Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

Expand Messages
  • Dave Dittrich
    ... I assumed human addressed email, or valid email messages to this list. ... Ditto. And the validation of email stats was beyond the call of duty. (I ve
    Message 1 of 27 , Mar 27, 2007
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Steve Fowler wrote:
      > BTW, I'm not familiar with "HAM" in this context! What's that?

      I assumed "human addressed email," or valid email messages to this list.

      > Your service and your effort has been and is greatly appreciated.

      Ditto. And the validation of email stats was beyond the call of duty.
      (I've just been hitting "d" a lot.)

      --
      Dave Dittrich Information Assurance Researcher,
      dittrich@... The iSchool
      http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich University of Washington

      PGP key http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/pgpkey.txt
      Fingerprint FE97 0C57 0843 F3EB 49A1 0CD0 8E0C D0BE C838 CCB5
    • Dave Dittrich
      ... I assumed human addressed email, or valid email messages to this list. ... Ditto. And the validation of email stats was beyond the call of duty. (I ve
      Message 2 of 27 , Mar 27, 2007
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Steve Fowler wrote:
        > BTW, I'm not familiar with "HAM" in this context! What's that?

        I assumed "human addressed email," or valid email messages to this list.

        > Your service and your effort has been and is greatly appreciated.

        Ditto. And the validation of email stats was beyond the call of duty.
        (I've just been hitting "d" a lot.)

        --
        Dave Dittrich Information Assurance Researcher,
        dittrich@... The iSchool
        http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich University of Washington

        PGP key http://staff.washington.edu/dittrich/pgpkey.txt
        Fingerprint FE97 0C57 0843 F3EB 49A1 0CD0 8E0C D0BE C838 CCB5
      • The Dog's Bollix
        If the people who complained about the (miniscule amounts of) spam contributed quarter as much as they bitched, then they wouldn t even have noticed. I can t
        Message 3 of 27 , Mar 27, 2007
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          If the people who complained about the (miniscule amounts of) spam contributed quarter as much
          as they bitched, then they wouldn't even have noticed. I can't believe someone would whine like a
          girl about a (unlimited) resource that was free. Maybe you need a job....I need someone to shine my shoes.

          (no offence meant to any women out there, you know who you are)

          TheDB's.


          ----- Original Message ----
          From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@...>
          To: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:40:32 PM
          Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

          Opps,

          Sorry Edna, I left you off the list of people to thank....... ..

          Like I stated previously, Edna has a life just like all of us and not to
          mention dedicates her time for FREE! Did I mention FREE? That should
          be aplauded!!!! !

          Ernie

          From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
          [mailto:linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Enda Cronnolly
          Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:45 PM
          To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
          Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

          Hi Guys,

          I "moderate" this group. Sorry for the delay in getting to you, I have
          been
          taking this up offlist to see what the issue is, and am now in a
          position to
          report.

          Here is a definitive summary of the spam and ham and moderator activity
          for
          the last 5 months:

          March 2007: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 27 ham
          ============ ========= ========= ====
          March 18th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 30 mins later.

          Feb 2007: 5 spam from 3 spammers, 8 ham
          ============ ========= ========= ====
          Feb 12th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 25 mins later
          Feb 15th, 2 spams, deleted and banned 4.5 hours later
          Feb 27th, 1 spam, deletion and banned 10 mins later

          Jan 2007: 2 spams from 2 spammers, 15 ham
          ============ ========= ========= ====
          Jan 29th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 1 hour later
          Jan 31st, 1 spam, deleted and banned 20 mins later

          Dec 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 8 ham
          ============ ========= ========= ====
          Dec 16, 1 spam, deleted and banned 6 hours later

          Nov 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 30 ham
          ============ ========= ========= ====
          Nov 20th, 1 spam, deleted and banner 90 mins later

          Everyone who expressed disatisfaction has been contacted offlist,
          advised
          that the spam level is typically 2 a month, and asked to provide
          evidence to
          the contrary, nobody has been able to do so.

          The complaints:

          1) Too much spam.
          Ans: No there's not, there's barely any, and not enough for it to be
          bothersome to moderate let alone for it to be bothersome to read as a
          subscriber. If I can spend 5 mins dealing with it, you can spend 3
          seconds
          deleting it from your mailbox, it'll become bothersome for me way before
          it
          becomes bothersome for you, and I'll be proactive in sorting the issue,
          trust me on that.

          2) Insufficient moderator activity.
          Ans: Just cause I don't moan about it in public doesn't mean nothing is
          done, you try a 10 min turnaround on dealing with spam, logging onto a
          website and deleting messages and going through a banning process. The
          longest any spam was left was 6 hours, yes, I'm human, I work, I sleep,
          I
          travel, I socialise. Anyone that thinks that effort is insufficient can
          pay
          me to do better. I keep the web archives public, this attracts spammers
          looking for google ranking, so I pay the price in having to take the
          time to
          delete the spam from the web archives as quickly as possible... search
          them,
          you won't find a single spam there. It takes me a lot longer to deal
          with
          spam than it takes you, don't think for a second that I dont have a
          handle
          on whats going on.

          3) Ratio of spam to ham is too high, 3-5 spams for every legit message.
          Ans: Look at the stats above, no its not, its nowhere near those values.
          If
          you're not happy with the ratio above, try generating more ham then,
          cheez.

          In summary, none of the complaints stand up. Anyone receiving more spam
          than
          what is above, is not receiving it from this list, this I have
          categorically
          verified. No action deemed necessary.

          Now its my turn, here's my complaint, anyone wants to make a complaint
          like
          this in future should only do so if you are in a position to
          substantiate
          what it is you have to say rather than making wild ubsubstantiated
          claims
          and wasting my time, and no, its not too much to ask, you are in a
          digital
          forensics field, wake up. Also, use the list-moderator email address off
          the
          list homepage, and if you don't get satisfaction there, then take it to
          the
          entire list instead of wasting everybody else's time too.

          Here's my offer, anyone that thinks I'm getting it wrong, archive the
          spam
          your getting from this list for the next month, and I'll give you my
          time to
          take it up with me then. Anyone who thinks that the above stats are
          wrong,
          and have the messages to prove otherwise, contact me offlist, and I'll
          go
          through them with you.

          Discussion closed.

          Thanks,

          -Enda.

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






          ____________________________________________________________________________________
          Get your own web address.
          Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
          http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Amie Taal
          I think it is really sad that we are all adults and because a few people including myself made a genuine point about the spam situation, it is now being turned
          Message 4 of 27 , Mar 28, 2007
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            I think it is really sad that we are all adults and because a few people including myself made a genuine point about the spam situation, it is now being turned into a situation it should not be and nobody has the right to disrespect anyone else irrespect of how highly or low it seems you regards yourself or others.

