Discussion:
Mailwasher (again)
(too old to reply)
Simon Lyall
2002-10-02 01:40:04 UTC
Permalink
Sorry to divert people from the Microsoft bashing but I'd thought I'd
bring this up again.

I mentioned a few months ago about Mailwasher forging bounces, anyway I
was hoping they would go away or their latest version would fix the
problem but it doesn't appear that way.

Checking our outgoing queues around 50% of emails waiting to go out appear
to be mailwasher forgeries ( bounces from our mail servers are elsewhere)
and I'm getting a little worried. I really try hard to get customer email
delivered and I don't what "normal" email to get delayed when it gets
stuck behind mailwasher junk.

Just wondering what others are doing? Private email is okay. I'm trying to
avoid blocking or deleting them if I can. One suggestion was to forward
them all to ***@mailwasher.net :) . The other problem is that it is
fairly hard to actually pick these messages out from others in the queue
safely.

Maybe I can sic the fraud squad on Mr Bolton for forging my email address.

FDrom their FAQ:

Q. How does MailWasher bounce messages?

A. MailWasher uses an algorithm to determine the best route to
send the bounced message back (from, reply to, return path) and
actually sends the bounce back via your isp's postmaster, so it
looks exactly like it has come from your isp and not from you at
your address. If the spammer has used a fake address, then your
bounce message will itself be bounced back to the postmaster and
you won't receive the bounced bounce email.
--
Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: ***@ihug.co.nz
Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: ***@darkmere.gen.nz
ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 01:50:59 UTC
Permalink
A. MailWasher uses an algorithm to determine the best route to send
the bounced message back (from, reply to, return path) and actually
sends the bounce back via your isp's postmaster
This isn't an AUP violation here?

Forging email from an address other than yours? I would just disallow
lusers from injecting such bogons. I would argue allowing this sets a
unnerving precedent of sorts.

Does this actually work? I mean, since most spam doesn't have a valid
return-path, bounces are mostly useless.


--cw (who has been archiving spam for years)



-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Mark Foster
2002-10-02 02:24:04 UTC
Permalink
I have a couple of mailboxes im bouncing because of spam volume. Depends
on the creed of the spammer I guess.
Some genuine dont see the point in continuing to spam non existant
addresses and stop.
Some set fake reply-to headers and dont care.

For those that bounce-the-bounce and come back to postmaster, I start
firewalling their MTA from my network. Solves the problem :P
Course, ISPs might not necessarily want to do that... (we all know how
controversial RBLs are.)

But yes, if forging mail headers is in breach of your AUP id ask your abuse
guy to contact the client and ask them to disable that feature of
mailwasher; and advise them that failing to do so will result in immediate
account suspension for breaching T&C.

Tends to work :)

Mark.
Post by Chris Wedgwood
A. MailWasher uses an algorithm to determine the best route to send
the bounced message back (from, reply to, return path) and actually
sends the bounce back via your isp's postmaster
This isn't an AUP violation here?
Forging email from an address other than yours? I would just disallow
lusers from injecting such bogons. I would argue allowing this sets a
unnerving precedent of sorts.
Does this actually work? I mean, since most spam doesn't have a valid
return-path, bounces are mostly useless.
--cw (who has been archiving spam for years)
-
unsubscribe nznog
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 03:14:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foster
I have a couple of mailboxes im bouncing because of spam volume.
Depends on the creed of the spammer I guess.
Why not throw alway all of that email then and never bounce it?
Post by Mark Foster
Some genuine dont see the point in continuing to spam non existant
addresses and stop. Some set fake reply-to headers and dont care.
Nope. I don't mean to be rude (but I can't help who I am)...

I don't believe this for a second. Unless some is like 0.0001% or
something.
Post by Mark Foster
For those that bounce-the-bounce and come back to postmaster, I
start firewalling their MTA from my network.
Seems pointless, spam comes from all over.
Post by Mark Foster
Solves the problem :P Course, ISPs might not necessarily want to do
that... (we all know how controversial RBLs are.)
IMO, RBLs are almost useless now. I stopped using all of them a while
ago and now spam works to *my* advantage.



FWIW, I have several domains and addresses which get *only* spam, I
mean nothing but spam. Never any real email. And I get a lot of
spam, hundreds if not thousands of messages a week sometimes.

Now, I used to reject all this email --- yet it *never* stopped
coming, even after a couple of years of nothing but rejection. I
removed A and MX records for months, that didn't help either.

