Re: Anti-spam Working Group

[Gunnar Lindberg <]

Since I was stupid enough not to save the .de.uu.net person's mail-
address (Kerstin ?) I actually though I'll just delete the spam and
go on with life. But, since the question is brought up again I'll
send it to the entire list and point out an "interesting problem":

    From janet689@localhost  Fri Sep  4 06:16:42 1998
    Return-Path: janet689@localhost
    Received: from animal.cs.chalmers.se
       (animal.cs.chalmers.se [129.16.225.30])
       by wentzl.cdg.chalmers.se (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id GAA19050
       for lindberg@localhost;
       Fri, 4 Sep 1998 06:16:42 +0200 (MET DST)
    From: janet689@localhost
    Received: from hex.de.uu.net (hex.de.uu.net [192.76.144.27])
	by animal.cs.chalmers.se (8.8.5/8.8.5)
	with ESMTP id GAA00279
	for Lindberg@localhost;
	Fri, 4 Sep 1998 06:16:40 +0200 (MET DST)
    Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 06:08:58 +0200 (MET DST)
    Message-Id: <199809040408.GAA24731@localhost
    Received: from x
	(1Cust215.tnt5.nyc3.da.uu.net [153.37.117.215]:1070)
	by hex.de.uu.net with SMTP (5.65+:004/3.0.2)
	id GAA24731; Fri, 4 Sep 1998 06:08:58 +0200 (MET DST)
    Subject: They Can Even Steal Your Identity!
    Status: R

    ARE YOU BEING INVESTIGATED?

    Has your personal and credit information been stolen?  Has someone
    assumed your identity?
    ...

This one almost certainly originated at UUNET in the US. It has then
been relayed by UUNET Germany, hex.de.uu.net, to my .forward.

So, UUNET Europe folks, can you refuse to act as Mail Relay for hosts
(dialup etc) at UUNET US? If so, please do!

	Gunnar Lindberg

PS
    MX(de.uu.net) = intramail.de.uu.net
    220 seismo.de.uu.net ESMTP (5.61c:012/UUNETdeLAN-2.1a15-1.2.10)

    Received: ... by hex.de.uu.net with SMTP (5.65+:004/3.0.2)

    5.61c, 5.65+ - Yupp, those were the days... 50% :-).
								    DS

>From owner-anti-spam-wg@localhost  Mon Sep  7 13:38:22 1998
>Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 20:20:02 +0100 (BST)
>From: Chuck Foster <Chuck.Foster@localhost
>Subject: Re: Anti-spam Working Group

>On Wed, 2 Sep 1998, Corneliu Tanasa wrote:
>> I agree.  Also, you could add to your spam relay list .kr and .mx and
>> also UU.NET.  Do you suggest to cut UUNET (however I will agree :-) ) ? 
>> I've sent lots of messages to UUnet, asking them to stop the spammers, 
>> but it was like shooting in the dark: no answer and no action !!!

>If you've found that UUNET UK have been remiss in responding to a spam
>report sent to us then I hope you'll let us know about it! As Kerstin
>points out, UUNET operating companies do have their own terms and
>conditions, and mechanisms in place to deal with network abuse.

>Regards,
>Chuck