            Nobody disputes that this is a very good site as a matter of fact it is one of the best in a league of a very few decent forensic sites, very informative with a lot of fantastic and knowledgable people making great contributions.

            When you have a very good website like this , yes at time expectations are high and this is nothing to do with any lack of service from the moderator etc but because of high regards for the site and the people who work on keeping it going.

            I think this topic should now be closed and an end to this discussion as it has been sorted out or at least people have been informed.

            I would hate to think that I or anyone else who ever raises any point would end up being insulted by people who just feel they have to have their say rather than being objective.

            Edna, thank you for a great job, despite they way things have gone you are greatly appreciated.


            ----- Original Message ----
            From: The Dog's Bollix <isxpro@...>
            To: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Wednesday, 28 March, 2007 2:33:30 AM
            Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

            If the people who complained about the (miniscule amounts of) spam contributed quarter as much
            as they bitched, then they wouldn't even have noticed. I can't believe someone would whine like a
            girl about a (unlimited) resource that was free. Maybe you need a job....I need someone to shine my shoes.

            (no offence meant to any women out there, you know who you are)

            TheDB's.

            ----- Original Message ----
            From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@linux- forensics. com>
            To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
            Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:40:32 PM
            Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

            Opps,

            Sorry Edna, I left you off the list of people to thank....... ..

            Like I stated previously, Edna has a life just like all of us and not to
            mention dedicates her time for FREE! Did I mention FREE? That should
            be aplauded!!!! !

            Ernie

            From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
            [mailto:linux_ forensics@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Enda Cronnolly
            Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:45 PM
            To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
            Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

            Hi Guys,

            I "moderate" this group. Sorry for the delay in getting to you, I have
            been
            taking this up offlist to see what the issue is, and am now in a
            position to
            report.

            Here is a definitive summary of the spam and ham and moderator activity
            for
            the last 5 months:

            March 2007: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 27 ham
            ============ ========= ========= ====
            March 18th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 30 mins later.

            Feb 2007: 5 spam from 3 spammers, 8 ham
            ============ ========= ========= ====
            Feb 12th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 25 mins later
            Feb 15th, 2 spams, deleted and banned 4.5 hours later
            Feb 27th, 1 spam, deletion and banned 10 mins later

            Jan 2007: 2 spams from 2 spammers, 15 ham
            ============ ========= ========= ====
            Jan 29th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 1 hour later
            Jan 31st, 1 spam, deleted and banned 20 mins later

            Dec 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 8 ham
            ============ ========= ========= ====
            Dec 16, 1 spam, deleted and banned 6 hours later

            Nov 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 30 ham
            ============ ========= ========= ====
            Nov 20th, 1 spam, deleted and banner 90 mins later

            Everyone who expressed disatisfaction has been contacted offlist,
            advised
            that the spam level is typically 2 a month, and asked to provide
            evidence to
            the contrary, nobody has been able to do so.

            The complaints:

            1) Too much spam.
            Ans: No there's not, there's barely any, and not enough for it to be
            bothersome to moderate let alone for it to be bothersome to read as a
            subscriber. If I can spend 5 mins dealing with it, you can spend 3
            seconds
            deleting it from your mailbox, it'll become bothersome for me way before
            it
            becomes bothersome for you, and I'll be proactive in sorting the issue,
            trust me on that.

            2) Insufficient moderator activity.
            Ans: Just cause I don't moan about it in public doesn't mean nothing is
            done, you try a 10 min turnaround on dealing with spam, logging onto a
            website and deleting messages and going through a banning process. The
            longest any spam was left was 6 hours, yes, I'm human, I work, I sleep,
            I
            travel, I socialise. Anyone that thinks that effort is insufficient can
            pay
            me to do better. I keep the web archives public, this attracts spammers
            looking for google ranking, so I pay the price in having to take the
            time to
            delete the spam from the web archives as quickly as possible... search
            them,
            you won't find a single spam there. It takes me a lot longer to deal
            with
            spam than it takes you, don't think for a second that I dont have a
            handle
            on whats going on.

            3) Ratio of spam to ham is too high, 3-5 spams for every legit message.
            Ans: Look at the stats above, no its not, its nowhere near those values.
            If
            you're not happy with the ratio above, try generating more ham then,
            cheez.

            In summary, none of the complaints stand up. Anyone receiving more spam
            than
            what is above, is not receiving it from this list, this I have
            categorically
            verified. No action deemed necessary.

            Now its my turn, here's my complaint, anyone wants to make a complaint
            like
            this in future should only do so if you are in a position to
            substantiate
            what it is you have to say rather than making wild ubsubstantiated
            claims
            and wasting my time, and no, its not too much to ask, you are in a
            digital
            forensics field, wake up. Also, use the list-moderator email address off
            the
            list homepage, and if you don't get satisfaction there, then take it to
            the
            entire list instead of wasting everybody else's time too.

            Here's my offer, anyone that thinks I'm getting it wrong, archive the
            spam
            your getting from this list for the next month, and I'll give you my
            time to
            take it up with me then. Anyone who thinks that the above stats are
            wrong,
            and have the messages to prove otherwise, contact me offlist, and I'll
            go
            through them with you.

            Discussion closed.

            Thanks,

            -Enda.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

            ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
            Get your own web address.
            Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
            http://smallbusines s.yahoo.com/ domains/? p=BESTDEAL

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






            ___________________________________________________________
            Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Ernest Baca
            Sorry, But I must respond to this message also. Let me first sart by qutoing word for word a portion of 2 posts regarding this issue: If the
            Message 5 of 27 , Mar 28, 2007
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Sorry,

              But I must respond to this message also. Let me first sart by qutoing word for word a portion of 2 posts regarding this issue:

              "If the moderators/group owners cannot boot the violators, then I will
              have to resign from the group.
              Please clean it up!"


              <FYI, She did>

              "I am getting far too many and this group is less like a forensic group."

              Now correct me if I'm wrong but by a few people, you mean 2. From what I read in the archives only 2 poeple had a problem. Most everyone else acknowledged thay had some but to the oppisite actually said it was not a problem to them.

              Now you want to talk about being adult here? At no time did I state that the complaint was not legit nor did I state you had no right to speak freely. As a matter of fact, I was just reminding you that your right to speak freely comes at a price. Like they say in my profession "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime". The point I was trying to make is that where in either of those posts is there a compliment as to how good this place is contrary to your statement about not disputing how good this site is. As a matter of fact I took the second quote as an insult to the group, and up until now I have not heard anything different up until now as to your positive attitude towards the group. Maybe it wasn't but sometimes people should be more careful in the way that they word things. It's the second hand comments that bother me, not the complaint itself.

