nanog mailing list archives
Re: anti-spam vs network abuse
From: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam () noc everquick net>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 23:18:21 +0000 (GMT)
AD> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:54:47 -0500 (EST) AD> From: Andy Dills AD> You don't have to. This is why I never understood why people AD> care so much about probing. If you do a good job with your AD> network, probing will have zero affect on you. All the person Actually, when one leaves honeypots and/or tarpits, getting probed can be rather fun... Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist () brics com> To: blacklist () brics com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist () brics com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
Current thread:
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse, (continued)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Charlie Clemmer (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Andy Dills (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Len Rose (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Rob Thomas (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Charlie Clemmer (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse E.B. Dreger (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Richard Irving (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Roy (Feb 28)
- Re: anti-spam vs network abuse Paul Vixie (Feb 28)