|
Home > Archive > Anonymous Servers > November 2005 > Antani admin is waiting for messages
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Antani admin is waiting for messages
|
|
| marcoc 2005-11-28, 7:46 am |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
A couple of posts here say that I'm not responding to mail.
None of authors followed my invitation to resend their messages
that I never had,
So please, if you try to contact me and had no answer,
please resent your message(s) to my address
antani-admin@firenze.linux.it
controlling the spelling (Antani, not Antanni).
Ciao. Antani admin.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDivjgqIOZDSyGL5cRAg15AJ9WdrjJLsD5
7NrWV1qKb2Z4tEeP4gCfRBeN
gZiLeIsBp5QkYDkEvD/mwqs=
=vjYL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2005-11-28, 5:57 pm |
| marcoc wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> A couple of posts here say that I'm not responding to mail. None of
> authors followed my invitation to resend their messages
> that I never had,
You never had them because SORBS killed them. Either you or your provider
are using SORBS. SORBS is evil. Here is your reject message (sanitized):
Final-Recipient: rfc822; mixmaster@firenze.linux.it
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host lorien.prato.linux.it[62.94.26.10] said: 554
_ _ Service unavailable; Client host [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] blocked using
_ _ dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net; Dynamic IP Addresses See:
_ _ http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx (in reply to RCPT
TO command)
>
> So please, if you try to contact me and had no answer,
> please resent your message(s) to my address
>
> antani-admin@firenze.linux.it
Messages sent to this address bounce too. I handle all my mail locally,
and have a dynamic IP. SORBS has blocked the entire block of IP addresses
I have available. It is this indiscriminate blocking that makes SORBS
unusable for most people.
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-28, 5:57 pm |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
> Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host lorien.prato.linux.it[62.94.26.10] said: 554
> _ _ Service unavailable; Client host [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] blocked using
> _ _ dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net; Dynamic IP Addresses See:
> _ _ http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx (in reply to RCPT
> TO command)
Same here:
554 Service unavailable; Client host [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] blocked using list.dsbl.org; http://dsbl.org/listing?xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-28, 5:57 pm |
| In article <182ff4892b6ad729cff04ef89db8a9a8@pseudo.borked.net>
Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>
> marcoc wrote:
>
>
> You never had them because SORBS killed them. Either you or your provider
> are using SORBS. SORBS is evil. Here is your reject message (sanitized):
>
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; mixmaster@firenze.linux.it
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.0.0
> Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host lorien.prato.linux.it[62.94.26.10] said: 554
> _ _ Service unavailable; Client host [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] blocked using
> _ _ dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net; Dynamic IP Addresses See:
> _ _ http://www.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx (in reply to RCPT
> TO command)
>
>
> Messages sent to this address bounce too. I handle all my mail locally,
> and have a dynamic IP. SORBS has blocked the entire block of IP addresses
> I have available. It is this indiscriminate blocking that makes SORBS
> unusable for most people.
The answer is for antani to read
http://www.nl.sorbs.net/using.shtml
and to ignore 127.0.0.10
| |
| Anonymous 2005-11-29, 2:46 am |
| On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, Anonymous <devnull@remailer.org.uk> wrote:
>In article <182ff4892b6ad729cff04ef89db8a9a8@pseudo.borked.net>
>Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
r[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
: 554[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
CPT[vbcol=seagreen]
s[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>The answer is for antani to read
>
>http://www.nl.sorbs.net/using.shtml
>
>and to ignore 127.0.0.10
No, the answer is no decent re-mailer uses Sorbs. XXXX him. I just ignore
him. Messages don't get through.
Dizum is a sponsor of SORBS but ignores it for remailers. Three Cheers to
Dizum. Hip Hip Hooray.
Boooooo to assholes like Antani. XXXX em, He ruins the remailer network by
breaking chains with his God like attitude. Pingers should drop his lame
XXX. He is worthless as a chain. It pisses me off everytime I get a bounce
from him because of SORBS. I want to stick his SORBS up his XXX.