              You mention expectations are high because of how good this site is? Well let me take from your own words,"this group is less like a forensic group." Sorry, but that is an insult to those of us who give of our time to make this a good place.

              Let me tell you a little story about a personal experience of mine which helps illustrate my point:
              I was teaching a Basic Linux Boot camp last year at the GMU Forensics Conference. I was called in at the last minute because the previous instructor (FBI) backed out. Becasue of this there was not enough time to update the course description in the handout material, so there were some people thinking that my class was going to be some sort of advanced Linux Class when in fact it was geared towards total beginners. Now keep in mind this is the type of class which within the industry would easily cost 1000 bucks per person. The conference fee is a fraction of the cost. Also, keep in mind that I took a week off of work just to teach the class and I didn't charge for my time.

              Several of the people who misunderstood were quick to thank me for my time and actually made room for those beginners that needed it more. I had one student that had just recently graduated college and was working for a contractor and had knowledge of Linux. At the advice of his company, he was directed to take my class because maybe the company misunderstood as well as others at the conference. Well to make a long story short this individual stayed in the class. To his defense, he became very frustrated at the pace of the class and the fact that he already knew most of what I was teaching.

              Now I had no problem with him being frustrated and at one point even suggested that he try and make some of the other presentations at the conference because it would be of better value to him. Instead of doing that he just complained the whole time and at times made comment as if I didn't know what I was doing. It wasn't that I didn't know what I was doing, it was that the pace of the class was slow to keep up with people that had less or no experience in Linux. At one point he even told me how much of a waste of his time it was and that his company wasn't going to be very appreciative of the fact that they wasted money.

              I agree his company wasted money because when he discovered that the class wasn't for him, he had the option to attend many other presentations that would have been more value to him and his company. Also, 300 bucks for a $1000 - $2500 course is a pretty good deal.

              I didn't have a problem with him not being pleased nor did I have a problem with his complaint, because he had a valid complaint in a way. What I had a problem with is the arogant attitude and the improper way he handled it. I couldn't belive it, I had a 25 year old kid trying to tell an 18 year Law Enforcement Vetern and long time computer person how the world really was and I didn't know what I was talking about. Hmm, I didn't bother telling him that I was programming computers when he was still in diapers. Not to mention, I was doing computer forensics before this kid was even out of high school. Oh and did I mention he was a contractor for a Fed agency? Got some news for him he was talking to an actual Fed, not a contractor for the Feds. Did I bother saying anything? Not really nor do I care.

              It just bothers me sometimes to see some of the arogance and ungreatfulness that people show when you have a person like many here that give of thier time for FREE. This is not an attack on you or John nor am I saying that you were like this kid. I am once again illustrating a point.

              Sometimes I just like to remind people of the power and freedom of open source. I just thought that this would be the appropriate time to remind everyone here to be greatful that this place exists, and it exists for FREE!

              I also think Edna has a point. Be ready to back up your claims, not just shoot off. According to her stats it's not that bad of a problem. Also, if your gonna complain be a little more politically correct about it.

              As far as my longwinded posts. I think you will find from many people here that I don't post that often due to my busy schedule, but when I do it can sometimes turn out to be longwinded, but it is because I feel strongly about a subject.

              Ernie
              www.linux-forensics.com <http://www.linux-forensics.com/>


              ________________________________

              From: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Amie Taal
              Sent: Wed 3/28/2007 6:30 AM
              To: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore



              I think it is really sad that we are all adults and because a few people including myself made a genuine point about the spam situation, it is now being turned into a situation it should not be and nobody has the right to disrespect anyone else irrespect of how highly or low it seems you regards yourself or others.

              Nobody disputes that this is a very good site as a matter of fact it is one of the best in a league of a very few decent forensic sites, very informative with a lot of fantastic and knowledgable people making great contributions.

              When you have a very good website like this , yes at time expectations are high and this is nothing to do with any lack of service from the moderator etc but because of high regards for the site and the people who work on keeping it going.

              I think this topic should now be closed and an end to this discussion as it has been sorted out or at least people have been informed.

              I would hate to think that I or anyone else who ever raises any point would end up being insulted by people who just feel they have to have their say rather than being objective.

              Edna, thank you for a great job, despite they way things have gone you are greatly appreciated.

              ----- Original Message ----
              From: The Dog's Bollix <isxpro@... <mailto:isxpro%40yahoo.com> >
              To: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com <mailto:linux_forensics%40yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, 28 March, 2007 2:33:30 AM
              Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

              If the people who complained about the (miniscule amounts of) spam contributed quarter as much
              as they bitched, then they wouldn't even have noticed. I can't believe someone would whine like a
              girl about a (unlimited) resource that was free. Maybe you need a job....I need someone to shine my shoes.

              (no offence meant to any women out there, you know who you are)

              TheDB's.

              ----- Original Message ----
              From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@linux- forensics. com>
              To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
              Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:40:32 PM
              Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

              Opps,

              Sorry Edna, I left you off the list of people to thank....... ..

              Like I stated previously, Edna has a life just like all of us and not to
              mention dedicates her time for FREE! Did I mention FREE? That should
              be aplauded!!!! !

              Ernie

              From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
              [mailto:linux_ forensics@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Enda Cronnolly
              Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:45 PM
              To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
              Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

              Hi Guys,

              I "moderate" this group. Sorry for the delay in getting to you, I have
              been
              taking this up offlist to see what the issue is, and am now in a
              position to
              report.

              Here is a definitive summary of the spam and ham and moderator activity
              for
              the last 5 months:

              March 2007: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 27 ham
              ============ ========= ========= ====
              March 18th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 30 mins later.

              Feb 2007: 5 spam from 3 spammers, 8 ham
              ============ ========= ========= ====
              Feb 12th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 25 mins later
              Feb 15th, 2 spams, deleted and banned 4.5 hours later
              Feb 27th, 1 spam, deletion and banned 10 mins later

              Jan 2007: 2 spams from 2 spammers, 15 ham
              ============ ========= ========= ====
              Jan 29th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 1 hour later
              Jan 31st, 1 spam, deleted and banned 20 mins later

              Dec 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 8 ham
              ============ ========= ========= ====
              Dec 16, 1 spam, deleted and banned 6 hours later

              Nov 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 30 ham
              ============ ========= ========= ====
              Nov 20th, 1 spam, deleted and banner 90 mins later

              Everyone who expressed disatisfaction has been contacted offlist,
              advised
              that the spam level is typically 2 a month, and asked to provide
              evidence to
              the contrary, nobody has been able to do so.

