Re: OT request for arcane tech help

I can only add that this happened to me as well. I got the same
"cavalier" treatment from my host service. It ended in a week or so and
didn't do me any "real" harm I know of. It did "tick me off" greatly.
There is always a balance between freedom and responsibility. I wonder
if the web sometimes allows too little responsibility!

On Apr 29, 2006, at 11:29 AM, Keith Gerling wrote:

> Hi Liam,
>
> My concern is that my domain name finds itself added to spam filters
> thus
> rendering my email address useless for communication. My mailbox has
> been
> filled up with bounced messages, and I cringe at the thought of the
> number
> of messages that WERE successfully delivered with "from gumphoto.com".
> My
> hosting service, who has treated this issue in a somewhat cavalier
> fashion,
> insists that the "from" field has, indeed, been used, and that spam
> filtering services are aware of this tactic and that there is no true
> risk
> of "permanent damage". Looking at the headers of the bounced
> messages, I
> see a confusing mess of different ip addresses, so I suppose they may
> be
> correct and that the SMTP service at the webhost is NOT being used for
> spam
> relay. But a security scan that Gordon was kind enough to run for me
> does
> indicate that there may be some lax security at my webhost. The whole
> issue
> has been a big pain and I have to wonder that if the "from" field can
> indeed
> be anything, why pick an actual domain? Why even bother with
> harvesting,
> which I thought was more appropriate to finding recipients for spam,
> not
> fake senders?
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Keith
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liam Lawless [mailto:lawless@bulldoghome.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 8:07 PM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> Subject: RE: OT request for arcane tech help
>
>
> Keith,
>
> My wife's e-mail has recently been subject to a similar attack. I'm no
> expert on these things and her domain host wasn't interested, but I've
> been
> doing a bit of reading on the web and it seems likely that the e-mail
> attached to her domain has been "harvested" from the internet, a
> discussion
> forum or somesuch. It seems that anyone sending an e-mail can put
> anything
> they like in the "From" field, and the reason that spammers use fake
> addresses is that large volumes of mail will be flagged by their ISPs.
>
> It is said that spammers usually move on to a different address after
> a week
> or two, but it may be possible to deflect the bounce messages by
> disabling
> the catchall feature of your e-mail account. To do this for my wife's
> account, I had to go to her domain's control panel, click on "Default
> Mail
> Account", then "Set Default Address (Catch All)", and type ":fail:" in
> the
> box which asks where unrouted mail to the account should be sent. Any
> bounce messages addressed to qytwehx@herdomain.com (or other name made
> from
> random characters) should then go back to the original sender who,
> hopefully, will then move on to someone else's e-mail address.
>
> I've only done this tonight, so can't say if it's worked yet, and of
> course
> your control panel will probably be different.
>
> And a disadvantage, I suppose, is that you cannot use the catchall
> feature,
> but hope this is some help.
>
>
>
> Liam
>
> ---
> [This E-mail has been scanned for viruses but it is your responsibility
> to maintain up to date anti virus software on the device that you are
> currently using to read this email. ]
>
Received on Sat Apr 29 10:42:10 2006