Explain yourself Antani. Right here in this group. Bet you won't you
cowardly XXXXXXX and detriment to the remailer system. Why not just get the=
XXXX out. Who needs broken chains because of assholes like you? Your stats
are shit too. Do us all a favor and go away. you are ruining the system.
Understand fukhead, YOU are ruining the system.
| |
| Thrasher Remailer 2005-11-29, 8:46 pm |
| In article
<a6f270a283c8c20a03f6b5a7e9036c0c@anon.bananasplit.info>
Anonymous <nobody@invalid.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, Anonymous <devnull@remailer.org.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> No, the answer is no decent re-mailer uses Sorbs. XXXX him. I just ignore
> him. Messages don't get through.
>
> Dizum is a sponsor of SORBS but ignores it for remailers. Three Cheers to
> Dizum. Hip Hip Hooray.
>
> Boooooo to assholes like Antani. XXXX em, He ruins the remailer network by
> breaking chains with his God like attitude. Pingers should drop his lame
> XXX. He is worthless as a chain. It pisses me off everytime I get a bounce
> from him because of SORBS. I want to stick his SORBS up his XXX.
>
> Explain yourself Antani. Right here in this group. Bet you won't you
> cowardly XXXXXXX and detriment to the remailer system. Why not just get the=
>
> XXXX out. Who needs broken chains because of assholes like you? Your stats
> are shit too. Do us all a favor and go away. you are ruining the system.
> Understand fukhead, YOU are ruining the system.
Because of it's use of SORBS, Antani's stats suck...
Stats-Version: 2.0
Generated: Tue 29 Nov 2005 21:11:06 GMT
Cypherpunk Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
antani ?12????1?112 :47 02+000040222 19.1% PR GO
ATL IN
Stats-Version: 2.0
Generated: Tue 29 Nov 2005 21:11:06 GMT
Mixmaster Latent-Hist Latent Uptime-Hist Uptime Options
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
antani ??2????2?211 1:06 00+000040422 19.1% PR GO
ATL IN
Given stats like this, NOBODY will use it in a reply block.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.
| |
| marcoc 2005-11-30, 7:46 am |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I summarize here the reasons and corrective actions
that cause broken chains and dropped mail for Antani
remailer, as well as the apparent lack of answer by me,
Antani domain has a primary SMTP that doesn't use SORBS
and a secondary one, owned by another organization with
a different policy, that started to use it some months
ago.
Primary SMTP has a different hostname, in HELO messages,
that the MX hostname. This is allowed by the RFC.
It seems that some SMTP, including ones used by Dingo and
Panta, started to drop connection if MX name and HELO
name differs. This is *not allowed* by RFC, albeit is a
common but IMHO wrnog reaction to some kind of spamming.
Their SMTP dropped to secondary SMTP and were stopped by
SORBS, being on a dynamic IP.
For the same reason they had error messages trying to
write to me. It is wrong to define me "a non
answering remop" if the sender had the evidence
I never received his or her messages; more if this
is due to a stupid, non RFC conforming, limitation
of his SMTP.
To cope with this, we changed HELO hostname to match
MX one, and arrange for a different, non SORBSed
backup MX
One more problem arose; the ping message catched
by nilsimsa, triggered by a sudden batch of ping
due to unknow reason (batch processing of an SMTP
queue of held messages by the previos remailer
in chain ?).
Manually observing the rules file allow to catch
this for Panta & Dingo pings. Is Reliable a more
aggressive pinger that Echolot ? This problem
usually arise only from Reliable pingers.
Antani admin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDjXPUqIOZDSyGL5cRAm6JAKCADJtALRzB
gBQQEoBbL/yMThM+JgCePPp9
uKesT2fxb+6cWDaXPXgfaKk=
=acgi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|
|