🚀 go-pugleaf

Hi folks,

This is a response to a well thought out posting by
our wise sage clewis of BNR.CA (sorry, no real name came
through). I'm tossing my 2 cents in too. Look for the "SG:"
tags from my antique compuserve mail handler.

Seeya,
Steve Gallinger, ISP
CIPSnet

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From:   INTERNET:clewis@BNR.CA, INTERNET:clewis@BNR.CA
TO:     Multiple recipients of list CIPS-L, INTERNET:CIPS-L@UNB.CA
DATE:   12/30/95 3:41 PM
RE:     Re: Free Sex etc... how

In article <19951222.162533.780@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca>,
Adrian Powell  <CIPS-L@unb.ca> wrote:
>>The last comment on the use of PGP raises in my mind a question about
>>authenticating posts to CIPS-L.  Is it somehow possible to
...
...snippity snip stuff on posting & security & anti-spam tools
...
There are options here.

>There have been a couple of proposals to prevent spams such as this,
>but I've not seen one that is entirely satisfactory.  There
>are programs such as CancelMoose that hits Usenet and trys to block
>spams by canceling them, however this doesn't do much for mailing
>lists, where spams are more annoying.  One gentleman proposed
>some checks that majordomo should perform before forwarding, but
>they involved a few minor checks (which consumed a major amount
>of bandwidth and CPU time) that basically ensured that mail came from
>legitimate addresses.  However, most "good" spams have forged headers
>so they appear to come from legitimate addresses, so this won't
>work, even if it was practical.
>
>It looks like the only way to protect ourselves is to join moderated lists,
>flame spammers, and support cancel bots.

I thank you ;-)

Here are some simple things we could do:

        1) We all agree that SPAM is bad in CIPS-L, and as owner of CIPS-L,
           we authorize you to nuke any off-topic posting you feel
           like.  If you wish to do this, I can provide you with the
           appropriate software.  This is known as retroactive moderation.
SG: It sounds good to me...can we agree to give Mike MacDonald that authority?
SG: BTW, Mike may not have all that much time for stuff like this.
SG: If not you Mike, can you 'bless' another volunteer?

        2) We moderate can.org.cips and cips-l.  You reject any off-topic
           junk.
SG: That'll work until our dedicated volunteer says "Oh blech, enough is
SG: is enough" and moves on. Continuity can be difficult to achieve
SG: It has to high a workload for the benefit involved.

        3) We do (2), and, rather than have you see everything, mail
           each message off to one of a group of moderators.  This speeds
           things up.
SG: Co-ordination is mucho trouble and time. I vote against this option

        4) We do (2), and you put filters into the injector that looks
           for known junk patterns (I have millions of them ;-).

           This has the advantage of not slowing the group down - it's
           all automatic.
SG: Howzabout we do (1) and perhaps throw in filters when we get a
SG: blast of the fowl smelling spam (ie. on an ad-hoc basis). Is that
SG: do-able in the U.N.B. environment?