Within minutes of restoring those addresses functionality, I got spam.
None of my efforts to prevent this even slowed the rate at which it
comes. This is why I simply don't believe mailwasher works, because I
know it *doesn't* :P


Now I accept all this spam to these 'spam trap addresses'.

I use it to train filters which I then apply to my inbox. I use no
RBL because I *want* all the spam I can get. The more spam I get, the
better I train my filters that keep spam out of my inbox --- and it
works great so far. IF there is a popular spam going about that my
filters would miss, chances are one of the spam-traps will get it
first, and thus my filters will adapt to it before it hits my inbox.



--cw
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Steve Phillips
2002-10-02 02:42:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Lyall
Just wondering what others are doing? Private email is okay. I'm trying to
avoid blocking or deleting them if I can. One suggestion was to forward
fairly hard to actually pick these messages out from others in the queue
safely.
echo "***@mailwasher.net" > /var/qmail/control/doublebounceto

:-)
--
Steve.

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Gordon Smith
2002-10-02 02:41:13 UTC
Permalink
Well, this is probably a list AUP violation as well, but....

what we do is inform the customer that forging headers is a breach of
our T&C, and repeated violations will result in the closure of their
account. Most don't realise the problems they're causing; once its
explained to them, they stop doing it.

I spoke with the software author some time ago about this issue, and he
was reluctant to disable it.

FWIW, I do believe that issues that impact ISP performance should be on
topic here.
This new worm has definitely tested our mail system - total viruses
intercepted for Oct is currently sitting at 1500....

Gordon Smith CCNA
Network Operations Manager

MoreNet Ltd




-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Juha Saarinen
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Wedgwood
Now I accept all this spam to these 'spam trap addresses'.
Isn't your "anti-spam" strategy based on you having more or
less free bandwidth? IOW, wouldn't work in NZ.
--
Juha Saarinen

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 03:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Isn't your "anti-spam" strategy based on you having more or less
free bandwidth? IOW, wouldn't work in NZ.
Free? Hell no, it cost somelike like $800US/month.


--cw
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Lyall
2002-10-02 04:03:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juha Saarinen
Post by Chris Wedgwood
Now I accept all this spam to these 'spam trap addresses'.
Isn't your "anti-spam" strategy based on you having more or
less free bandwidth? IOW, wouldn't work in NZ.
Spam doesn't take up much bandwidth. Most spam is only a few kilobytes in
size and anything over 15 kilobytes is pretty uncommon.

A bunch of spam I have lying around (14299 messages) averages in size at
only 6812 bytes. Only 3% were bigger than 20 kilobytes.

So even if you get 1000 spams per day thats just 205 Megabytes per month.

The problem is the load on machines, people's time filtering it out and
the false positives. For example one spammer sent us (over the weekend)
450,000 (approx) emails over 3 days. All of these were from (the same)
bogus domain (optprofessional.com) .
--
Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: ***@ihug.co.nz
Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: ***@darkmere.gen.nz
ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz


-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 04:56:55 UTC
Permalink
For example one spammer sent us (over the weekend) 450,000 (approx)
emails over 3 days. All of these were from (the same) bogus domain
(optprofessional.com) .
So why did you accept them?


--cw
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Bart Kindt
2002-10-02 05:00:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Wedgwood
For example one spammer sent us (over the weekend) 450,000 (approx)
emails over 3 days. All of these were from (the same) bogus domain
(optprofessional.com) .
So why did you accept them?
Because he occasionally would like to have a weekend off...



Bart Kindt
Manager, Network Operations
Director, The Internet Group Limited
New Zealand

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 05:15:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bart Kindt
Because he occasionally would like to have a weekend off...
And?

220 mx1.clear.net.nz -- Server ESMTP (CLEAR Net)
ehlo lies.org
250-mx1.clear.net.nz
250-8BITMIME
250-PIPELINING
250-DSN
250-XDFLG
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-HELP
250-SAML
250-SEND
250-SOML
250-TURN
250-XSTA
250-XLOOP ECA5EFC954D260A84AAC76A6D892DE71
250-ETRN
250-RELAY
250 SIZE 0
mail from:<***@optprofessional.com>
550 5.1.8 invalid/host-not-in-DNS return address not allowed

I guess they must work weekend or something.

220 mail.internet.co.nz ESMTP
ehlo lies.org
250-mail.internet.co.nz
250-PIPELINING
250 8BITMIME
mail from:<***@optprofessional.com>
553 sorry, your envelope sender domain must exist (#5.7.1)

So must they.

