From: "Sue Morris" <zantique-AT-ozemail.com.au> Subject: Re: spam back!! Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 08:22:52 +1000 hey malgosia - thanks for the research and url info :) cheers sue -----Original Message----- From: malgosia askanas <ma-AT-panix.com> To: foucault-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU <foucault-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU> Date: Wednesday, July 08, 1998 5:25 AM Subject: Re: spam back!! >A great majority of spam is sent from fake addresses, so returning it usually >has no effect other than getting back an "invalid address" error message. >The non-Virginia headers for this particular spam were as follows: > >Received: from www.telecommex.com ([207.48.68.252]) by lists.village.Virginia.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.6) with SMTP id XAA04857 for <foucault-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 23:36:52 -0400 >From: maurice-AT-netsrv.tobunken.go.jp >Received: from tara by www.telecommex.com via SMTP (951211.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH1502/940406.SGI) > id CAA03129; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 02:27:39 -0500 >Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 02:27:39 -0500 >Message-Id: <199807030727.CAA03129-AT-www.telecommex.com> >To: gloria234-AT-aol.com >Subject: Are you an Internet Marketer? > >I checked out userid "maurice" on "netsrv.tobunken.go.jp" and got the reply >"user unknown", so I suspect that returning the spam is pointless. The >"www.telecommex.com" information may be relevant to tracing down where the >spam really came from. > >There is a very comprehensive Web page dedicated to spam-fighting tools and >techniques at: > >http://www4.ncsu.edu/~aiken/antispam.html > > >-m >
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005