- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: New crypto bill to be introduced
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:03 PM 3/28/96 -0500, Declan B. McCullagh wrote: >At CFP today, we heard about a new crypto bill being introduced >tomorrow, which will be similar to Leahy's bill with the >crypto-being-used-in-furtherance-of-crime portion removed and an >explicit no-government-mandated-escrow provision added. While this does sound like progress, I'm suspicious. Peter Junger's analysis raised serious doubt as to the ability of bill to open up the crypto export market as it purported to. And where, exactly, did this these changes come from? Who was consulted? What recommendations were NOT taken? >We have put our "List of Shame" numbers on our nametags. >-Declan You're overdoing it on this "List of Shame" thing. You don't know who actually made those anonymous postings, and it's been observed that those names seem to correspond nicely with an NSA-hate list. It would not take a great deal of imagination to conclude that the NSA was motivated to de-focus our anger at the Leahy bill and replace it with a great deal of back-stabbing commentary. (If that was the intent, it succeeded...) On the other hand, I've also noticed that there hasn't been a lot of specific analysis of the Leahy bill in the last few weeks, and my suggestion that the Leahy bill be informally re-written to address Junger's objections (as well as my own, and Tim May's, etc) has not resulted in a great deal of repair work. Now, miraculously, a replacement bill appears that includes SOME repairs. (obviously, we have to wait to hear how most of it comes out...) I get the impression that we are being sequentially offered ice cream cones with decreasing amounts of poison in them, in the hopes that at some point we'll bite. It seems to me that whoever is writing these bills should be willing to make a statement about what his goals are, and who he's talking to as he crafts them, and what changes he was UNwilling to include. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

RC4 licensening
by Jack Mott 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello Cypherworld, Anyone know how much it costs to license RC4 or how RSA has been handling the whole situation? I finally got my Turbo C implementation to work with the DELPHI 2.0 version, I'm pumped. Now I just have to get GCC figured out and I'll make the Linux version work too. yyyeeeeha. -- thecrow(a)iconn.net "It can't rain all the time" RSA ENCRYPTION IN 3 LINES OF PERL --------------------------------------------------------- #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

2 1

JT's Restarants - Excellent Undervauled Investment Opportunity
by jtsr-stock＠jtsr-stock.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To be removed from our mailing list please reply to this message with "REMOVE" in the subject. Recently we wrote you to tell about an excellent investment opportunity in JT's Restaurants (OTC BB: JTSR). Since our last message was sent JTSR has risen in value over 40% (from Feb 17, 1998 to March 6, 1998). This is just the beginning. This is still a ground floor opportunity. If you would like more information about this exciting investment opportunity please visit our web site at http://www.jtsr-stock.com or call 1-888-295-6365 for complete information. The contents of this message have been provided for the review of potential investors only and does not constitute an offering of securities.