              The complaints:

              1) Too much spam.
              Ans: No there's not, there's barely any, and not enough for it to be
              bothersome to moderate let alone for it to be bothersome to read as a
              subscriber. If I can spend 5 mins dealing with it, you can spend 3
              seconds
              deleting it from your mailbox, it'll become bothersome for me way before
              it
              becomes bothersome for you, and I'll be proactive in sorting the issue,
              trust me on that.

              2) Insufficient moderator activity.
              Ans: Just cause I don't moan about it in public doesn't mean nothing is
              done, you try a 10 min turnaround on dealing with spam, logging onto a
              website and deleting messages and going through a banning process. The
              longest any spam was left was 6 hours, yes, I'm human, I work, I sleep,
              I
              travel, I socialise. Anyone that thinks that effort is insufficient can
              pay
              me to do better. I keep the web archives public, this attracts spammers
              looking for google ranking, so I pay the price in having to take the
              time to
              delete the spam from the web archives as quickly as possible... search
              them,
              you won't find a single spam there. It takes me a lot longer to deal
              with
              spam than it takes you, don't think for a second that I dont have a
              handle
              on whats going on.

              3) Ratio of spam to ham is too high, 3-5 spams for every legit message.
              Ans: Look at the stats above, no its not, its nowhere near those values.
              If
              you're not happy with the ratio above, try generating more ham then,
              cheez.

              In summary, none of the complaints stand up. Anyone receiving more spam
              than
              what is above, is not receiving it from this list, this I have
              categorically
              verified. No action deemed necessary.

              Now its my turn, here's my complaint, anyone wants to make a complaint
              like
              this in future should only do so if you are in a position to
              substantiate
              what it is you have to say rather than making wild ubsubstantiated
              claims
              and wasting my time, and no, its not too much to ask, you are in a
              digital
              forensics field, wake up. Also, use the list-moderator email address off
              the
              list homepage, and if you don't get satisfaction there, then take it to
              the
              entire list instead of wasting everybody else's time too.

              Here's my offer, anyone that thinks I'm getting it wrong, archive the
              spam
              your getting from this list for the next month, and I'll give you my
              time to
              take it up with me then. Anyone who thinks that the above stats are
              wrong,
              and have the messages to prove otherwise, contact me offlist, and I'll
              go
              through them with you.

              Discussion closed.

              Thanks,

              -Enda.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
              Get your own web address.
              Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
              http://smallbusines <http://smallbusines/> s.yahoo.com/ domains/? p=BESTDEAL

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


              __________________________________________________________
              Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html <http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • The Dog's Bollix
              I think it s probably a good time to point out that Enda is a man. Not related to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
              Message 6 of 27 , Mar 28, 2007
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                I think it's probably a good time to point out that

                Enda is a man. Not related to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

                http://www.behindthename.com/php/view.php?name=enda

                Not a she/her.

                Just FYI



                ----- Original Message ----
                From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@...>
                To: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:12:46 AM
                Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

                Sorry,

                But I must respond to this message also. Let me first sart by qutoing word for word a portion of 2 posts regarding this issue:

                "If the moderators/group owners cannot boot the violators, then I will
                have to resign from the group.
                Please clean it up!"

                <FYI, She did>

                "I am getting far too many and this group is less like a forensic group."

                Now correct me if I'm wrong but by a few people, you mean 2. From what I read in the archives only 2 poeple had a problem. Most everyone else acknowledged thay had some but to the oppisite actually said it was not a problem to them.

                Now you want to talk about being adult here? At no time did I state that the complaint was not legit nor did I state you had no right to speak freely. As a matter of fact, I was just reminding you that your right to speak freely comes at a price. Like they say in my profession "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime". The point I was trying to make is that where in either of those posts is there a compliment as to how good this place is contrary to your statement about not disputing how good this site is. As a matter of fact I took the second quote as an insult to the group, and up until now I have not heard anything different up until now as to your positive attitude towards the group. Maybe it wasn't but sometimes people should be more careful in the way that they word things. It's the second hand comments that bother me, not the complaint itself.

                You mention expectations are high because of how good this site is? Well let me take from your own words,"this group is less like a forensic group." Sorry, but that is an insult to those of us who give of our time to make this a good place.

                Let me tell you a little story about a personal experience of mine which helps illustrate my point:
                I was teaching a Basic Linux Boot camp last year at the GMU Forensics Conference. I was called in at the last minute because the previous instructor (FBI) backed out. Becasue of this there was not enough time to update the course description in the handout material, so there were some people thinking that my class was going to be some sort of advanced Linux Class when in fact it was geared towards total beginners. Now keep in mind this is the type of class which within the industry would easily cost 1000 bucks per person. The conference fee is a fraction of the cost. Also, keep in mind that I took a week off of work just to teach the class and I didn't charge for my time.

                Several of the people who misunderstood were quick to thank me for my time and actually made room for those beginners that needed it more. I had one student that had just recently graduated college and was working for a contractor and had knowledge of Linux. At the advice of his company, he was directed to take my class because maybe the company misunderstood as well as others at the conference. Well to make a long story short this individual stayed in the class. To his defense, he became very frustrated at the pace of the class and the fact that he already knew most of what I was teaching.

                Now I had no problem with him being frustrated and at one point even suggested that he try and make some of the other presentations at the conference because it would be of better value to him. Instead of doing that he just complained the whole time and at times made comment as if I didn't know what I was doing. It wasn't that I didn't know what I was doing, it was that the pace of the class was slow to keep up with people that had less or no experience in Linux. At one point he even told me how much of a waste of his time it was and that his company wasn't going to be very appreciative of the fact that they wasted money.

                I agree his company wasted money because when he discovered that the class wasn't for him, he had the option to attend many other presentations that would have been more value to him and his company. Also, 300 bucks for a $1000 - $2500 course is a pretty good deal.

                I didn't have a problem with him not being pleased nor did I have a problem with his complaint, because he had a valid complaint in a way. What I had a problem with is the arogant attitude and the improper way he handled it. I couldn't belive it, I had a 25 year old kid trying to tell an 18 year Law Enforcement Vetern and long time computer person how the world really was and I didn't know what I was talking about. Hmm, I didn't bother telling him that I was programming computers when he was still in diapers. Not to mention, I was doing computer forensics before this kid was even out of high school. Oh and did I mention he was a contractor for a Fed agency? Got some news for him he was talking to an actual Fed, not a contractor for the Feds. Did I bother saying anything? Not really nor do I care.

                It just bothers me sometimes to see some of the arogance and ungreatfulness that people show when you have a person like many here that give of thier time for FREE. This is not an attack on you or John nor am I saying that you were like this kid. I am once again illustrating a point.

                Sometimes I just like to remind people of the power and freedom of open source. I just thought that this would be the appropriate time to remind everyone here to be greatful that this place exists, and it exists for FREE!