220 bart.gen.nz ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:11:48 +1200; (No UCE/UBE) logging access from:
charon.cryptoapps.com(OK)-charon.cryptoapps.com [66.60.186.13]
ehlo lies.org
250-bart.gen.nz Hello charon.cryptoapps.com [66.60.186.13], pleased to meet you
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-PIPELINING
250-EXPN
250-VERB
250-8BITMIME
250-SIZE
250-DSN
250-ETRN
250-AUTH DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5 PLAIN
250-DELIVERBY
250 HELP
mail from:<***@optprofessional.com>
553 5.1.8 <***@optprofessional.com>... Domain of sender address ***@optprofessional.com does not exist

I guess you do too!

220 mail.igrin.co.nz ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.6/8.11.6; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:15:11 +1200
ehlo lies.org
250-mail.igrin.co.nz Hello charon.cryptoapps.com [66.60.186.13], pleased to meet you
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-8BITMIME
250-SIZE 10485760
250-DSN
250-ONEX
250-ETRN
250-XUSR
250 HELP
mail from:<***@optprofessional.com>
553 5.1.8 <***@optprofessional.com>... Domain of sender address ***@optprofessional.com does not exist
quit


What a busy place NZ must be in the weekends.




--cw
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Lyall
2002-10-02 05:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Wedgwood
For example one spammer sent us (over the weekend) 450,000 (approx)
emails over 3 days. All of these were from (the same) bogus domain
(optprofessional.com) .
So why did you accept them?
Because I thought he would go away after the first day. Also we very much
avoid blocking email to customers.

Except for a very small list (less than 10 ) of sites we accept all email
that comes in. Spam is only blocked for customers who subscribe to the
anti-spam service and they are able to look at whats been blocked and
retrieve it for up to 20 days afterways.

People do not accept their email being blocked and get VERY paranoid if
they think email is not getting through. Dropping people's email to the
floor is not an option in an ISP situation. At least IMHO, other people
may have different ideas but I know at leasts one ISP used to lose
customers due to the heavy spam filtering.

The ones that were blocked were *only* blocked because the volume or
nature of their email was causing load issues for our servers.

w.r.t RBLs we use them as part of our anti-spam service, useful ones
include bl.spamcop.net and kr.cluecentral.net and cn.cluecentral.net.

What software are you using for filtering? Some sort of Bayesian type
thing?
--
Simon Lyall. | Newsmaster | Work: ***@ihug.co.nz
Senior Network/System Admin | Postmaster | Home: ***@darkmere.gen.nz
ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 06:43:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Lyall
Because I thought he would go away after the first day. Also we very
much avoid blocking email to customers.
Except the domain is bogus... how much legitimate email do you get
bogus domains and how much spam do you get with bogus domains?
Post by Simon Lyall
People do not accept their email being blocked and get VERY paranoid
if they think email is not getting through. Dropping people's email
to the floor is not an option in an ISP situation.
Except here the domain is bogus and it clearly wasn't email (it was
spam).
Post by Simon Lyall
w.r.t RBLs we use them as part of our anti-spam service, useful ones
include bl.spamcop.net and kr.cluecentral.net and
cn.cluecentral.net.
I found that there was still plenty of spam coming using various RBLs
and that the false-positive rate is too high. So I started trying to
think of ways to put the spam I get to use.
Post by Simon Lyall
What software are you using for filtering? Some sort of Bayesian
type thing?
Originally is was something I made up, then I tried a pseudo-Bayesian
filter (based on the now infamous Paul Graham article).

I then decided to do it a little differently as I wanted to do things
that present tools didn't allow such as: word aging, different
treatment of header and body tokens, pseudo-canonicalization of HTML
text and attachments (ie. don't use HTML tags raw, actually tread what
would be rendered "kinky" in red as "kinky" and "c/RED:kinky" so that
not only is the word "kinky" going to count here as a bad word, it
will doubly count if in HTML it would be rendered in red.

As a side-effect, I decode attachments so that if the body is text but
base64 encoded, I pull out the decoded tokens and am ignorant to the
encoded type.

On top of that, I get spam from various sources and teach it with that
in the hopes that if a burst of messages is going about, one of the
traps will see it first and increase the likelihood of catching it
when it is actually sent to me.

