LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (April 2003, week 1)Back to main SAS-L pageJoin or leave SAS-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Tue, 1 Apr 2003 14:47:52 +0100
Reply-To:     Alastair Nicol <calaban.madness@BLUEYONDER.CO.UK>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Alastair Nicol <calaban.madness@BLUEYONDER.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: SPAM forcing unsubscription - proposed solution for Digests
In-Reply-To:  <18b.17e3f399.2bba0480@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

there are numerious mailing listing packages out there which do attempt to stop spam.

its a difficult nut to crack, but not impossible.

stopping all HTML formatted email would make a big dent in the "porn" spam. Most (all?) email clients support sending plain text emails.

its also very easy to scan incoming email and strip iframes/image links/jscript tags.

Its also very easy to match incoming email against known spam. This is a service we have purchased at work (very cheap). I'm also aware of an open source project to provide a database of signatures for all current spam, I dont know the current status (it only started up a couple of months ago)

LISTSERV could implement these simple changes on their servers and everyone would be a lot happier.

so either 1. hassle listserv to sort out spam/porn issues. 2. move sas-l to another host.

my 2p

Al

Philip Gallagher wrote:

>w.r.t. Steve Albert's problem with pornographic spam in SAS-L Digests >evoking IT demands to unsubscribe: > >Considering Digests alone, there is a possible solution, that is, moderators. >Since there are usually only four to seven digests per day, perhaps it would >not be an insufferable burden for a brave soul(s) to volunteer to "moderate" >the Digests. No more than deleting obvious spam, followed by forwarding >to the Digest list. (I don't know the mechanism by which the LISTSERV >could implement this, but I don't know anything about the internal workings >of LISTSERVs anyway, but I know a clever programmer must be able to >devise a way for the LISTSERV to permit posting only by the moderator >to the Digest list. At least I hope there is an easy way.) >With a halfways decent editor (NOT AOL!) it should not usually take more >than two minutes per digest, and maybe even less. Hence, hopefully not >more than 15 minutes per day. > >Downsides: >1. The time of the brave moderator. >2. Additional delay before we see the digests. As it is, a whole string of >answers have often appeared somewhere down the line before we digest >readers ever see the first question. Still, if it would get thousands(?) of >Highly Esteemed IT Gurus off our backs, well, ... > >Phil Gallagher >Nantucket > >Error above: the text above should have read "Maximally Highly Esteemed >IT Gurus", at least as long as they rule our world. :-) > >


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SAS-L page