                I also think Edna has a point. Be ready to back up your claims, not just shoot off. According to her stats it's not that bad of a problem. Also, if your gonna complain be a little more politically correct about it.

                As far as my longwinded posts. I think you will find from many people here that I don't post that often due to my busy schedule, but when I do it can sometimes turn out to be longwinded, but it is because I feel strongly about a subject.

                Ernie
                www.linux-forensics .com <http://www.linux- forensics. com/>

                ____________ _________ _________ __

                From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com on behalf of Amie Taal
                Sent: Wed 3/28/2007 6:30 AM
                To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

                I think it is really sad that we are all adults and because a few people including myself made a genuine point about the spam situation, it is now being turned into a situation it should not be and nobody has the right to disrespect anyone else irrespect of how highly or low it seems you regards yourself or others.

                Nobody disputes that this is a very good site as a matter of fact it is one of the best in a league of a very few decent forensic sites, very informative with a lot of fantastic and knowledgable people making great contributions.

                When you have a very good website like this , yes at time expectations are high and this is nothing to do with any lack of service from the moderator etc but because of high regards for the site and the people who work on keeping it going.

                I think this topic should now be closed and an end to this discussion as it has been sorted out or at least people have been informed.

                I would hate to think that I or anyone else who ever raises any point would end up being insulted by people who just feel they have to have their say rather than being objective.

                Edna, thank you for a great job, despite they way things have gone you are greatly appreciated.

                ----- Original Message ----
                From: The Dog's Bollix <isxpro@yahoo. com <mailto:isxpro% 40yahoo.com> >
                To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:linux_ forensics% 40yahoogroups. com>
                Sent: Wednesday, 28 March, 2007 2:33:30 AM
                Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

                If the people who complained about the (miniscule amounts of) spam contributed quarter as much
                as they bitched, then they wouldn't even have noticed. I can't believe someone would whine like a
                girl about a (unlimited) resource that was free. Maybe you need a job....I need someone to shine my shoes.

                (no offence meant to any women out there, you know who you are)

                TheDB's.

                ----- Original Message ----
                From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@linux- forensics. com>
                To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:40:32 PM
                Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

                Opps,

                Sorry Edna, I left you off the list of people to thank....... ..

                Like I stated previously, Edna has a life just like all of us and not to
                mention dedicates her time for FREE! Did I mention FREE? That should
                be aplauded!!!! !

                Ernie

                From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                [mailto:linux_ forensics@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Enda Cronnolly
                Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:45 PM
                To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore

                Hi Guys,

                I "moderate" this group. Sorry for the delay in getting to you, I have
                been
                taking this up offlist to see what the issue is, and am now in a
                position to
                report.

                Here is a definitive summary of the spam and ham and moderator activity
                for
                the last 5 months:

                March 2007: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 27 ham
                ============ ========= ========= ====
                March 18th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 30 mins later.

                Feb 2007: 5 spam from 3 spammers, 8 ham
                ============ ========= ========= ====
                Feb 12th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 25 mins later
                Feb 15th, 2 spams, deleted and banned 4.5 hours later
                Feb 27th, 1 spam, deletion and banned 10 mins later

                Jan 2007: 2 spams from 2 spammers, 15 ham
                ============ ========= ========= ====
                Jan 29th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 1 hour later
                Jan 31st, 1 spam, deleted and banned 20 mins later

                Dec 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 8 ham
                ============ ========= ========= ====
                Dec 16, 1 spam, deleted and banned 6 hours later

                Nov 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 30 ham
                ============ ========= ========= ====
                Nov 20th, 1 spam, deleted and banner 90 mins later

                Everyone who expressed disatisfaction has been contacted offlist,
                advised
                that the spam level is typically 2 a month, and asked to provide
                evidence to
                the contrary, nobody has been able to do so.

                The complaints:

                1) Too much spam.
                Ans: No there's not, there's barely any, and not enough for it to be
                bothersome to moderate let alone for it to be bothersome to read as a
                subscriber. If I can spend 5 mins dealing with it, you can spend 3
                seconds
                deleting it from your mailbox, it'll become bothersome for me way before
                it
                becomes bothersome for you, and I'll be proactive in sorting the issue,
                trust me on that.

                2) Insufficient moderator activity.
                Ans: Just cause I don't moan about it in public doesn't mean nothing is
                done, you try a 10 min turnaround on dealing with spam, logging onto a
                website and deleting messages and going through a banning process. The
                longest any spam was left was 6 hours, yes, I'm human, I work, I sleep,
                I
                travel, I socialise. Anyone that thinks that effort is insufficient can
                pay
                me to do better. I keep the web archives public, this attracts spammers
                looking for google ranking, so I pay the price in having to take the
                time to
                delete the spam from the web archives as quickly as possible... search
                them,
                you won't find a single spam there. It takes me a lot longer to deal
                with
                spam than it takes you, don't think for a second that I dont have a
                handle
                on whats going on.

                3) Ratio of spam to ham is too high, 3-5 spams for every legit message.
                Ans: Look at the stats above, no its not, its nowhere near those values.
                If
                you're not happy with the ratio above, try generating more ham then,
                cheez.

                In summary, none of the complaints stand up. Anyone receiving more spam
                than
                what is above, is not receiving it from this list, this I have
                categorically
                verified. No action deemed necessary.

                Now its my turn, here's my complaint, anyone wants to make a complaint
                like
                this in future should only do so if you are in a position to
                substantiate
                what it is you have to say rather than making wild ubsubstantiated
                claims
                and wasting my time, and no, its not too much to ask, you are in a
                digital
                forensics field, wake up. Also, use the list-moderator email address off
                the
                list homepage, and if you don't get satisfaction there, then take it to
                the
                entire list instead of wasting everybody else's time too.

                Here's my offer, anyone that thinks I'm getting it wrong, archive the
                spam
                your getting from this list for the next month, and I'll give you my
                time to
                take it up with me then. Anyone who thinks that the above stats are
                wrong,
                and have the messages to prove otherwise, contact me offlist, and I'll
                go
                through them with you.

                Discussion closed.

                Thanks,

                -Enda.

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                Get your own web address.
                Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
                http://smallbusines <http://smallbusines /> s.yahoo.com/ domains/? p=BESTDEAL

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs. yahoo.com/ nowyoucan. html <http://uk.docs. yahoo.com/ nowyoucan. html>

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                ____________________________________________________________________________________
                Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast
                with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
                http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Ernie Baca
                Sorry, I m dyslexic....lol....Actually I kept seeing Edna not Enda...I aplogize. Man this is the first time I ve actually gotten in trouble for being
                Message 7 of 27 , Mar 28, 2007
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sorry,

                  I'm dyslexic....lol....Actually I kept seeing Edna not Enda...I
                  aplogize. Man this is the first time I've actually gotten in trouble
                  for being dyslexic. I guess there is a first time for everything.....