Now, this assume that any spam sent to me will also be sent to others,
many others, and that it will look somewhat like previous spam email
messages I have gotten --- but so far, that seems, to be a reasonable
guess.

I can think of other things to do aswell, but I've gotten bored with
it :)



--cw
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Byrnand
2002-10-02 22:39:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Wedgwood
Post by Simon Lyall
Because I thought he would go away after the first day. Also we very
much avoid blocking email to customers.
Except the domain is bogus... how much legitimate email do you get
bogus domains and how much spam do you get with bogus domains?
I have to agree here. By definition email should have a return address if
it is "genuine". If the domain name of the "from" address doesn't even
exist, then its almost a sure bet that the email is bogus, and I see no
reason it should be accepted. Most MTA's seem to default to this action as
well.

Regards,
Simon


-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Byrnand
2002-10-03 00:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Lyall
Post by Simon Byrnand
I have to agree here. By definition email should have a return address if
it is "genuine". If the domain name of the "from" address doesn't even
exist, then its almost a sure bet that the email is bogus, and I see no
reason it should be accepted. Most MTA's seem to default to this action as
well.
I guess you don't get email from people who post to newsgroups, most of
them use bogus addresses so if they reply via email to a post the address
Most newsreaders I've seen that have email integrated allow you to set a
different email address for posting to the news group than for sending
email. Even Outlook Express does this. People writing newsreaders know that
fake address are almost mandatory to avoid being spammed....Newsreaders
that don't have integrated email will be launching the normal email program
with normal email address.

You definately have a point, but I've honestly never come across this
actually happening before.
Post by Simon Lyall
Which appears to be a legit little mailout sent last week from
Are you talking about the envelope-sender address or the "From:" header ?
It looks like you're talking about the From: header here. I'm (and
presumably Chris was) talking about the envelope from address, as exchanged
at the beginning of the SMTP transaction...
Post by Simon Lyall
Our spam filtering also has a "No MX for
Simon Blake
2002-10-03 02:00:44 UTC
Permalink
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2505.txt

To whit:

2.9. Verify "MAIL From:"

The MTA SHOULD be able to perform a simple "sanity check" of the
"MAIL From:" domain and refuse to receive mail if that domain is
nonexistent (i.e. does not resolve to having an MX or an A record).
If the DNS error is temporary, TempFail, the MTA MUST return a 4xx
Return Code (Temporary Error). If the DNS error is an Authoritative
NXdomain (host/domain unknown) the MTA SHOULD still return a 4xx
Return Code (since this may just be primary and secondary DNS not
being in sync) but it MAY allow for an 5xx Return Code (as configured
by the sysadmin).

It doesn't actually say that you must drop mail from nonexistant
domains, but it certainly implies that those sending mail with
nonexistant domains shouldn't be suprised if their mail does get
dropped.

Cheers
Si
Post by Simon Lyall
Post by Chris Wedgwood
For example one spammer sent us (over the weekend) 450,000 (approx)
emails over 3 days. All of these were from (the same) bogus domain
(optprofessional.com) .
So why did you accept them?
Because I thought he would go away after the first day. Also we very much
avoid blocking email to customers.
Except for a very small list (less than 10 ) of sites we accept all email
that comes in. Spam is only blocked for customers who subscribe to the
anti-spam service and they are able to look at whats been blocked and
retrieve it for up to 20 days afterways.
People do not accept their email being blocked and get VERY paranoid if
they think email is not getting through. Dropping people's email to the
floor is not an option in an ISP situation. At least IMHO, other people
may have different ideas but I know at leasts one ISP used to lose
customers due to the heavy spam filtering.
The ones that were blocked were *only* blocked because the volume or
nature of their email was causing load issues for our servers.
w.r.t RBLs we use them as part of our anti-spam service, useful ones
include bl.spamcop.net and kr.cluecentral.net and cn.cluecentral.net.
What software are you using for filtering? Some sort of Bayesian type
thing?
--
ihug, Auckland, NZ | Asst Doorman | Web: http://www.darkmere.gen.nz
-
unsubscribe nznog
-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Byrnand
2002-10-03 05:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Blake
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2505.txt
2.9. Verify "MAIL From:"
The MTA SHOULD be able to perform a simple "sanity check" of the
"MAIL From:" domain and refuse to receive mail if that domain is
nonexistent (i.e. does not resolve to having an MX or an A record).
If the DNS error is temporary, TempFail, the MTA MUST return a 4xx
Return Code (Temporary Error). If the DNS error is an Authoritative
NXdomain (host/domain unknown) the MTA SHOULD still return a 4xx
Return Code (since this may just be primary and secondary DNS not
being in sync) but it MAY allow for an 5xx Return Code (as configured
by the sysadmin).
Interesting.
Post by Simon Blake
It doesn't actually say that you must drop mail from nonexistant
domains, but it certainly implies that those sending mail with
nonexistant domains shouldn't be suprised if their mail does get
dropped.
It doesn't get dropped, it gets rejected. If the MTA that rejected it was
the one the end user was connecting to during the attempted send of the
message (EG their ISP's outgoing server) their email client won't even be
able to send the message - they will immediately get an error. Both Outlook
Express and Eudora will display this error, not sure about others.

However if the one rejecting it was the destination MTA then the sending
MTA will not be able to deliver it, and will have to generate a bounce.
Unfortunately, since the envelope-sender address is invalid, it has nowhere
to bounce it to, except the postmaster....

(However, any other kind of "normal" bounces, like the destination address
not existing will never bounce to the right place either, so the senders
email configuration is "broken")

Regards,
Simon


-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Lyall
2002-10-02 23:11:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Byrnand
I have to agree here. By definition email should have a return address if
it is "genuine". If the domain name of the "from" address doesn't even
exist, then its almost a sure bet that the email is bogus, and I see no
reason it should be accepted. Most MTA's seem to default to this action as
well.
I guess you don't get email from people who post to newsgroups, most of
them use bogus addresses so if they reply via email to a post the address
will not be legit ( ***@notihug.co.nz.nospam sort of thing ).

Checking around I also came across:

From: ***@Glengarry Wines

Which appears to be a legit little mailout sent last week from
e-***@Glengarry.co.nz . I didn't see any others in the search.

Our spam filtering also has a "No MX for
Chris Wedgwood
2002-10-02 23:59:23 UTC
Permalink
That's a header. What was the envelope-sender/return-path?

My guess is since most NZ ISPs with any level of clue reject email
from bogus senders, the sender-envelope was sane or that Glengarry
will realize they made a mistake and correct it.

In general this applies to anyone sending email with a bogus
sender-envelope; so many places will reject this that the problem is
rare and tends to be corrected early.
Post by Simon Lyall
Our spam filtering also has a "No MX for
Richard Stevenson
2002-10-06 21:01:22 UTC
Permalink
Hi all :)

Just to make everyone's day... the new Netguide has a copy of MailWasher
on the cover CD. Sigh.

Richard
--
Richard Stevenson
Systems Specialist
Xtra Limited
http://www.xtra.co.nz

Email: ***@team.xtra.co.nz
Phone: +64 9 3555231
Mobile: +64 25 2903101
Fax: +64 9 3555260
Pager: +64 26 100155

This email is for the person(s) identified above, and is confidential to
the sender and the person(s). No one else is authorised to use or
disseminate this email or its contents. The email or its contents do not
necessarily represent the views of Xtra Limited or Telecom.

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Simon Byrnand
2002-10-07 20:26:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juha Saarinen
Post by Richard Stevenson
Hi all :)
Just to make everyone's day... the new Netguide has a copy of MailWasher
on the cover CD. Sigh.
Right next to Bonzai Buddy... sacrilege.
You've got a bit of a Bonzai Buddy fetish going there Juha, by the large
number of posts of yours that have mentioned him in the last couple of
months...

Are you sure you aren't a closet admirer ? ;-)

Regards,
Simon


-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Juha Saarinen
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Stevenson
Hi all :)
Just to make everyone's day... the new Netguide has a copy of MailWasher
on the cover CD. Sigh.
Right next to Bonzai Buddy... sacrilege.
--
Juha Saarinen

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Dan Langille
2002-10-07 20:29:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Simon Byrnand
Post by Juha Saarinen
Post by Richard Stevenson
Hi all :)
Just to make everyone's day... the new Netguide has a copy of
MailWasher on the cover CD. Sigh.
Right next to Bonzai Buddy... sacrilege.
You've got a bit of a Bonzai Buddy fetish going there Juha, by the
large number of posts of yours that have mentioned him in the last
couple of months...
Are you sure you aren't a closet admirer ? ;-)
Closet, closest, whatever...
--
Dan Langille
I'm looking for a computer job:
http://www.freebsddiary.org/dan_langille.php

-
To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
where the body of your message reads:
unsubscribe nznog
Loading...