Re(2): Spam revenge

Add a rule to your .procmailrc to filter email with that URL in the body and get on with life.

Better to LART or at least blacklist the spammer... "just filter it" does nothing to combat theft of resources (bandwidth and cycles on the mail server). And who knows, maybe a particularly intelligent spammer will take you off their list if they get enough 551 go fsck yourself replies from sendmail....

-- F o x t r o t U n i f o r m Found a typo in this node? /msg me The hell with paco, vote for Erudil!

Comment on Re(2): Spam revenge

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re(2): Spam revenge by shotgunefx (Parson) on Sep 04, 2002 at 20:45 UTC
Unfortunately the headers are forged most of the time. If the ad contains an 800 number, better to call repeatedly and ask very stupid and annoying question, very slowly. 800 calls cost actual money. Or you could fax their fax with a nice message in a 200pt font repeatedly. -Lee "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."	[reply]
Re^3: Spam revenge by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Sep 05, 2002 at 04:18 UTC
shotgunefx beat me to it.. the problem is that most of the time, spammers don't even care about what comes back. They fire off a few million mails and simply don't care at all about how many of them get rejected, bounced, filtered or otherwise don't reach their destination because if even 0.01% of recipients do react to these mails, they've at least broken even, if not made a profit. It simply doesn't matter whether you bounce a spam mail, sendmail rejects it, or whatever. The only way to combat theft of resources is to silently filter spam as close to the source as possible. `.procmailrc` is just available to anyone, while the system's sendmail configuration may not be. If you do have access to it, all the better. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks