Jump to content

Newsgroup spam (supposedly)


Farelf
 Share

Recommended Posts

New variety for me - appear to be NG subscriptions or similar (don't know, don't use 'em) or bounces of same. May be of relevance seeing there was an instance of misreporting mentioned in these forums just recently. Anyway, chunks of chatter with (I see) a payload consisting of a link to an image-hosting site (well-buried in the body, sheesh they want their victims to work for their "reward") but apart from the detail of delivery just plain old spam to me. Hmm ... that image insertion doesn't even fit in with the flow. Lovingly crafted? Like Dr. Frankenstein's monster. Trusting the parser on these:

[links pulled for the moment while I work out why those reports were unmunged]

Well, danged if I know. Preferences are intact and when I view the report in members.spamcop.net all looks okay but displaying the full message (action=display) my "real address" is unmunged in the top "Delivered-To:". No problem, not public, but I could have sworn it was the same when I posted the tracking URLs and that certainly shouldn't be the case then. Trying again:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z1305326744z2...;action=display

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z1305332309z6...;action=display

They're fine - just confused myself, it seems, must have posted the wrong links first time (and not noticed even when I saw the "symptoms"). Bear with me.

Edited by Farelf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My "address book / .wab file" is on the dead computer, but there was a bit of concern at first glance of the same 'exposure' issue .. seems like a bit of a random-function was applied to the addresses .... (in the first one, anyway ...)

Here's my take on what I see ... all the 'newsgroup' stuff you're talking about isn't actually meant to be 'seen' ... note that it's all wrapped up by < style > xxxx < / style > HTML markers, with the Context-Type: HTML (for the most part) .... so, with an HTML enabled e-mail reader, the thought was apparently that all that extra crap would be 'ate' by the 'style' tags, leaving 'only' the URL as the displayed e-mail Body data ...

How many e-mail clients this would actually work on these days, I don't know ... wouldn't work here due to the "Read as Plain-Text" settings .....

The parser didn't pick it up as the actual HTML construct sucks ....

NOTE: I actually got sidetracked a bit when I found that I didn't have a link for members ... and then found that I can't login there anyway .. hmmmmm .... tried an https: link and then ran into a database error .... not sure whether to go with IronPort folks still 'fixing' things or that an Admin somewhere has reached out a bit and ..... naw, he wouldn't do that, would he ...???? Just leave that as over a half-dozen e-mails not replied to .....

NOTE II: OK, silly me .. mailsc URL works fine ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Here's my take on what I see ... all the 'newsgroup' stuff you're talking about isn't actually meant to be 'seen' ... note that it's all wrapped up by < style > xxxx < / style > HTML markers, with the Context-Type: HTML (for the most part) .... so, with an HTML enabled e-mail reader, the thought was apparently that all that extra crap would be 'ate' by the 'style' tags, leaving 'only' the URL as the displayed e-mail Body data ...
Interesting - thanks for the insight, that never occurred to me. My concern is/was that some reporters might get taken in by the assorted bogosity in all its spuriousness and be inclined to add some mistaken reporting on the basis of the fake lines. But if that stuff isn't even intended to be seen ... well reprters would mostly be looking at the revealed source and, like me, ignore that great chunks of it "should be" hidden. The message is, trust the parse in the first instance, look very carefully before adding reports.
...The parser didn't pick it up as the actual HTML construct sucks ....
Yes, that disappointed me too but progress seems to be intermittent with that. Not sure if the current effort is retrograde or simply in line with recent results.
... mailsc URL works fine ...
Thank goodness for that. Fighting spammers is bad enough, fighting SC at the same time would be a touch tragic.

Thinking along those lines and well O/T otherwise but heck, this is the lounge.

“Punishment Sir!”

A US Air Force C-130 was scheduled to leave Thule Air Base, Greenland at midnight. During the pilot's preflight check, he discovers that the latrine holding tank is still full from the last flight. So a message is sent to the base and an airman who was off duty is called out to take care of it. The young man finally gets to the air base and makes his way to the aircraft only to find that the latrine pump truck has been left outdoors and is frozen solid, so he must find another one in the hangar, which takes even more time. He returns to the aircraft and is less than enthusiastic about what he has to do.

Nevertheless, he goes about the pumping job deliberately and carefully (and slowly) so as not to risk criticism later. As he's leaving the plane, the pilot stops him and says, "Son, your attitude and performance has caused this flight to be late and I'm going to personally see to it that you are not just reprimanded but punished."

Shivering in the cold, his task finished, he takes a deep breath, stands up tall and says, "Sir, with all due respect, I'm not your son; I'm an Airman in the United States Air Force. I've been in Thule, Greenland, for 11 months without any leave, and reindeers' asses are beginning to look pretty good to me. I have one stripe; it's two-thirty in the morning, the temperature is 40 degrees below zero, and my job here is to pump sh*t out of an aircraft. Now, just exactly what form of punishment did you have in mind?"

Well, TG for the Army. And SpamCop.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, TG for the Army.

Minor detail, the U.S. Air Force become its 'own' service back in 1947

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Air_Forces

But, oh yeah, I've gotten to deal with officers like that depicted myself <g>

Recall a Captain, promoted early for whatever reasons, good grades, if nothing else ... anyway, caught him chewing out one of my tropps over something basically silly, something like two minutes over the allotted time for lunch break .... walked over, interrupted his speech, invited my guy to get back to work ... then pulled out my 'little black book' .. flipped through a few pages, and started reading off some times, dates, numbers, and details of this particular officer's violations of exactly that same 'rule' (he'd gotten into a health kick and started running over the lunch break, the changing clothes, taking a shower, etc. routine took him well over that allotted time three days a week) ... tossed out a couple of reminders of the thing called 'chain-of-command'noting that he should have been chewing me out rather than the troop .....

The Captain stopped me after a bit and pointed out that in his training, it was a 'known fact' that 'running a little black book' was illegal. I looked down at my collar, ran my finger over the stripes found there, and answered with ... "Yes ..... and the question is ...??????"

It took him the longest time to come up with an answer <g>

Single word, sounded just like "Dismissed" if you removed all those extra sounds of self-strangulation going on n the background <g>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh, yes, there are some "beauts" amongst those officers and gentlemen, bless 'em.

Minor detail, the U.S. Air Force become its 'own' service back in 1947
Yes, I know (well, didn't have the actual year at my fingertips, thanks). That's what I meant, the Air Force officer being such a twit (being polite), TG there's that "other service". Though, as you remind us, it has its share of twits too.

The division of Army and Air Force is perhaps more stongly part of the psyche here, we tend to think of them as "always" being separate - like the RAAF formed in 1921 from the former Australian Flying Corps (which started in 1910, or 1901 if you count the Engineers' balloonists and being a former sapper I do tend to count it :D). The RAF formed even earlier, in 1918, out of the RFC; many pilots (and crew, I guess) from the dominions served in/with the RAF so to all practical intents the division actually goes back that far as a background to the Army/Air Force thing. Unless/until I turn my brain on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stripes on collar? I don't understand. Searches unforthcoming (or interrogation ineffective).

Back in those days, that's where the rank insignia was worn on the 'duty' uniform. "Stripes" signifying that I was a simple enlisted guy, totally bereft of the benefits of his West Point Academy 'training' this Captain had enjoyed ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...