                  Ernie

                  --- In linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com, The Dog's Bollix <isxpro@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > I think it's probably a good time to point out that
                  >
                  > Enda is a man. Not related to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
                  >
                  > http://www.behindthename.com/php/view.php?name=enda
                  >
                  > Not a she/her.
                  >
                  > Just FYI
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message ----
                  > From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@...>
                  > To: linux_forensics@yahoogroups.com
                  > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:12:46 AM
                  > Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore
                  >
                  > Sorry,
                  >
                  > But I must respond to this message also. Let me first sart by
                  qutoing word for word a portion of 2 posts regarding this issue:
                  >
                  > "If the moderators/group owners cannot boot the violators, then I
                  will
                  > have to resign from the group.
                  > Please clean it up!"
                  >
                  > <FYI, She did>
                  >
                  > "I am getting far too many and this group is less like a forensic
                  group."
                  >
                  > Now correct me if I'm wrong but by a few people, you mean 2. From
                  what I read in the archives only 2 poeple had a problem. Most
                  everyone else acknowledged thay had some but to the oppisite actually
                  said it was not a problem to them.
                  >
                  > Now you want to talk about being adult here? At no time did I state
                  that the complaint was not legit nor did I state you had no right to
                  speak freely. As a matter of fact, I was just reminding you that your
                  right to speak freely comes at a price. Like they say in my
                  profession "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime". The point
                  I was trying to make is that where in either of those posts is there
                  a compliment as to how good this place is contrary to your statement
                  about not disputing how good this site is. As a matter of fact I took
                  the second quote as an insult to the group, and up until now I have
                  not heard anything different up until now as to your positive
                  attitude towards the group. Maybe it wasn't but sometimes people
                  should be more careful in the way that they word things. It's the
                  second hand comments that bother me, not the complaint itself.
                  >
                  > You mention expectations are high because of how good this site is?
                  Well let me take from your own words,"this group is less like a
                  forensic group." Sorry, but that is an insult to those of us who give
                  of our time to make this a good place.
                  >
                  > Let me tell you a little story about a personal experience of mine
                  which helps illustrate my point:
                  > I was teaching a Basic Linux Boot camp last year at the GMU
                  Forensics Conference. I was called in at the last minute because the
                  previous instructor (FBI) backed out. Becasue of this there was not
                  enough time to update the course description in the handout material,
                  so there were some people thinking that my class was going to be some
                  sort of advanced Linux Class when in fact it was geared towards total
                  beginners. Now keep in mind this is the type of class which within
                  the industry would easily cost 1000 bucks per person. The conference
                  fee is a fraction of the cost. Also, keep in mind that I took a week
                  off of work just to teach the class and I didn't charge for my time.
                  >
                  > Several of the people who misunderstood were quick to thank me for
                  my time and actually made room for those beginners that needed it
                  more. I had one student that had just recently graduated college and
                  was working for a contractor and had knowledge of Linux. At the
                  advice of his company, he was directed to take my class because maybe
                  the company misunderstood as well as others at the conference. Well
                  to make a long story short this individual stayed in the class. To
                  his defense, he became very frustrated at the pace of the class and
                  the fact that he already knew most of what I was teaching.
                  >
                  > Now I had no problem with him being frustrated and at one point
                  even suggested that he try and make some of the other presentations
                  at the conference because it would be of better value to him. Instead
                  of doing that he just complained the whole time and at times made
                  comment as if I didn't know what I was doing. It wasn't that I didn't
                  know what I was doing, it was that the pace of the class was slow to
                  keep up with people that had less or no experience in Linux. At one
                  point he even told me how much of a waste of his time it was and that
                  his company wasn't going to be very appreciative of the fact that
                  they wasted money.
                  >
                  > I agree his company wasted money because when he discovered that
                  the class wasn't for him, he had the option to attend many other
                  presentations that would have been more value to him and his company.
                  Also, 300 bucks for a $1000 - $2500 course is a pretty good deal.
                  >
                  > I didn't have a problem with him not being pleased nor did I have a
                  problem with his complaint, because he had a valid complaint in a
                  way. What I had a problem with is the arogant attitude and the
                  improper way he handled it. I couldn't belive it, I had a 25 year old
                  kid trying to tell an 18 year Law Enforcement Vetern and long time
                  computer person how the world really was and I didn't know what I was
                  talking about. Hmm, I didn't bother telling him that I was
                  programming computers when he was still in diapers. Not to mention, I
                  was doing computer forensics before this kid was even out of high
                  school. Oh and did I mention he was a contractor for a Fed agency?
                  Got some news for him he was talking to an actual Fed, not a
                  contractor for the Feds. Did I bother saying anything? Not really nor
                  do I care.
                  >
                  > It just bothers me sometimes to see some of the arogance and
                  ungreatfulness that people show when you have a person like many here
                  that give of thier time for FREE. This is not an attack on you or
                  John nor am I saying that you were like this kid. I am once again
                  illustrating a point.
                  >
                  > Sometimes I just like to remind people of the power and freedom of
                  open source. I just thought that this would be the appropriate time
                  to remind everyone here to be greatful that this place exists, and it
                  exists for FREE!
                  >
                  > I also think Edna has a point. Be ready to back up your claims, not
                  just shoot off. According to her stats it's not that bad of a
                  problem. Also, if your gonna complain be a little more politically
                  correct about it.
                  >
                  > As far as my longwinded posts. I think you will find from many
                  people here that I don't post that often due to my busy schedule, but
                  when I do it can sometimes turn out to be longwinded, but it is
                  because I feel strongly about a subject.
                  >
                  > Ernie
                  > www.linux-forensics .com <http://www.linux- forensics. com/>
                  >
                  > ____________ _________ _________ __
                  >
                  > From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com on behalf of Amie Taal
                  > Sent: Wed 3/28/2007 6:30 AM
                  > To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                  > Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore
                  >
                  > I think it is really sad that we are all adults and because a few
                  people including myself made a genuine point about the spam
                  situation, it is now being turned into a situation it should not be
                  and nobody has the right to disrespect anyone else irrespect of how
                  highly or low it seems you regards yourself or others.
                  >
                  > Nobody disputes that this is a very good site as a matter of fact
                  it is one of the best in a league of a very few decent forensic
                  sites, very informative with a lot of fantastic and knowledgable
                  people making great contributions.
                  >
                  > When you have a very good website like this , yes at time
                  expectations are high and this is nothing to do with any lack of
                  service from the moderator etc but because of high regards for the
                  site and the people who work on keeping it going.
                  >
                  > I think this topic should now be closed and an end to this
                  discussion as it has been sorted out or at least people have been
                  informed.
                  >
