* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
@ 2001-04-17 19:25 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-04-17 19:26 ` Nathan Dabney
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Matti Aarnio @ 2001-04-17 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Zarzycki; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:18:48PM -0700, Dave Zarzycki wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 J.I.@thor.sbay.org wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Arrggg!!! Mumble... grumble... F*cking spammer using my hostname as the
> from address for sending spam...
Actually not. Either your MTA, or your MUA did that.
I got:
From: J. I.
This particular detail -- when to add canonical domain to e.g. From:
address, and when not -- is implemented rather fuzzily usually..
> Dave Zarzycki
/Matti Aarnio
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
2001-04-17 19:25 ` Matti Aarnio
@ 2001-04-17 19:26 ` Nathan Dabney
2001-04-17 19:26 ` Rik van Riel
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Dabney @ 2001-04-17 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Zarzycki; +Cc: linux-kernel
Nope, it was spoofed.
It just looks to you like it came from you, like mine looks like it came from
my domain...
-Nathan
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 12:18:48PM -0700, Dave Zarzycki wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 J.I.@thor.sbay.org wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Arrggg!!! Mumble... grumble... F*cking spammer using my hostname as the
> from address for sending spam...
>
> Dave Zarzycki
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
2001-04-17 19:25 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-04-17 19:26 ` Nathan Dabney
@ 2001-04-17 19:26 ` Rik van Riel
2001-04-17 19:27 ` Disconnect
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Rik van Riel @ 2001-04-17 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Zarzycki; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Dave Zarzycki wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 J.I.@thor.sbay.org wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Arrggg!!! Mumble... grumble... F*cking spammer using my hostname as the
> from address for sending spam...
Funny, I saw a "From: J.I.@conectiva.com.br" ...
regards,
Rik
--
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2001-04-17 19:26 ` Rik van Riel
@ 2001-04-17 19:27 ` Disconnect
2001-04-17 19:44 ` John Jasen
2001-04-17 19:28 ` Doug McNaught
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Disconnect @ 2001-04-17 19:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Zarzycki; +Cc: linux-kernel
(Sending to LKML just so nobody else flips out)
OK it wasn't just us. Lemme reassure the admins I just forwarded it to ;)
It seems to list the hostname of whoever receives it (neat trick).
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Dave Zarzycki did have cause to say:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 J.I.@thor.sbay.org wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Arrggg!!! Mumble... grumble... F*cking spammer using my hostname as the
> from address for sending spam...
>
---
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1 [www.ebb.org/ungeek]
GIT/CC/CM/AT d--(-)@ s+:-- a-->? C++++$ ULBS*++++$ P+>+++ L++++>+++++
E--- W+++ N+@ o+>$ K? w--->+++++ O- M V-- PS+() PE Y+@ PGP++() t 5---
X-- R tv+@ b++++>$ DI++++ D++(+++) G++ e* h(-)* r++ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:27 ` Disconnect
@ 2001-04-17 19:44 ` John Jasen
2001-04-17 20:17 ` [OT] " J Sloan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: John Jasen @ 2001-04-17 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Disconnect; +Cc: Dave Zarzycki, linux-kernel
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Disconnect wrote:
> (Sending to LKML just so nobody else flips out)
>
> OK it wasn't just us. Lemme reassure the admins I just forwarded it to ;)
>
> It seems to list the hostname of whoever receives it (neat trick).
sendmail, by default, appends its domainname to incoming email that
doesn't have one.
--
-- John E. Jasen (jjasen1@umbc.edu)
-- In theory, theory and practise are the same. In practise, they aren't.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [OT] Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:44 ` John Jasen
@ 2001-04-17 20:17 ` J Sloan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: J Sloan @ 2001-04-17 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Jasen; +Cc: Disconnect, Dave Zarzycki, linux-kernel
John Jasen wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Disconnect wrote:
>
> > (Sending to LKML just so nobody else flips out)
> >
> > OK it wasn't just us. Lemme reassure the admins I just forwarded it to ;)
> >
> > It seems to list the hostname of whoever receives it (neat trick).
>
> sendmail, by default, appends its domainname to incoming email that
> doesn't have one.
We reject domainless messages, so that's not it.
jjs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2001-04-17 19:27 ` Disconnect
@ 2001-04-17 19:28 ` Doug McNaught
2001-04-17 20:03 ` Alan Cox
2001-04-17 23:03 ` David Woodhouse
6 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Doug McNaught @ 2001-04-17 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Zarzycki; +Cc: linux-kernel
Dave Zarzycki <dave@zarzycki.org> writes:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 J.I.@thor.sbay.org wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Arrggg!!! Mumble... grumble... F*cking spammer using my hostname as the
> from address for sending spam...
Not true. The From: address was simply "J.I."; your mailhost tacked
on your local domain since it was unqualified.
Gave me a turn, too, until I figured it out.
-Doug
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2001-04-17 19:28 ` Doug McNaught
@ 2001-04-17 20:03 ` Alan Cox
2001-04-17 23:03 ` David Woodhouse
6 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2001-04-17 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Zarzycki; +Cc: linux-kernel
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 J.I.@thor.sbay.org wrote:
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Arrggg!!! Mumble... grumble... F*cking spammer using my hostname as the
> from address for sending spam...
Its variously called 'fraud' and 'obtaining services by deception' in most
jurisdictions and as a criminal matter can be reported to interested parties.
Generally the mailing list isnt an interested party 8)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 19:18 ` Your response is requested Dave Zarzycki
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2001-04-17 20:03 ` Alan Cox
@ 2001-04-17 23:03 ` David Woodhouse
2001-04-18 6:27 ` Matti Aarnio
6 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: David Woodhouse @ 2001-04-17 23:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matti Aarnio; +Cc: Dave Zarzycki, linux-kernel
matti.aarnio@zmailer.org said:
> Actually not. Either your MTA, or your MUA did that.
> I got:
> From: J. I.
> This particular detail -- when to add canonical domain to e.g. From:
> address, and when not -- is implemented rather fuzzily usually..
I'm in the "if it arrives unqualified by SMTP from !localhost, reject it"
camp. I certainly can't think of a single case where it's appropriate to
accept it _and_ qualify it with the local domain in that case.
--
dwmw2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: Your response is requested
2001-04-17 23:03 ` David Woodhouse
@ 2001-04-18 6:27 ` Matti Aarnio
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Matti Aarnio @ 2001-04-18 6:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Woodhouse; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 12:03:41AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> matti.aarnio@zmailer.org said:
> > Actually not. Either your MTA, or your MUA did that.
> > I got:
> > From: J. I.
> > This particular detail -- when to add canonical domain to e.g. From:
> > address, and when not -- is implemented rather fuzzily usually..
>
> I'm in the "if it arrives unqualified by SMTP from !localhost, reject it"
> camp. I certainly can't think of a single case where it's appropriate to
> accept it _and_ qualify it with the local domain in that case.
I didn't look for what it was at the SMTP level while
incoming, but RFC 821 (SMTP) is the transport method, and
VGER won't accept unqualified ( + a few more rules )
What you are saying is that RFC 822 level (visible headers)
should be controlled for something ?
I have a surprise for you, RFC 822 data carries only incidental
resemblance with the message content and destination.
Like now, you (dwmw2) get this message twice: once from me
which means the "From:" might even carry some resemblance
to the sender (yes, resemblance, it isn't my login-id, just
my email address), the second one comes via the list, and
the Majordomo won't change the From: to be
linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
which is the real sender in that case...
... and this is completely off topic ...
> --
> dwmw2
/Matti Aarnio
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread