On 02/12/2018 05:31, M. Balridge wrote:> Quoting dovecot-e51 at deemzed.uk: > >> Not to stir the pot, but I notice my email address has recently been >> harvested from this list for spamming purposes. This email address is >> unique and not used for anything else. >> >> I'd distinguish this from spam sent to the mailing list itself, which is >> obviously different. >> >> Is there anything further that could be done to prevent this? > > It's practically impossible to "police" all of those who sign up for a mailing > list that they do so for honest or constructive intentions. In addition, > copies of this mailing list are archived by various online search engines and > indexors, from content maintained or published by the list operators. > > You're already using unique mail addresses, which is a sensible strategy, and > one I use myself. In fact, I use a scheme whereby I don't need to change or > update any back-end settings to deal with a multitude of unique and ad-hoc > specified addresses for every vendor/supplier and interaction point I deal with. > > In short, if you use a public mailing list, expect that the address you use > for it will be discovered and abused by the nefarious marketeers of the High > Bit Seas. > > Cordially, > =MalckySince he uses a unique address, it is trivial to write a rule to ensure msgs come from dovecot.org and discard everything else, I do that on LKML, works a treat. This address alone is a mailing list only address, direct messages go to junk folder, which I visually scan occasionally, and if I dont within 7 days, tuff, they're deleted automatically. Which is why it annoys me that some people on mailing lists feel the need to reply directly, rather than through mailing list. (Yeah I know its also shortcomings of certain mailers and mailing services (has gmail even fixed that yet) where hitting reply or reply all should go to list. Its also dumb when list admins dont set reply-to list, the entire point of relying to a list, is, well, to the list) -- Kind Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate, discuss, or reveal, any part, to anyone, without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments, immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. Only PDF [1] and ODF [2] documents accepted, please do not send proprietary formatted documents Links: ------ [1] http://www.adobe.com/ [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20181202/a628110e/attachment-0001.html>
On 12/01/2018 04:09 PM, Noel Butler wrote:> > Which is why it annoys me that some people on mailing lists feel the > need to reply directly, rather than through mailing list.Sometimes it is the MUA that is poorly designed that causes this. Also, some lists set the "reply to" with the sender rather than the list. Further, some user agents have a separate "reply" for replying to list instead of original sender but human error results in wrong being clicked. That's happened to me - causing me to accidentally reply to wrong address.
On 02/12/2018 10:16, Michael A. Peters wrote:> On 12/01/2018 04:09 PM, Noel Butler wrote: > >> Which is why it annoys me that some people on mailing lists feel the need to reply directly, rather than through mailing list. > > Sometimes it is the MUA that is poorly designed that causes this.I could have sworn I said that, oh yes, I see I did> Also, some lists set the "reply to" with the sender rather than the list.Also covered (poorly configured)> Further, some user agents have a separate "reply" for replying to list instead of original sender but human error results in wrong being clicked. That's happened to me - causing me to accidentally reply to wrong address.-- Kind Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate, discuss, or reveal, any part, to anyone, without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments, immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. Only PDF [1] and ODF [2] documents accepted, please do not send proprietary formatted documents Links: ------ [1] http://www.adobe.com/ [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20181202/8d6bf723/attachment.html>
On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 10:09:02AM +1000, Noel Butler wrote:> On 02/12/2018 05:31, M. Balridge wrote: > > > Quoting dovecot-e51 at deemzed.uk: > > > >> Not to stir the pot, but I notice my email address has recently been > >> harvested from this list for spamming purposes. This email address is > >> unique and not used for anything else. > >> > >> I'd distinguish this from spam sent to the mailing list itself, which is > >> obviously different. > >> > >> Is there anything further that could be done to prevent this? > > > > It's practically impossible to "police" all of those who sign up for a mailing > > list that they do so for honest or constructive intentions. In addition, > > copies of this mailing list are archived by various online search engines and > > indexors, from content maintained or published by the list operators. > > > > You're already using unique mail addresses, which is a sensible strategy, and > > one I use myself. In fact, I use a scheme whereby I don't need to change or > > update any back-end settings to deal with a multitude of unique and ad-hoc > > specified addresses for every vendor/supplier and interaction point I deal with. > > > > In short, if you use a public mailing list, expect that the address you use > > for it will be discovered and abused by the nefarious marketeers of the High > > Bit Seas. > > > > Cordially, > > =Malcky> > Since he uses a unique address, it is trivial to write a rule to ensure > msgs come from dovecot.org and discard everything else, I do that on > LKML, works a treat. This address alone is a mailing list only address, > direct messages go to junk folder, which I visually scan occasionally, > and if I dont within 7 days, tuff, they're deleted automatically. > > Which is why it annoys me that some people on mailing lists feel the > need to reply directly, rather than through mailing list. > > (Yeah I know its also shortcomings of certain mailers and mailing > services (has gmail even fixed that yet) where hitting reply or reply > all should go to list. Its also dumb when list admins dont set reply-to > list, the entire point of relying to a list, is, well, to the list)There's an extensive email etiquette post somewhere on the net explaining why setting 'reply-to' to the list is a bad idea. Reply-to is intended for the sender to explain that replies shouldn't be sent to the obvious sending address, but to another address. This is essential if, say, the sender is temporarily away from home and s using a friend's email service. It is unfortunate that there are user-agents that do not provide the reply-to-list' option. And that there are mailing list programs that do not provide the proper list-headers to indicate the mailing list address. The proper response to such cases is to complain to the email software providers. -- hendrik> > -- > Kind Regards, > > Noel Butler > > This Email, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged > information, therefore remains confidential and subject to copyright > protected under international law. You may not disseminate, discuss, or > reveal, any part, to anyone, without the authors express written > authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify > the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments, > immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not > waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. Only > PDF [1] and ODF [2] documents accepted, please do not send proprietary > formatted documents > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] http://www.adobe.com/ > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument
On 12/01/2018 05:00 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:> > There's an extensive email etiquette post somewhere on the net > explaining why setting 'reply-to' to the list is a bad idea. > > Reply-to is intended for the sender to explain that replies shouldn't > be sent to the obvious sending address, but to another address. > This is essential if, say, the sender is temporarily away from home and s using a friend's email service. > > It is unfortunate that there are user-agents that do not provide the > reply-to-list' option. And that there are mailing list programs that > do not provide the proper list-headers to indicate the mailing list > address. >The problem though is that then muscle memory with keyboard shortcuts result in reply going to the user instead of list. Netiquette posts are just someone's opinion, and they often don't take into account the vastly different way different types of minds work. Just as an example, I have a deaf friend who hates bottom posting because the way captions always work is equivalent to top posting - new content pops up above the old content, so the flow she expects is opposite but netiquette nazis scream at her when she top posts.
On 02/12/2018 01:09, Noel Butler wrote: [...]> all should go to list. Its also dumb when list admins dont set reply-toIt's quite the opposite.> list, the entire point of relying to a list, is, well, to the list)Sorry, but that tells us more more about the audience of such lists than you just intended to. If I want to answer to the list, I press the "reply-to-list" (or "reply-to-all") button. Sometimes I really just wants to reply privately. FWIW such bad behaviour of list-admins is usually called "reply-to munging" and https://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html should show why that is always a bad idea (and that a configuration option is actually a serious bug in any mailing software). Every sane MUA has separate "Reply to sender" and "Reply to list" buttons (or similar user-interface elements) for mails with RFC 2919/2369 headers - either directly or via some addons/plug-ins/extensions. If your MUA is not sane, change the MUA or edit the addresses by hand - your choice. MfG, Bernd -- Bernd Petrovitsch Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at LUGA : http://www.luga.at
On 02/12/2018 11:00, Hendrik Boom wrote:> There's an extensive email etiquette post somewhere on the net > explaining why setting 'reply-to' to the list is a bad idea.Lots of posts around about this, all self serving :) There may of course be an RFC floating around, but I admit to never having bothered to look, because good netizens reply to list, lists are public, they are for the masses - the membership - the subscriber base, never seen the point in replying privately to a list post, since the answer deprives the list membership of, the answer, so you avoid getting 1500 people ask the same damn question. -- Kind Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate, discuss, or reveal, any part, to anyone, without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments, immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. Only PDF [1] and ODF [2] documents accepted, please do not send proprietary formatted documents Links: ------ [1] http://www.adobe.com/ [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20181203/d5f11997/attachment.html>