                  > I would hate to think that I or anyone else who ever raises any
                  point would end up being insulted by people who just feel they have
                  to have their say rather than being objective.
                  >
                  > Edna, thank you for a great job, despite they way things have gone
                  you are greatly appreciated.
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message ----
                  > From: The Dog's Bollix <isxpro@yahoo. com <mailto:isxpro%
                  40yahoo.com> >
                  > To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:linux_ forensics%
                  40yahoogroups. com>
                  > Sent: Wednesday, 28 March, 2007 2:33:30 AM
                  > Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore
                  >
                  > If the people who complained about the (miniscule amounts of) spam
                  contributed quarter as much
                  > as they bitched, then they wouldn't even have noticed. I can't
                  believe someone would whine like a
                  > girl about a (unlimited) resource that was free. Maybe you need a
                  job....I need someone to shine my shoes.
                  >
                  > (no offence meant to any women out there, you know who you are)
                  >
                  > TheDB's.
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message ----
                  > From: Ernest Baca <ebaca@linux- forensics. com>
                  > To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                  > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:40:32 PM
                  > Subject: RE: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore
                  >
                  > Opps,
                  >
                  > Sorry Edna, I left you off the list of people to thank....... ..
                  >
                  > Like I stated previously, Edna has a life just like all of us and
                  not to
                  > mention dedicates her time for FREE! Did I mention FREE? That should
                  > be aplauded!!!! !
                  >
                  > Ernie
                  >
                  > From: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                  > [mailto:linux_ forensics@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Enda
                  Cronnolly
                  > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 3:45 PM
                  > To: linux_forensics@ yahoogroups. com
                  > Subject: Re: [linux_forensics] Too much spam on this group anymore
                  >
                  > Hi Guys,
                  >
                  > I "moderate" this group. Sorry for the delay in getting to you, I
                  have
                  > been
                  > taking this up offlist to see what the issue is, and am now in a
                  > position to
                  > report.
                  >
                  > Here is a definitive summary of the spam and ham and moderator
                  activity
                  > for
                  > the last 5 months:
                  >
                  > March 2007: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 27 ham
                  > ============ ========= ========= ====
                  > March 18th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 30 mins later.
                  >
                  > Feb 2007: 5 spam from 3 spammers, 8 ham
                  > ============ ========= ========= ====
                  > Feb 12th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 25 mins later
                  > Feb 15th, 2 spams, deleted and banned 4.5 hours later
                  > Feb 27th, 1 spam, deletion and banned 10 mins later
                  >
                  > Jan 2007: 2 spams from 2 spammers, 15 ham
                  > ============ ========= ========= ====
                  > Jan 29th, 1 spam, deleted and banned 1 hour later
                  > Jan 31st, 1 spam, deleted and banned 20 mins later
                  >
                  > Dec 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 8 ham
                  > ============ ========= ========= ====
                  > Dec 16, 1 spam, deleted and banned 6 hours later
                  >
                  > Nov 2006: 1 spam from 1 spammer, 30 ham
                  > ============ ========= ========= ====
                  > Nov 20th, 1 spam, deleted and banner 90 mins later
                  >
                  > Everyone who expressed disatisfaction has been contacted offlist,
                  > advised
                  > that the spam level is typically 2 a month, and asked to provide
                  > evidence to
                  > the contrary, nobody has been able to do so.
                  >
                  > The complaints:
                  >
                  > 1) Too much spam.
                  > Ans: No there's not, there's barely any, and not enough for it to
                  be
                  > bothersome to moderate let alone for it to be bothersome to read as
                  a
                  > subscriber. If I can spend 5 mins dealing with it, you can spend 3
                  > seconds
                  > deleting it from your mailbox, it'll become bothersome for me way
                  before
                  > it
                  > becomes bothersome for you, and I'll be proactive in sorting the
                  issue,
                  > trust me on that.
                  >
                  > 2) Insufficient moderator activity.
                  > Ans: Just cause I don't moan about it in public doesn't mean
                  nothing is
                  > done, you try a 10 min turnaround on dealing with spam, logging
                  onto a
                  > website and deleting messages and going through a banning process.
                  The
                  > longest any spam was left was 6 hours, yes, I'm human, I work, I
                  sleep,
                  > I
                  > travel, I socialise. Anyone that thinks that effort is insufficient
                  can
                  > pay
                  > me to do better. I keep the web archives public, this attracts
                  spammers
                  > looking for google ranking, so I pay the price in having to take the
                  > time to
                  > delete the spam from the web archives as quickly as possible...
                  search
                  > them,
                  > you won't find a single spam there. It takes me a lot longer to deal
                  > with
                  > spam than it takes you, don't think for a second that I dont have a
                  > handle
                  > on whats going on.
                  >
                  > 3) Ratio of spam to ham is too high, 3-5 spams for every legit
                  message.
                  > Ans: Look at the stats above, no its not, its nowhere near those
                  values.
                  > If
                  > you're not happy with the ratio above, try generating more ham then,
                  > cheez.
                  >
                  > In summary, none of the complaints stand up. Anyone receiving more
                  spam
                  > than
                  > what is above, is not receiving it from this list, this I have
                  > categorically
                  > verified. No action deemed necessary.
                  >
                  > Now its my turn, here's my complaint, anyone wants to make a
                  complaint
                  > like
                  > this in future should only do so if you are in a position to
                  > substantiate
                  > what it is you have to say rather than making wild ubsubstantiated
                  > claims
                  > and wasting my time, and no, its not too much to ask, you are in a
                  > digital
                  > forensics field, wake up. Also, use the list-moderator email
                  address off
                  > the
                  > list homepage, and if you don't get satisfaction there, then take
                  it to
                  > the
                  > entire list instead of wasting everybody else's time too.
                  >
                  > Here's my offer, anyone that thinks I'm getting it wrong, archive
                  the
                  > spam
                  > your getting from this list for the next month, and I'll give you my
                  > time to
                  > take it up with me then. Anyone who thinks that the above stats are
                  > wrong,
                  > and have the messages to prove otherwise, contact me offlist, and
                  I'll
                  > go
                  > through them with you.
                  >
                  > Discussion closed.
                  >
                  > Thanks,
                  >
                  > -Enda.
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                  > Get your own web address.
                  > Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business.
                  > http://smallbusines <http://smallbusines /> s.yahoo.com/ domains/?
                  p=BESTDEAL
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                  > Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new
                  Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs. yahoo.com/ nowyoucan. html
                  <http://uk.docs. yahoo.com/ nowyoucan. html>
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  ______________________________________________________________________
                  ______________
                  > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast
                  > with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
                  > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • Jon Evans
                  ... LMAO, DB priceless :-) I haven t noticed much (sp|H)am in this list! In fact the only time that I have noticed is when it came up as Subject: matter.
                  Message 8 of 27 , Mar 31, 2007
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The Dog's Bollix wrote:

                    >Maybe you need a job....I need someone to shine my shoes.

