Subject: Re: SPAM ?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 08:41:50 +0100

I can confirm this and would also suggest to take appropriate counter
measures.

Regards

Ulrich

Tom Rushworth <[email-masked]> on 08.12.99 21:21:05

Please respond to [email-masked]

To:   [email-masked]
cc:    (bcc: Ulrich Moser/T078045/SYSTOR)
Subject:  SPAM ?

Is it just me, or is everyone on the list getting spam through the list?
Maybe we need PGP authentication that senders are also subscribers :).

--
Tom Rushworth

---

From: Werner Koch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:56:56 +0100

> I can confirm this and would also suggest to take appropriate counter

I don't think that it is needed.  It only seems so that there is so
much UCE becuase this list as migrated to a very low traffic one.

It is not easy to have a junk free ML when it is an open list; you
have to maintain filter rules and even when you use ORBS, junk will
come through from time to time.   What I do in this case is simply
cleaning it up from the mail archive.

I don't think that it is a good idea to have a closed ML, mainly
because it is not easy to have anoymous poster.

By the way, anything new on an updated RFC?

-- 
Werner Koch at guug.de           www.gnupg.org           keyid 621CC013

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:21:09 +0900

wk>  On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 08:41:50AM +0100
wk>  [email-masked] wrote:

wk> I don't think that it is a good idea to have a closed ML, mainly
wk> because it is not easy to have anoymous poster.

i agree as i think the ability for anonymous posting is essential --
especially in this area ;-)

i suppose a hack of asking anonymous posters to include some string
like 'rfc 2440' in their posts and filtering anonymous posts based on
that is not desirable...instructions for doing this could be included
where subscription information is mentioned.  i suppose that might be
annoying for anoynmous posters.  well, just a thought anyway.

wk> By the way, anything new on an updated RFC?

speaking of which, did anybody read my comments other than the 'thank
you' at the top of the message dated:

   Tue, 07 Dec 1999 23:25:24 +0900

w/ message-id:

   <[email-masked]>

?  i didn't get any replies about them -- i'd at least like to know if
my comments were off, silly, etc.  i do think that the rfc as it currently
reads is ambiguous w.r.t. partial body lengths.