Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lking

You can say 'Think You'

Recommended Posts

My addy had come up in the rotation as the forged sender of spam. So for the next day or so I will collect the "Undelivered Mail" notices sent by uninformed Postmasters releaving the rest of you of that ho-hum duty. ;)

Given how often this comes up (here at least) I would think all the adm folks in the world would have changed their system settings.

Guess that is the beauty of the internet, like parenthood, there isn't qualification test to get started.

Edited by Lking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So for the next day or so I will collect the "Undelivered Mail" notices sent by uninformed Postmasters releaving the rest of you of that ho-hum duty. ;)
Thanks. I had that duty last week, of all things in the middle of a family emergency with very spotty internet access.

-- rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...So for the next day or so I will collect the "Undelivered Mail" notices sent by uninformed Postmasters releaving the rest of you of that ho-hum duty. ;)...
Think you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My addy had come up in the rotation as the forged sender of spam.

Boy do I wish for "the old days." The results from the 22nd were in the 10s. Results for today before I got tired of counting, about noon are:

spam -- 542

Undelivered Mail, spam rejections, etc. -- 6924

Now that is a personal high. Out of that I saw 13 "out of the office", a large number (100+) of C/R and maybe 1/3 of the bounces were 'spam rejects' per say. I was surprised at the number that were 'inbox full.' Also noted several that stated "You" have sent to many emails in the last ...

This all came to one of the default type addresses I have (postmaster, webmaster, etc.). I guess for managers of large systems or systems with high net visibility this is small potatoes. But a 10 fold increase over night sure got my attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spam -- 542

Undelivered Mail, spam rejections, etc. -- 6924

Whew! Those kinds of numbers call for a superfund cleanup!

First time this happened to me, I got about 4,000 bounces. The last time (a couple weeks ago), only a paltry few dozen. I'm wondering what would account for the difference, and I can only guess that it might just have been a much smaller spam run, and one concentrated on a specific part of the world (Russia).

-- rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...one concentrated on a specific part of the world (Russia).

Didn't count country of origin but, most seemed to be english (GB and US), fair number were German and French; Some asian (JP, and could have been Korean, Hong Kong). I didn't get many from Russia, etc.

Just my lucky day I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must really be my turn in the barrel! The spammers have stopped using one of my domain addresses and now started using another. The peak spam-bounce count is less than before but sure adds to the total noise level.

I am amazed at the number of "Out of the office" messages I'm getting in this wave. When I had a cubical "Out of the office" messages were almost grounds for dismissal. The underlying rule was ever client email would be answered within 24hrs. Kind of a 'If no ones reading your mail, don't bother to come back."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Must really be my turn in the barrel! The spammers have stopped using one of my domain addresses and now started using another. The peak spam-bounce count is less than before but sure adds to the total noise level.
Bummer
I am amazed at the number of "Out of the office" messages I'm getting in this wave.
That is unusual. They're still used a fair bit but usually on the basis of whitelisted addresses - and, though though that is fallible, any resultant leakage is sort of linear, rather than a 'scatter'. Some people must be relying on filtering instead and, as far as I can make out, any filtering will occasionally leak a bit.
When I had a cubical "Out of the office" messages were almost grounds for dismissal. The underlying rule was ever client email would be answered within 24hrs. Kind of a 'If no ones reading your mail, don't bother to come back."
Ah well, that's what happens when you work at the sharp end of the business Lou. These days you would take your whatchamacallit with you and answer your own over the VPN. Anyone who has time to answer your mail as well as their own would be deemed under-employed, allowing for vacation and leave of absence cover is so last century. But not everyone is front-line. Nah, I'm being cynical, most places I know use vacation cover as staff development. In that model, most of those OOs would be advising alternate contacts as well as "Back next Michaelmas."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah well, that's what happens when you work at the sharp end of the business Lou.
Yea and you know who's eye that sharp pointy thing was stuck in!

These days you would take your whatchamacallit with you and answer your own over the VPN.
Good point. Hadn't stopped to think how many lifetimes ago the experience was.

Anyone who has time to answer your mail as well as their own would be deemed under-employed, ...
Don't know about under-employed but surely under-payed not tech staff. They sorted emails/phone messages and passed them to tech staff based on who/what instructions. That bunch was a real client hand-holder. Based on their growth and profit margin, not a bad plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...That bunch was a real client hand-holder. Based on their growth and profit margin, not a bad plan.
Straying O/T but this IS the lounge ... yeah, a good model Lou. But, "horses for courses", noting (for instance) some say Google Inc. gets "120%" productivity by tasking their staff just 80% of office hours. Which (together with pay scales, profit share and benefits) makes them a very desirable employer. Which allows extraordinary selection standards. Which (exclusivity) makes them an even more desirable employer. Which ensures they can get the 'right' people - for their 'culture', their priorities and plans, their business(es). Which ultimately means they can afford the pay scales, profit share, benefits and (generally) employee lifestyle opportunities they support.

