Four11 turns up the following addy for a Michel J Meynard in Massachusetts: 102414.567@compuserve.com, odds are it's him. No telling if it's still a current address though.
I can't find any direct connection between MM and Mondial, so no telling what this guy's role is. He may just be the web developer, but from the sound of "Michel Meynard Inc." he sounds just like the kind of ego-maniac that thinks he can trademark the word "Earth". That's just my opinion though.
We need an open-source OCA project!
Perl for Dummies is a good starter book. It was a
lot more help than Learning Perl, but I still
refer to both.
I just picked up the Perl Cookbook, and it looks
like it will also be a huge benefit. I've
reinvented the wheel (badly) several times for
lack of good practical examples like these.
The Harmony Project was a coordinated effort to get all the Linux users in the world to sing a single note on New Year's Eve 1999 at midnight UTC, thus ringing in the year 2000 in "Harmony".
Everyone was also supposed to stand facing Redmond Washington, so the effective resonance of the millions of voices would cause Microsoft's office
windows to shatter.
However, no one in the Linux community could agree on which note to sing, so the project was abandoned.
Unless I'm mistaken, this means I can go purchase
an E-machine for $399 and get a ~$100 refund for
not using Windows on it?
Aw, yeah!
:)