                    LMAO, DB priceless :-)

                    I haven't noticed much (sp|H)am in this list! In fact the only time
                    that I have noticed is when it came up as Subject: matter.

                    I'm actually looking for good spam filters and a good way of
                    implementing it on a mail server, slightly off topic I know.

                    Regards,
                    JonE.
                  • maillist@citadelsystems.net
                    Hello, The attached perl script parses the output from Harlan Carvey s regp.pl script. It finds the Current Control Set and through that translates the time
                    Message 9 of 27 , Mar 31, 2007
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hello,

                      The attached perl script parses the output from Harlan Carvey's regp.pl
                      script. It finds the Current Control Set and through that translates the
                      time zone information into human readable format. Lastly, it translates
                      the shutdown time into human readable format.

                      The script requires the following perl modules:
                      DateTime::Format::WindowsFileTime
                      DateTime::TimeZone
                      DateTime
                      integer (You should already have this)
                      Getopt::Long
                      Switch

                      Note: Regp.pl can be found at http://sourceforge.net/projects/windowsir/
                      and is written by Harlan Carvey.

                      Sample Output:

                      Current Control Set: 2
                      Default Control Set: 2
                      Failed Control Set: 1
                      Last Known Good Control Set: 4

                      Standard Time Zone: Eastern Standard Time
                      Standard Hours: -5
                      Standard Time Starts: On Sunday the 1st week of November at 02:00:00:00
                      (AM)

                      Day Light Savings Zone Name: Eastern Daylight Time
                      Day Light Saving: -4
                      Daylight Savings Starts: On Sunday the 2nd week of March at 02:00:00:00
                      (AM)

                      Current Time Zone offset: -4

                      Shutdown Time: 2007-03-26T12:47:24

                      Possible TimeZone matches:
                      America/Atikokan Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Bogota Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Detroit Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Eirunepe Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Grand_Turk Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Havana Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Indiana/Indianapolis Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Indiana/Marengo Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Indiana/Vevay Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Indiana/Vincennes Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Iqaluit Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Jamaica Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Kentucky/Louisville Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Lima Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Menominee Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Montreal Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Nassau Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/New_York Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Nipigon Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Port-au-Prince Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Rio_Branco Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Thunder_Bay Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      America/Toronto Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                      EST5EDT Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4


                      It has gone though some limited testing on my end. Please email on any issues you find with it.

                      I hope this will prompt some other people to post some of their homegrown tools. :)

                      Later,

                      K Murphy
                      maillist@...
                      URL: http://www.citadelsystems.net



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • maillist@citadelsystems.net
                      Hello again, Looks like the list removed the attachment. You can download the script at: http://www.citadelsystems.net under the downloads section. K Murphy
                      Message 10 of 27 , Mar 31, 2007
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hello again,

                        Looks like the list removed the attachment.

                        You can download the script at: http://www.citadelsystems.net under the
                        downloads section.

                        K Murphy
                        maillist@...
                        URL: http://www.citadelsystems.net
                        On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 13:44 -0400, maillist@... wrote:
                        > Hello,
                        >
                        > The attached perl script parses the output from Harlan Carvey's
                        > regp.pl
                        > script. It finds the Current Control Set and through that translates
                        > the
                        > time zone information into human readable format. Lastly, it
                        > translates
                        > the shutdown time into human readable format.
                        >
                        > The script requires the following perl modules:
                        > DateTime::Format::WindowsFileTime
                        > DateTime::TimeZone
                        > DateTime
                        > integer (You should already have this)
                        > Getopt::Long
                        > Switch
                        >
                        > Note: Regp.pl can be found at
                        > http://sourceforge.net/projects/windowsir/
                        > and is written by Harlan Carvey.
                        >
                        > Sample Output:
                        >
                        > Current Control Set: 2
                        > Default Control Set: 2
                        > Failed Control Set: 1
                        > Last Known Good Control Set: 4
                        >
                        > Standard Time Zone: Eastern Standard Time
                        > Standard Hours: -5
                        > Standard Time Starts: On Sunday the 1st week of November at
                        > 02:00:00:00
                        > (AM)
                        >
                        > Day Light Savings Zone Name: Eastern Daylight Time
                        > Day Light Saving: -4
                        > Daylight Savings Starts: On Sunday the 2nd week of March at
                        > 02:00:00:00
                        > (AM)
                        >
                        > Current Time Zone offset: -4
                        >
                        > Shutdown Time: 2007-03-26T12:47:24
                        >
                        > Possible TimeZone matches:
                        > America/Atikokan Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Bogota Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Detroit Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Eirunepe Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Grand_Turk Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Havana Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Indiana/Indianapolis Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings
                        > Offset: -4
                        > America/Indiana/Marengo Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset:
                        > -4
                        > America/Indiana/Vevay Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Indiana/Vincennes Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset:
                        > -4
                        > America/Iqaluit Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Jamaica Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Kentucky/Louisville Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings
                        > Offset: -4
                        > America/Lima Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Menominee Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Montreal Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Nassau Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/New_York Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Nipigon Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Port-au-Prince Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset:
                        > -4
                        > America/Rio_Branco Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Thunder_Bay Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > America/Toronto Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        > EST5EDT Standard Offset: -5 Daylight Savings Offset: -4
                        >
                        > It has gone though some limited testing on my end. Please email on any
                        > issues you find with it.
                        >
                        > I hope this will prompt some other people to post some of their
                        > homegrown tools. :)
                        >
                        > Later,
                        >
                        > K Murphy
                        > maillist@...
                        > URL: http://www.citadelsystems.net
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • Jon Roland
                        A common situation I encounter is a file, especially an email inbox file, that is zeroed out during a disk overflow crash. I use Thunderbird, so the mailboxes
                        Message 11 of 27 , Apr 2 5:15 AM
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          A common situation I encounter is a file, especially an email inbox
                          file, that is zeroed out during a disk overflow crash. I use
                          Thunderbird, so the mailboxes are single large files separated by only a
                          blank line, followed by a header. Recovering them has proved to be a
                          challenge. However, in a disk overflow crash it would seem one should be
                          able to recover by just gathering all the now unallocated blocks be
                          gathered into a single file, which it was before it got zeroed. Any
                          suggestions on this?

                          -- Jon

                          ----------------------------------------------------------------
                          Linux Migration Network 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757
                          512/374-9585 www.linux-migration.net jroland@...
                          ----------------------------------------------------------------
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.