There are usually several (at least) potentially successful models & cultures for any circumstance, some harder to kick start than others, some easier to maintain than others, all having different risk, stress and reward profiles for customers, employees and other stakeholders (more than 9 dimensions right there and people say string theory is hard). It's not real easy and things keep changing :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, at last, maybe the fruits of sending unmunged complaints from work (outside of spamcop) - my work email address is being used in spam runs too, the uninformed bounces are starting to come in. Alternatively, I've been rather harsh with Chinese registrars of late, could be from that. But most likely just a contact address on a compromised machine in one of the less secure parts of the world I deal with.

Unexpected bonus - puzzling over SCbl listing of the work mail server over the past 3 weeks (only noticed that 4-5 days ago), so far only spamtrip hits, not getting much excitement from our tech contractor to fix it. But now, I'm starting to get informed bounces too - so far only System Administrator 'undeliverable' notices - since it seems one or more of the one or more things doing it is forging my address on the stuff which is actually going out from the correct server for that address (I'm reasonably sure I'm not spamming in my sleep, if I were I would be doing it from home - anyway, who sleeps?).

Neat, loads of evidence. When our tech guy gets excited. Yeah, I've given him all the reasons why he should get excited but he keeps muttering about 'simultaneous presence in mutiple locales is prohibited by the laws of sychronicity'. Okay, I just made that up, but I'm sure he would have muttered that, had he thought of it. Sounds better than "I'm bloody busy already!" To my ear, anyway. Well, both of them. Gotta cut down on the sugar. Or get some sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...I'm starting to get informed bounces too - so far only System Administrator 'undeliverable' notices - since it seems one or more of the one or more things doing it is forging my address on the stuff which is actually going out from the correct server for that address ...
Agh no - assumed those System Administrator undeliverables were coming from SMTP sessions, but I was relying too much on a 3rd party tool (PocketKnife Peek) which seemed to imply they were local/internal. Not so, using the Outlook "Options ..." selection reveals they are yet more backscatter, relating to spam sent from other servers, not ours. Except for a couple which have shed their receiving header detail and which are therefore indeterminate.

So we don't have the evidence of our phantom mailer yet. But SenderBase stats are picking up (rocketed up to 50/d :D)

...In the light of the late Grace Hopper, see the preview of a book written years back by Michio Kaku ... Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey through the 10th Dimension
Noted for when I get home. Trying to catch some sleep now. :D As if. Quick glance, it looks like my kind of stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Farelf' date='May 13 2008, 02:48 AM' post='64455

Except for a couple which have shed their receiving header detail and which are therefore indeterminate.

Speaking of uninformed bounces, as you were, I also fine the bounces with no info really frustrating. Ones where the only clue is 'mail sent to Ivan[at]xxx.ru'

I also see that viruses are still alive and well on the net. In the bounces I have gotten several copies of NetSky.P and Fujacks!html the last few days.

Off Topic - Grace Hopper was an interesting person and speaker. Heard her speak a couple of time. Still have one of her micro-sec long peaces of wire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just go an interesting bounce.

Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

From: Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON[at]ironport1.ssb.no

To: me[at]mine.com

message undeliverable reason 5.1.1

The attached spam was one of the current drug type

Subject: 81% off for john.d...

From: barnabas hoang <me[at]mine.com>

To: <john.d..[at]ssb.no>

I just thought the ironport sub domain was interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Off Topic - Grace Hopper was an interesting person and speaker. Heard her speak a couple of time. Still have one of her micro-sec long peaces of wire.
Yes she was - you would have some memories to cherish there. But 327 yards of wire? I think that may be a nanosecond length you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just go an interesting bounce.

Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

From: Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON[at]ironport1.ssb.no

BANETELE NORWAY BaneTele AS (formerly Enitel), Norway Norwegian commercial ISP. No wonder the Swedes whipped them back in the days of yore. But yeah, server name seems to say they are using some IronPort appliance, they need to add some IronPort management tools (or get a clue).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes she was - you would have some memories to cherish there. But 327 yards of wire? I think that may be a nanosecond length you have.

