Re: [luv-talk] [luv-jobs] shopping together
Michael Lindner via luv-jobs wrote:
Dear,
I've just thought that we just have to go shopping together, it's gonna be much fun! Take a look at that new mall http://also.baputech.com/e4rmf
Well I must confess I am only subscribed to luv-jobs; because I don't seem to have got around to unsubscribing; but I will confess I am completely bewildered by this email; not only does the above URL takes me to: http://financenews24.clubbusinessfinancenews.com/?bill=2j390rjw0wef&k=11200&... which seems like spam ! but apparently there is some kind of connection to the criminal justice system : eg. criminalcoordinator <criminalcoordinator@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au> in the above cc list. Anyone got an idea ?
regards Rohan McLeod
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Well I must confess I am only subscribed to luv-jobs; because I don't seem to have got around to unsubscribing;
but I will confess I am completely bewildered by this email;
Um... it's absolutely classic spam. And 'Michael Lindner' is doubtless a forged GECOS field, and everything else about the spamvertised mail, likewise. (I am not on the luv-jobs mailing list.)
Rick Moen via luv-talk wrote:
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Well I must confess I am only subscribed to luv-jobs; because I don't seem to have got around to unsubscribing; but I will confess I am completely bewildered by this email; Um... it's absolutely classic spam. And 'Michael Lindner' is doubtless a forged GECOS field, and everything else about the spamvertised mail, likewise.
Thanks Rick; so just for clarity on my part; luv-jobs probably has a genuine " Michael Lindner "; and someone is pretending to be him ? regards Rohan McLeod
Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Thanks Rick; so just for clarity on my part; luv-jobs probably has a genuine " Michael Lindner "; and someone is pretending to be him ?
I really would not know. As I mentioned, I am not subscribed to that mailing list. My point merely was that literally _everything_ in a typical spam except the last-hop Received header is typically a forgery.
David via luv-talk wrote:
On 1 October 2016 at 18:21, Rohan McLeod via luv-talk <luv-talk@luv.asn.au> wrote:
Michael Lindner via luv-jobs wrote: Now we have this spam on two lists.
Please don't quote spam and retransmit it.
Well perhaps I should have contacted Rick off-list in my query to him; but are you seriously suggesting spam problems can't be addressed on luv-talk ?; Perhaps the moderator of luv-talk can arbitrate on this ? regards Rohan McLeod
On Saturday, 1 October 2016 8:28:22 PM AEST Rohan McLeod via luv-talk wrote:
David via luv-talk wrote:
On 1 October 2016 at 18:21, Rohan McLeod via luv-talk
<luv-talk@luv.asn.au> wrote:
Michael Lindner via luv-jobs wrote: Now we have this spam on two lists.
Please don't quote spam and retransmit it.
Well perhaps I should have contacted Rick off-list in my query to him; but are you seriously suggesting spam problems can't be addressed on luv-talk ?; Perhaps the moderator of luv-talk can arbitrate on this ?
The best thing to do for that sort of thing is to notify the LUV committee. I think that the luv-jobs list is moderated for non-members so probably someone on the committee approved the wrong message by mistake. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Hello Russell and Rohan, On 10/1/16, Russell Coker via luv-talk <luv-talk@luv.asn.au> wrote:
On Saturday, 1 October 2016 8:28:22 PM AEST Rohan McLeod via luv-talk wrote:
David via luv-talk wrote:
On 1 October 2016 at 18:21, Rohan McLeod via luv-talk
<luv-talk@luv.asn.au> wrote:
Michael Lindner via luv-jobs wrote: Now we have this spam on two lists.
Please don't quote spam and retransmit it.
Well perhaps I should have contacted Rick off-list in my query to him; but are you seriously suggesting spam problems can't be addressed on luv-talk ?; Perhaps the moderator of luv-talk can arbitrate on this ?
The best thing to do for that sort of thing is to notify the LUV committee. I think that the luv-jobs list is moderated for non-members so probably someone on the committee approved the wrong message by mistake.
I seem to remember seeing a committee member caught by such a link, as have I. A good discussion should help with understanding and recognising such, and less falling for. I am wondering whether it would be safe to use wget on the link, with a careful use of headers, and limiting recursion/dependent pages, and a careful inspection. I would like to see the host machines taken down suitably. Everybody needs to make a living, but not unethically. Providing ethical opportunities is part of the solution, at least in the long term. Regards, Mark Trickett
On 10/1/16, David via luv-talk <luv-talk@luv.asn.au> wrote:
On 1 October 2016 at 18:21, Rohan McLeod via luv-talk <luv-talk@luv.asn.au> wrote:
Michael Lindner via luv-jobs wrote:
Now we have this spam on two lists.
I have had the misfortune to meet such spam before, sometimes quoting can be germane to the discussion and recognising and dealing with. It is an excellent example of the hiding of content by the use of HTML content in an email, and why I would prefer that the default is __PLAIN__TEXT__. The nature of the link is to go to a site/page that hijacks the browser, through java or javascript, and may have some way of also hijacking MS Outlook.
Please don't quote spam and retransmit it.
There are also issues about various ways of accessing email, and composing a response. It helps to make some allowance for the limited editing capabilities when using some of the more limited email clients, including the web interfaces. Thinking about this, and then campaigning for better software and better defaults helps, along with "educating" the commercial world about the mischief of some of the capabilities they choose to utilise and exploit. Regards, Mark Trickett
participants (5)
-
David -
Mark Trickett -
Rick Moen -
Rohan McLeod -
Russell Coker