I have been spammed from...

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by whoisthis, Dec 27, 2004.

  1. whoisthis

    whoisthis Guest

    these people have spammed me

































































































































    ----





























     
    whoisthis, Dec 27, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. whoisthis

    qwerty Guest

    You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    been used.

    Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    their own emails in their spam email lists.

    So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    think it all acheive anything.
     
    qwerty, Dec 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. whoisthis

    qwerty Guest

    You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    been used.

    Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    their own emails in their spam email lists.

    So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    think it all acheive anything.
     
    qwerty, Dec 27, 2004
    #3
  4. whoisthis

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    "qwerty" <> wrote:

    > You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    > have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    > made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    > been used.
    >
    > Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    > their own emails in their spam email lists.
    >
    > So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    > think it all acheive anything.
    >
    >


    There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    buried within the html email.
     
    whoisthis, Dec 27, 2004
    #4
  5. whoisthis

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    "qwerty" <> wrote:

    > You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    > have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    > made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    > been used.
    >
    > Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    > their own emails in their spam email lists.
    >
    > So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    > think it all acheive anything.
    >
    >


    There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    buried within the html email.
     
    whoisthis, Dec 27, 2004
    #5
  6. whoisthis

    Steve Guest

    whoisthis wrote:
    > In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    > "qwerty" <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    >>have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    >>made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    >>been used.
    >>
    >>Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    >>their own emails in their spam email lists.
    >>
    >>So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    >>think it all acheive anything.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    > buried within the html email.

    The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    the true sender.

    see rfc 2821.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Dec 27, 2004
    #6
  7. whoisthis

    Steve Guest

    whoisthis wrote:
    > In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    > "qwerty" <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    >>have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    >>made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    >>been used.
    >>
    >>Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    >>their own emails in their spam email lists.
    >>
    >>So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    >>think it all acheive anything.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    > buried within the html email.

    The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    the true sender.

    see rfc 2821.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Dec 27, 2004
    #7
  8. whoisthis

    Enkidu Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:04:10 +1300, Steve <> wrote:

    >whoisthis wrote:
    >> In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    >> "qwerty" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    >>>have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    >>>made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    >>>been used.
    >>>
    >>>Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    >>>their own emails in their spam email lists.
    >>>
    >>>So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    >>>think it all acheive anything.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    >> buried within the html email.

    >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    >the true sender.
    >

    That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!

    Cheers,

    Cliff
    --

    The National Party manifesto can be viewed here:

    http://www.labour.org.nz/policy/index.html
     
    Enkidu, Dec 27, 2004
    #8
  9. whoisthis

    Enkidu Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:04:10 +1300, Steve <> wrote:

    >whoisthis wrote:
    >> In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    >> "qwerty" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    >>>have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    >>>made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    >>>been used.
    >>>
    >>>Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    >>>their own emails in their spam email lists.
    >>>
    >>>So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    >>>think it all acheive anything.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    >> buried within the html email.

    >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    >the true sender.
    >

    That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!

    Cheers,

    Cliff
    --

    The National Party manifesto can be viewed here:

    http://www.labour.org.nz/policy/index.html
     
    Enkidu, Dec 27, 2004
    #9
  10. whoisthis

    Alex Axolotl Guest

    whoisthis wrote:

    > these people have spammed me
    >

    <snip>

    My deepest sympathy.
    Why don't you post this to a different group instead of here ?
    Please ?
    Pretty please ?
    Nicely ?
     
    Alex Axolotl, Dec 28, 2004
    #10
  11. whoisthis

    Alex Axolotl Guest

    whoisthis wrote:

    > these people have spammed me
    >

    <snip>

    My deepest sympathy.
    Why don't you post this to a different group instead of here ?
    Please ?
    Pretty please ?
    Nicely ?
     
    Alex Axolotl, Dec 28, 2004
    #11
  12. whoisthis

    qwerty Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:04:10 +1300, Steve <> wrote:
    >
    > >whoisthis wrote:
    > >> In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    > >> "qwerty" <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    > >>>have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    > >>>made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    > >>>been used.
    > >>>
    > >>>Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    > >>>their own emails in their spam email lists.
    > >>>
    > >>>So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    > >>>think it all acheive anything.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    > >> buried within the html email.

    > >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    > >the true sender.
    > >

    > That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    > the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!
    >

    well no... mostly they direct people to temp websites.
     
    qwerty, Dec 28, 2004
    #12
  13. whoisthis

    qwerty Guest

    "Enkidu" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:04:10 +1300, Steve <> wrote:
    >
    > >whoisthis wrote:
    > >> In article <BqQzd.2829$>,
    > >> "qwerty" <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>You don't understand SPAM do you ? Real spam doesn't
    > >>>have valid email addresses to reply to. They are either fake
    > >>>made up or some poor innocent person who's email has
    > >>>been used.
    > >>>
    > >>>Also do you really think SPAMMERS would include
    > >>>their own emails in their spam email lists.
    > >>>
    > >>>So really whats the use of posting them here? I don't
    > >>>think it all acheive anything.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> There were not the "reply to:" or "From:" headers, they were emails
    > >> buried within the html email.

    > >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    > >the true sender.
    > >

    > That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    > the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!
    >

    well no... mostly they direct people to temp websites.
     
    qwerty, Dec 28, 2004
    #13
  14. whoisthis

    Alden Bates Guest

    Alex Axolotl <> wrote:

    >My deepest sympathy.
    >Why don't you post this to a different group instead of here ?
    >Please ?
    >Pretty please ?
    >Nicely ?


    Posting it to a porn newsgroup is likely to get more and more
    interesting spam sent to them, I'd wager.