You are of course correct. I can carry it. :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off Topic - Grace Hopper was an interesting person and speaker. Heard her speak a couple of time. Still have one of her micro-sec long peaces of wire.
Years ago, some TV show did a piece on the Strategic Defense Initiative (aka "Star Wars"). The slant was to show what many folks at the time maintained, that the software required to do reliable and rapid automatic targeting was too complicated. They interviewed Commodore Hopper (retired at the time) and asked her about this. Her response was more or less that when she worked on creating COBOL back in the 1960s, she wanted to have a module that could scan the source code for problems -- I may have the details wrong, but the idea was something like Lint from hell (if you remember C Lint). I recall being amused at the notion of the SDI being coded in COBOL. Kinda like building a Formula One race car with wooden frame rails.

-- rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...I recall being amused at the notion of the SDI being coded in COBOL. Kinda like building a Formula One race car with wooden frame rails. ...
At the other extreme is the nightmare of national security being dependent on leading-edge commercial products where the source code can (and often does) contain any sort of nasty surprise. Milspec is milspec and that goes for processors and software in critical service. But yeah, the thought of COBOL running in a ballistics routine is amusing in a consciousness-expanding sort of way, a bit like Bob Shaw's "Wooden Spaceships" (SF novel in the "steampunk" sub genre).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the other extreme is the nightmare of national security being dependent on leading-edge commercial products where the source code can (and often does) contain any sort of nasty surprise. Milspec is milspec and that goes for processors and software in critical service.

Just be advised that not all "milspecs" get written up by folks with full knowledge of the concepts, materials, processes involved. In fact, numerous so called 'military specifications' also include the words, so as to cover the engineer's, office concerned, or even the Government itself just in case the specification isn't quite up to snuff ... "or best commercial practice"

On the other hand, there are certain items that carry much more specific standards, construction, materials, etc. Those things slated for flight, space, submarine, nuclear, and such. But those requirements / specifications aren't as much 'milspec' as they are mission specific criteria, typically going far beyond 'milspec' ....

I don't even want to talk about software, having suffered a long period of some fantastic flashbacks after reading Farelf's remarks. Not that it should came as any surprise, but the only thing I can think of that was worse than 'certifying software' was getting the documentation put together and meeting all the "milspecs" that were placed on the 'technical' manuals. (Pretty hard to consider them 'technical' when they were required to be written to the 5th grade level.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should check my various domains... I've had a few bounces from various other domains. I'm sure my 'postmaster' address has a few email messages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just be advised that not all "milspecs" get written up by folks with full knowledge of the concepts, materials, processes involved. In fact, numerous so called 'military specifications' also include the words, so as to cover the engineer's, office concerned, or even the Government itself just in case the specification isn't quite up to snuff ... "or best commercial practice"
I used to work (as a consultant) with the FAA back in the 1990s, when they were spending money like topsy and issuing lots of specs with very ambitious technical requirements (just like the DoD, if not worse).

We reviewed one spec they wrote which (to illustrate) said "the system shall square the circle, reverse entropy, and walk on water." We pointed out no one in industry was building anything like this, and that it would therefore require a very expensive development program. We encouraged them to see whether they could live with the commercial off-the-shelf ("COTS") offerings.

Next version of the spec came out, this time reading (again paraphrasing): "the system shall square the circle, reverse entropy, and walk on water, AND SHALL BE COTS."

-- rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Next version of the spec came out, this time reading (again paraphrasing): "the system shall square the circle, reverse entropy, and walk on water, AND SHALL BE COTS."
:lol: Not so much a specification then, as a 'log of claims', to borrow a term from the IR (Industrial Relations) world hereabouts (= Labor Relations, more or less, except we would spell it 'Labour' and if any red-ragger were to be caught actually performing work/labour ... but I digress and reveal my prejudices belike). Wish lists are fine but they're not well adapted to specify critical components of systems meant to assure the function, reliability and service life of assets to which people routinely entrust their lives. IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wish lists are fine but they're not well adapted to specify critical components of systems meant to assure the function, reliability and service life of assets to which people routinely entrust their lives. IMO.

Aaaarrrgghh! Reality issues galore there. When one has to deal with the fact that the timeframe between the "Requirements Document" that conjectures the (possible future) need and the resulting system that (might actually) gets fielded could be anywhere from 10 to 20 years, one can't help but pack the specifications with (what appear to be) 'wish-list' items <g> As in rconner's situation, you'd be looking at the FAA trying to come up with replacements for 50's/60's/70's vintage equipment made to handle the anticipated changes and traffic situations conjectured to exist in the 2000's.

Not that it's exactly in the same vein, but ... look at Arthur C. Clark's sci-fi description of instant world-wide communcations, using those unbeleivable things like satellites. Even his much-conjectured scenario of world-wide 'free telephone' communications is almost there, if one goes with the hype of the MagicJack at only $19 U.S./year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×