spam smackdown?

It looks like someone's trying to make a point.

It has been more than a point. :slight_smile:


Murat Yuksel

The takeaway is:

1) NANOG doesn't seem to do simple inbound spam filtering :slight_smile:

-Jim P.

"It looks like someone's trying to make a point"

Must be an Outlook exploit affected several clients.

luckily, many of us saw almost none of this spam due to effective
inbound spam filtering on our accounts. which is awesome.

i did, however, manage to see lots of messages from people complaining
about the spam that they did receive. :slight_smile:


I love all the email about spam

In fairness to the Communications Committee (of which I have zero influence or power), a few points:

1) They apparently filtered it more than a day ago, we are just seeing the queue drain. Which is not surprising on a mailing list of > 10K email addresses.

2) Inbound spam filtering is VERY HARD on something like NANOG. How many people here post things like samples of spam? Imagine the backlash: “This is an operational list. How could you not expect operational content to include samples?!?!?! AAARRGGGGGHHHHHHHh HRHFLSHFBEAW% ^&*DKJHFSLkdjh@#%asltrifhuawlekhtfweq5r1r#@%!@#QWEGDAwsgfhqw!!!!111!!!!” (That is honestly what I expect of some posters here….)

3) Anyone who feels this is so frickin’ bad it is unbearable, and knows they could do SO MUCH BETTER themselves, should volunteer for the Communications Committee. Otherwise, everyone should thank the unpaid volunteers for their gracious and excellent work day after day, year after year. Or just STFU.

For my part, I would just like to thank the CC members. I think they do a most amazing job, and deserve of humblest gratitude.

hear hear!

Thank you Communications Committee. What he said.

John Springer

Yes, yes, the volunteers are all wonderful people and can I get a
hip-hip-hooray. Nevertheless, before I "STFU" I would politely suggest
that volunteering to perform a function for which one is not prepared
to put in the needed effort is generally worse than not volunteering
at all. Volunteering blocks other would-be volunteers for the same
effort. Even if there are no other volunteers, it prevents the
function from being farmed out to a paid service with the appropriate
diligence and expertise.

I would urge the current volunteers to careful consider whether
they're willing and able to put in the exceptional effort and
commitment of time and availability needed to competently operate a
mailing list server on today's Internet. Failing to halt a spam flood
in a timely manner does not exhibit a reasonable level of commitment
to the task.

One simply can't walk away from a mail server for a couple of days any
more. Even volunteer efforts require the kind of monitoring and
on-call rotations we all use in our professional lives.

Bill Herrin