    Alden
    --
    http://www.tetrap.com
     
    Alden Bates, Dec 28, 2004
    #14
  15. whoisthis

    Alden Bates Guest

    Alex Axolotl <> wrote:

    >My deepest sympathy.
    >Why don't you post this to a different group instead of here ?
    >Please ?
    >Pretty please ?
    >Nicely ?


    Posting it to a porn newsgroup is likely to get more and more
    interesting spam sent to them, I'd wager.

    Alden
    --
    http://www.tetrap.com
     
    Alden Bates, Dec 28, 2004
    #15
  16. On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:08:17 +1300, Alden Bates <>
    wrote in <news:>:

    > Alex Axolotl <> wrote:
    >
    >>My deepest sympathy.
    >>Why don't you post this to a different group instead of here ?
    >>Please ?
    >>Pretty please ?
    >>Nicely ?

    >
    > Posting it to a porn newsgroup is likely to get more and more
    > interesting spam sent to them, I'd wager.
    >
    > Alden


    "Interesting" as in "May you live in 'interesting' times!"

    --
    Regards,
    Nicolaas.
     
    Nicolaas Hawkins, Dec 28, 2004
    #16
  17. On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:08:17 +1300, Alden Bates <>
    wrote in <news:>:

    > Alex Axolotl <> wrote:
    >
    >>My deepest sympathy.
    >>Why don't you post this to a different group instead of here ?
    >>Please ?
    >>Pretty please ?
    >>Nicely ?

    >
    > Posting it to a porn newsgroup is likely to get more and more
    > interesting spam sent to them, I'd wager.
    >
    > Alden


    "Interesting" as in "May you live in 'interesting' times!"

    --
    Regards,
    Nicolaas.
     
    Nicolaas Hawkins, Dec 28, 2004
    #17
  18. whoisthis

    Ralph Fox Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:34:49 +1300, in message
    <>, Enkidu wrote:

    > >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    > >the true sender.
    > >

    > That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    > the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!


    The addresses in the body might be for purposes other than getting
    custom. Here are two examples:


    1. An opt-out email address:

    | To be removed from further mailings, send an email to lid

    Take a look at the OP's list for an email address similar to the above.

    2. An email address found in HTML code similar to this...

    | <img src="http://foo.invalid/spacer.gif?isrcvd=" width=1 height=1 alt="">

    I get HTML spam addressed to multiple addresses. Some of this spam
    contains HTML code like the above to verify the address of one of
    the recipients -- usually the first recipient, & often not me but
    somebody else.


    --
    Cheers,
    Ralph

    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." -- Thomas Paine
     
    Ralph Fox, Dec 28, 2004
    #18
  19. whoisthis

    Ralph Fox Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:34:49 +1300, in message
    <>, Enkidu wrote:

    > >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    > >the true sender.
    > >

    > That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    > the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!


    The addresses in the body might be for purposes other than getting
    custom. Here are two examples:


    1. An opt-out email address:

    | To be removed from further mailings, send an email to lid

    Take a look at the OP's list for an email address similar to the above.

    2. An email address found in HTML code similar to this...

    | <img src="http://foo.invalid/spacer.gif?isrcvd=" width=1 height=1 alt="">

    I get HTML spam addressed to multiple addresses. Some of this spam
    contains HTML code like the above to verify the address of one of
    the recipients -- usually the first recipient, & often not me but
    somebody else.


    --
    Cheers,
    Ralph

    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." -- Thomas Paine
     
    Ralph Fox, Dec 28, 2004
    #19
  20. whoisthis

    Enkidu Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:16:38 +0000, Ralph Fox
    <-echo.invalid> wrote:

    >On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:34:49 +1300, in message
    ><>, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >> >The headers and content of an email need bear absolutely no relation to
    >> >the true sender.
    >> >

    >> That's true, but if they put fake email addressess in the *body* of
    >> the SPAM, they are unlikely to get any custom!

    >
    >The addresses in the body might be for purposes other than getting
    >custom. Here are two examples:
    >
    >
    >1. An opt-out email address:
    >
    >| To be removed from further mailings, send an email to lid
    >
    > Take a look at the OP's list for an email address similar to the above.
    >
    >2. An email address found in HTML code similar to this...
    >
    >| <img src="http://foo.invalid/spacer.gif?isrcvd=" width=1 height=1 alt="">
    >
    > I get HTML spam addressed to multiple addresses. Some of this spam
    > contains HTML code like the above to verify the address of one of
    > the recipients -- usually the first recipient, & often not me but
    > somebody else.


    Oh, thanks very much for posting my *unmunged* email address! If I
    get any emails addressed to the address variant above, I'll know why
    and I'll be comin' to getcha!!!!

    Cheers,

    Cliff
    --

    The National Party manifesto can be viewed here:

    http://www.labour.org.nz/policy/index.html
     
    Enkidu, Dec 28, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Thund3rstruck

    Got spammed from someone at charter.net...(rant)

    Thund3rstruck, Nov 22, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    2,610
    NewKillerStar
    Nov 23, 2003
  2. Geronimo
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    381
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Oct 28, 2004
  3. Collector»NZ

    Anyone been spammed by Netlinks NZ

    Collector»NZ, Dec 7, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    668
    Collector»NZ
    Dec 15, 2004
  4. Who Am I

    Just been spammed by fitnessgear.co.nz

    Who Am I, Oct 21, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    566
    whoisthis
    Oct 26, 2005
  5. Craig Whitmore

    Have you been spammed by...

    Craig Whitmore, Mar 3, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    347
    Craig Whitmore
    Mar 3, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page