>
> On Tue, 24 May 1994 01:35:40 +0200 Eric Thomas said:
> >Well, unfortunately these  problems are quite new and there  is no single
> >place where you  can conveniently say "toss all mail  from XYZ.COM". This
> >will clearly have to be added to the next release.
>
> Eric, developing  a filtering mechanism  to "toss  all mail from  XYZ.COM" is
> definitely needed,  however, this begs the  question of what to  do about net
> abusers who post their crap to Listserv lists via Usenet mirrors.
>
> A case in point is that guy who posted the message about the end of the world
> to every Usenet newsgroup  to which he had access. As  a result, all Listserv
> lists  in the  bit.listserv hierarchy  received this  guy's crap.  I have  my
> Listserv lists set so that only subscribers can post messages there, however,
> since this  junk mail  originated on  my List's  Usenet mirror,  the Listserv
> which hosts my list willingly distributed the mail message.
>
> In order for  a filter to block  out all postings from a  particular host, it
> must also  block out postings from  that host that are  submitted via Usenet.
> The challenge  for Eric is  not only  to develop a  new filter to  block mail
> messages sent directly  Listserv lists; its also filtering out  the crap that
> comes from abuses of Usenet that  affect Listserv or perhaps the mechanism at
> American University which  permits mirroring news groups  with Listserv lists
> needs to be changed so it too has a filtering mechanism.
>
>
>   Stan  Horwitz  Internet: [log in to unmask]  Bitnet:  STAN@TEMPLEVM
>   Temple University  -- Senior  Consultant (My  views are  all mine!)
>   Manager of the Help-Net and Suggest lists and Listserv Postmaster.
>
   Stan is right about the origins of the junk mail and many other
   offensive pieces of mail. Have any of you been received sexually
   offensive mail or mail about sex lines? Some of this appeared on
   Convex's list about a year ago and of course it stood out like a
   sore thumb in a supercomputer service list. Most of it comes from
   Usenet etc. That was why the mail from the Davis internet address
   seemed much more threatening.
        It does not hit all lists.  We are making a big mistake
   on this list by talking about it as the amount of mail one of these
   posts generates will serve as a poll to the advertiser about the
   efficacy of the unwanted mail. The more we acknowledge our
   frustration, the more mail we will get. The internet has the
   security of a sieve if you do not guard your list--the best remedy
   is silence. Turn their evident success in the New York Times and on
   CBS into the failure of silence. This is the principle tactic used
   to discourage terrorism by some heads of state who conceal their
   apprehensions. Silence discourages emulation of the green card's
   apparent success. The other problem is that this type of generated
   chaos might very well be a deliberate tactic by a single group to
   disrupt the electronic superhighway and destroy all of the
   pecuniary benefits of the new medium. This too is a commonplace
   among state terrorist as many of our European colleagues can
   attest. Whole sectors of a prosperous economy can be destroyed
   through the chaos caused by a campaign of terror. Paul
 
--
 
Dr. Paul S. di Virgilio,  University of Toronto  [log in to unmask]