(Sorry about the wide cross-reply, but I'm more than a tad irate)
On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 19:29:24 EST, "K.V. Rao" said:
> Recently we posted a admin message to a metar list at our site (we combine
> the lists so that only one message is received by a subscriber even if
> that person subscribed to several lists). Surprisingly, I received the
> following message that thought it was a spam message. If you read below,
> it tells that since listserv does not fill the To: field with the actual
> recipient's address, it got the spam masters attention. How can we fix
> this problem in listserv config? I want the e-mail id of the individual to
> show up in To: address line rather than
> To: Multiple Recipients of list xxx
You probably don't want to do this.
If each message has a distinct To: field, then each message has
to be sent out individually. So instead of Listserv handing your
mail server *one* message with 4,000 recipients, it will hand it
4,000 messages with one recipient each.
> 3. you Bcc'ed the correct recipient or a mailing list the
> recipient belongs to. Unfortunately, in order to contain
> the menace of UCE, several email recipients now have
> filters that reject email unless their email address, or
> a mailing list they subscribe to, appears in the To:
> or Cc: fields. If that is the case, you may resend your
> original message to the following recipient by their
> explicit email addresses. Our statistics suggest that
> over 96% of UCE gets rejected with this policy.
96% of all UCE, and all Bcc: and many list management packages.
Listserv, Majordomo, Listproc - everybody sets the To: like this,
for the performance reason I listed above. (Well - some small
lame list management software may actually send out lots of
copies, but it doesn't scale at *all*).
> Our Gateway heuristics suggests the email address that may have
> triggered this was:
>
> <[log in to unmask]>
Please notify this person to seek internet connectivity
from a provider that has a clue. The only way to deal
with broken providers like this is to boycott them.
The only real fix at the Listserv end is as follows:
1) 'QUIET DELETE * *@INDUS.NET' to unsubscribe any users
from that provider from any of your lists.
2) Add '*@INDUS.NET' to the Listserv 'trapin' variable so people
from that provider cannot accidentally get onto your lists and
then not be able to receive mail from them.
> If you are operating a commercial list, please remove
> this from it now!! If this was intended as a personal
> email, please accept our apology and resend it to the
> above address directly.
How about all the people who operate non-commercial lists, and
the people at this provider who would actually like to receive
mail from those lists?
> Additionally, your email claimed to be addressed to the
> potentially forged email address(es) quoted below. If
> you are a spammer, you would know that it is a very
> common practice among spammers to use a "To: " header
> that has nothing to do with who the message is actually
> delivered to. Sort of like writing a fictitious address
> on an envelope but dropping it in someone else's mailbox.
It's also a very common practice to pass a memo around an
office labelled "To: All Employees". I bet the boss would
just *LOVE* to be required to write out every name every time.
> Since you may have intentionally abused or otherwise misused our
> mailing system, we are adding _your_ email address to a mailing
> list of suspected spammers. We reserve the right to sell it to
> anyone for legal commercial advertising purposes. We do not
> otherwise send unsolicited email.
Hmm.. and how does one get *removed* from this mailing list?
> Due to the volume of the spam this Spam Detection Auto Reply
> Gateway receives, and to avoid mail loops caused by auto replies,
> all replies to this message are sent into a blackhole.
If you find it necessary to black-hole replies, maybe you're rejecting
too much mail.
> -=-=- Always check email addresses and save everyone the trouble
> and cost of dealing with unwanted email. -=-=-
>
> >From [log in to unmask] Sun Mar 21 23:34:54 1999
> > by indnet.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA25412;
> > Mon, 22 Mar 1999 02:36:41 -0500 (EST)
> > spool id 514256 for [log in to unmask]; Mon, 22 Mar 1999 00:00:11 -0500
> > (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA09194 for <[log in to unmask]>; Sun, 21
> > Mar 1999 13:42:37 -0500 (EST)
> >Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 13:42:36 -0500 (EST)
> >From: "K.V. Rao" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Update on India Network - Administrivia
> >Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> >Sender: [log in to unmask]
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
|
