__/ [ William Poaster ] on Monday 04 September 2006 08:56 \__
> This message was posted on Usenet, NOT JLAforums, & on Mon, 04 Sep 2006
> 06:12:23 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Just been receiving messages like (fragment):
>>
>> ===
>> SMTP error from remote mail server after MAIL FROM:<<MY ADDRESS>>:
>> host <<REMOTE_MAIL_DAEMON>> [IP ADDRESS]: 553 5.3.0 Message from
>> 130.88.200.93 rejected based on external blacklist - See also
>> http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml
>> ===
>>
>> Going to Spamcop to run a quick lookup:
>>
>> ===
>> 130.88.200.93 listed in bl.spamcop.net (127.0.0.2)
>>
>> If there are no reports of ongoing objectionable email from this system it
>> will be delisted automatically in approximately 14 hours. Causes of
>> listing
>>
>> * System has sent mail to SpamCop spam traps in the past week (spam
>> traps
>> are secret, no reports or evidence are provided by SpamCop)
>> * SpamCop users have reported system as a source of spam less than 10
>> times in the past week
>>
>> Automatic delisting
>> If you are the administrator of serenity.mcc.ac.uk and you are sure it
>> will not be the subject of any more reports of spam, you may cause the
>> system to be delisted without waiting for us to review the issue.
>>
>> You may only do this once per IP! So please be sure that the problem is
>> really and truly resolved. If you delist your system and we get more spam
>> reports about it, you will not be allowed to expedite delisting again.
>> Delisting normally occurs 24 hours after spam reports have ceased.
>>
>> You must be able to receive mail at one of the addresses below. Until you
>> have received and confirmed your request, it will not take effect.
>>
>> Looking for potential administrative email addresses for 130.88.200.93:
>>
>> 130.88.200.93 is an mx ( 0 ) for serenity.mcc.ac.uk 130.88.200.143 is
>> an mx ( 1 ) for mcc.ac.uk
>> ===
>>
>> Just informed the postmaster.
>>
>> But here is the point to make:
>>
>> * Some student and staff on compus still use Windows * They waste IT
>> staff's time and effort * Their software licences drain the University
>> budget(1) * With maware/spyware and viruses(2) - they raise the level of
>> traffic on the network, thus slowing it down
>> * Their computers get hijacked and send SPAM(3) to everyone (Linux users
>> included)
>> * Their computers attack Web sites and enable criminals to demand ransoms
>> and raise hosting fees (for all of us)
>> * They get our outgoing mail server blacklisted, making communication
>> harder for everyone
>
> Fortunately my ISP uses the SPEWS blacklist for email filtering,
> (http://www.spews.org) so I hardly see any spam. I also do not use my real
> email address anywhere on Usenet (as you know). Consequently, because of
> those two things, I maybe get one spam email in three or four months (&
> that may slip through my GMX email address). :-)
>
>> To anyone who argues that Linux users are bitter, these may be some among
>> many reasons. There is no reason why money should be spent maintaining,
>> protecting, resending, and purging.
>
> I agree, none at all.
>
>> That's just Microsoft's' gift to the world. And it's getting worse every
>> day.
>
> As far as security on M$ Winders goes, Joe Public hasn't a clue, hence
> all the zombied machines. Another thing too, ATM there is a promotional ad
> on tv for (Dixon's) PCWorld for Tom-Tom & for a *wireless* Netgear router.
> Would you like to bet that there are no instructions & warnings about
> setting the thing up *securely*?
> So the average "Joe Public" gets his wireless equipment home, plugs in
> etc, & starts surfing completely oblivious that he broadcasting to all &
> sundry.
>
> Wanna bet too that there is NO warning in the package about how easy
> wireless (WEP) is to crack *if* it's not set up properly?
>
>> ___
>> (1) That must be well over a million pounds, which could help lecturers
>> get a decent wage. There is equally-capable free open source software,
>> which encourages collaboration -- a key area in research and learning. (
>
>> 2) 9 in 10 Windows PC's is infected with spyware. (
>
>
>>3) 80% of all SPAM is sent from hijacked Windows PC's.
Thanks for the references below. I left links out and used the most
optimistic figure (among more mouth-gaping statistics). Recent figures
suggest that, only 2 weeks ago, the number of Windows zombie rose by 20%.
That was in a _single week_.
> Yes. An old article, but still valid:-
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/04/trojan_spam_study/
>
> A bit newer:-
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4369891.stm
>
> At present:-
> http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39281508,00.htm
>
> I have no doubt the "Windows Apologists" will start making excuses about
> all this.
How long before we see threads like:
"My college doesn't permit Windows"
... the Dean says It ruins the network and becomes a support nightmare, which
costs too much.
Time will tell. That day will come.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Windows is 'intuitive': go to 'Start' to finish session
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 514480k total, 476760k used, 37720k free, 7504k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
