Spam and Newsgroups Question

[Tom Nakashima]

Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
who don't use the newsgroups?
-tom

[Paul Southworth]

In article >,
Tom Nakashima > wrote:
>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Absolutely, every Usenet article is scanned by harvesters for addresses.
It's just like putting your email address on a public web page.

--Paul

[Paul Southworth]

In article >,
Tom Nakashima > wrote:
>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Absolutely, every Usenet article is scanned by harvesters for addresses.
It's just like putting your email address on a public web page.

--Paul

[S o r n i]

Tom Nakashima wrote:
> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail"
> than ones who don't use the newsgroups?

I'd guess that the ones who use their valid e-mail addresses do -- and so
probably do those who fudge 'em with common things like "nospam" or
whatever.

Then again, I know quite a few people who get TONS of spam daily, and do
/not/ read newsgroups at all (AFAIK).

Bill "no help whatsoever" S.

[S o r n i]

Tom Nakashima wrote:
> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail"
> than ones who don't use the newsgroups?

I'd guess that the ones who use their valid e-mail addresses do -- and so
probably do those who fudge 'em with common things like "nospam" or
whatever.

Then again, I know quite a few people who get TONS of spam daily, and do
/not/ read newsgroups at all (AFAIK).

Bill "no help whatsoever" S.

[ZeeExSixAre]

sittingduck wrote:
> "Tom Nakashima" > wrote:
>
>> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail"
>> than ones who do
>
> If you use your real address you will.
>
> I like using www.spamgourmet.com. They will forward a specified # of
> emails to you, keeping your real email hidden.
>
> www.mailinator.com is very handy for sites that require email for
> sign-up. You can create then go
> check it, it lasts for just a few hours.
>
> With the tools that are available now, you can keep certain addresses
> very private now.


Even if you dont' keep it that private, spam even through hotmail is pretty
good. They seem to have gotten the spam filters pretty well and have
filtered out (correctly) nearly all my spam. I receive about one or two
spams per week.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

[ZeeExSixAre]

sittingduck wrote:
> "Tom Nakashima" > wrote:
>
>> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail"
>> than ones who do
>
> If you use your real address you will.
>
> I like using www.spamgourmet.com. They will forward a specified # of
> emails to you, keeping your real email hidden.
>
> www.mailinator.com is very handy for sites that require email for
> sign-up. You can create then go
> check it, it lasts for just a few hours.
>
> With the tools that are available now, you can keep certain addresses
> very private now.


Even if you dont' keep it that private, spam even through hotmail is pretty
good. They seem to have gotten the spam filters pretty well and have
filtered out (correctly) nearly all my spam. I receive about one or two
spams per week.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/
>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Only if they put their email addresses in postings.

--
PeteCresswell

[(Pete Cresswell)]

RE/
>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Only if they put their email addresses in postings.

--
PeteCresswell

[Werehatrack]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:24:42 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
> may have said:

>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Yes, generally.

More information here:

http://tinyurl.com/25xxz

original URL:

om&lr=&hl=en


--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:24:42 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
> may have said:

>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Yes, generally.

More information here:

http://tinyurl.com/25xxz

original URL:

om&lr=&hl=en


--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[G.T.]

Tom Nakashima wrote:
> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
> who don't use the newsgroups?

Of course. When I changed ISPs recently I set up 7 accounts, the only one
that is receiving spam is my Usenet account which is this one. I don't
like obsfucating my address so I'll just use temp ones if the spam gets to
be too much.

Greg

[G.T.]

Tom Nakashima wrote:
> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
> who don't use the newsgroups?

Of course. When I changed ISPs recently I set up 7 accounts, the only one
that is receiving spam is my Usenet account which is this one. I don't
like obsfucating my address so I'll just use temp ones if the spam gets to
be too much.

Greg

[Rick Onanian]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:24:42 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
> wrote:
>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Counterintuitively, the address I use [unmunged] for posting to
these newsfroups gets less spam than other addresses. It does,
however, get a lot more viruses, worms, and other malicious code.
--
Rick Onanian

[Rick Onanian]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:24:42 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
> wrote:
>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>who don't use the newsgroups?

Counterintuitively, the address I use [unmunged] for posting to
these newsfroups gets less spam than other addresses. It does,
however, get a lot more viruses, worms, and other malicious code.
--
Rick Onanian

[Werehatrack]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 08:37:47 -0400, Rick Onanian >
may have said:

>On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:24:42 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
> wrote:
>>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>>who don't use the newsgroups?
>
>Counterintuitively, the address I use [unmunged] for posting to
>these newsfroups gets less spam than other addresses. It does,
>however, get a lot more viruses, worms, and other malicious code.

I believe that you commented once that the spammers may be removing
the "spam" from the string on the mistaken assumption that it's a
munging inclusion. The Swen worm, on the other hand, harvests and
pounds blindly at any address it finds in Usenet headers.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Werehatrack]

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 08:37:47 -0400, Rick Onanian >
may have said:

>On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:24:42 -0700, "Tom Nakashima"
> wrote:
>>Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
>>who don't use the newsgroups?
>
>Counterintuitively, the address I use [unmunged] for posting to
>these newsfroups gets less spam than other addresses. It does,
>however, get a lot more viruses, worms, and other malicious code.

I believe that you commented once that the spammers may be removing
the "spam" from the string on the mistaken assumption that it's a
munging inclusion. The Swen worm, on the other hand, harvests and
pounds blindly at any address it finds in Usenet headers.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Zog The Undeniable]

Tom Nakashima wrote:

> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
> who don't use the newsgroups?
> -tom
>
>
Lots - hence the Yahoo! address which is pretty well spamtrapped,
although it does work, honest. As for the pseudonym - that's just to
protect myself from future employers etc.

[Zog The Undeniable]

Tom Nakashima wrote:

> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail" than ones
> who don't use the newsgroups?
> -tom
>
>
Lots - hence the Yahoo! address which is pretty well spamtrapped,
although it does work, honest. As for the pseudonym - that's just to
protect myself from future employers etc.

[LioNiNoiL_a t_NetscapE_D 0 T_NeT]

> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail"
> than ones who don't use the newsgroups?

There seems to be plenty of evidence showing that to be the case, which
is why I munge my e-mail address [to foil automated spambots], which has
the added bonus of eliminating e-mail from those n00bs who are too
clueless to figure it out.

[LioNiNoiL_a t_NetscapE_D 0 T_NeT]

> Anyone know if people who use the newsgroups get more "spam mail"
> than ones who don't use the newsgroups?

There seems to be plenty of evidence showing that to be the case, which
is why I munge my e-mail address [to foil automated spambots], which has
the added bonus of eliminating e-mail from those n00bs who are too
clueless to figure it out.