1 0

No Subject
by owner-cypherpunks＠toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, Mike Duvos wrote: > tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) writes: > > > At 1:46 PM 3/27/96, Scott Schryvers wrote: > > >> Question. If e-cash were backed by gold would that make it > >> more reliable than say the dollar? > > Not necessarily. Historically, gold emerged as the primary > currency metal because [Excellent points about gold's practical use, good timing, and industrial value countered by the current lack of industrial value.] > Basically, one can create monetary value for any commodity whose > supply can be controlled, usually by the folks wishing to lend it > value, by simply making a stable market in it, and having the > reputation and power to control that market in perpetuity. > > The best example of this is probably the diamond market. Here we > have a rare but intrinsically worthless material, the gem quality > diamond, which has no useful industrial applications at all, > since non-gem quality diamonds and substitutes, both synthetic > and natural, are in abundance. I was with you until this. In fact diamonds are anything but rare. Their value is the result of the most exceptional marketing by DeBeers, and the very tight restrictions on supply. I might note that the restrictions on supply are even somewhat tangential. DeBeers has created one of the most historic, long standing and impressive market distortions anyone has ever seen. Of course this only goes to further the argument (which I think you are adopting) that it is fairly simple to estlablish a commodity of "value" regardless of intrinsic worth) > Gem quality diamonds are extremely valuable, because their supply > is carefully controlled, and because of clever marketing designed > to convince every male human in North America and most of Europe > that shelling out two months salary for one is the unique and > true symbol of everlasting love. Even gem quality stones are relatively abundant believe it or not. > The diamond industry has even made plans for the holographic > fingerprinting of every diamond they release, should synthetic > gem-quality diamonds ever hit the market, so that they may > continue their control of the supply of their "currency", even in > the face of a flood of absolutely identical "unsanctioned" gems. Again, even absent the intrinsic value of the substance it seems that marketing and perception will dictate "effective value." > I recall a very clever Science Fiction story I read a number of > years ago in which aliens completely destroyed human civilization > by manufacturing all the world's goods and services, and > accepting payment only in cowpies, which were subject to an > arbitrary and complicated grading system similar to that used by > modern gemologists. One day, the aliens simply left, and human > civilization, consisting mostly by then of PhD Cowflopologists > with expertise only in interpreting swirls on lumps of shit, > promptly folded. This is precisely the point, and why, while I agree with your comments about gold today, I think the most important issue is the long term solvency of a commodity. As you have noted, anyone can make a substance worth something in the short term. (Tulips) The challenge, and the goal in my view, is to create a currency based on a backing which endures the long term, and the unthinkable (collapse of a major government or some such). > Before I digress to far from your original question, let me state > the point I am trying to make here. If a entity, or group of > entities, with reputation and power to make a market, decide to > demoninate a currency using a rare commodity, it makes little > difference whether the rare commodity is near-perfect crystals of > carbon found only on land that they own, a vault filled with gold > bars, exponentiated random numbers modulo the product of two > large but closely guarded primes, or statistically unlikely > swirls in wads of digested plant material dropping from the butt > of a cow. > > In all these cases, the important thing is not the commodity, but > the entities guaranteeing the market, and the perception of their > reputation and ability to support said currency in perpetuity. > Absolute control over the supply of the commodity in question > doesn't hurt either. When the value of the intrinsic worth of a commodity in question does become apparent is in periods of transition, flux, disorder, or strife. The security of a currency is going to be a major factor, especially immediately following introduction, to its popularity- except in unusual circumstances (tulips, market distortions, etc.) > Indeed, US government backed e-cash would be a far more trusted > and reliable currency than gold backed currency printed by > DigiCash BV. I'm not sure this is precisely true. While gold itself might not be the best choice, the general principal that a commodity based currency is less secure or trustworthy than a government backed one (even a powerful and imposing government) is not one I'm prepared to endorse without reservation. > One good inflation-resistant indicator of whether gold is a good > value is the ratio between gold and silver prices. Both of these > metals are mined with similar difficulty, and have similar uses > for backing currency and as coinage metals. Historically, there > have been times when gold and silver prices were approximately > equal. > > I have no doubt that if the unwashed masses were sold the notion > that gold was the single reliable inflation-proof form of wealth > they could own, and the holdings of international bankers were > sold into the hands of millions of individual citizens, a > controlled devaluation would follow, together with much chortling > and uncorking of champagne, as gold and silver prices became > nearly equal again. I believe this correct. > As long as people who count have vaults full of the stuff, and > wish to carry it on their books as an expensive asset, it will of > course continue to have its current inflated value, and nothing > will be done to depress the market. In that sense gold is a > reliable asset, as long as most of the little people refrain from > jumping on the bandwagon. Just like diamonds. Again, while the commodity itself (gold) may not be appropriate, I don't believe this ends the argument. > > No form of digital money extant is an actual currency in > > the conventional sense. Nor does this seem likely. Nor > > necessary. Nor useful. Nor important. > > Actual currency can circulate forever in the economy without > eventual conversion into some other kind of money. The > requirements of current digital cash systems for centralized > clearing to eliminate double spending and to mint new coins tends > to preclude the kinds of perpetual peer-to-peer transactions we > think of when we conceptualize "currency." Which suggests that private currencys must utilize e-cash (if at all) merely as monetary instruments which continue to look much like what exists today. (e.g., drafts, checks, bonds...) > Real electronic currency could be invented, but would have to > live its life within a population of tamper-proof smart cards > communicating with each other through secure protocols. Whether > anyone will bother to implement such a system remains to be seen. I concur. > Until then, the "check" model of digital money is, as Tim points > out, the correct one. I concur again. > > The point being that talking about "what backs up digital > > cash?" is misleading. (What really backs it up is the > > reputation of the entities, but I digress.) > > "The reputation of the entities" is the only important > consideration regardless of what the cash is denominated in. In > most cases, the valued commodities, if they exist, are simply > pretty window-dressing for some unseen but powerful syndicate. Yet here I must differ. I'm still not convinced that a legitimate commodity somewhat resistant to the market distortions you cite does not exist. Don't ask me what it is yet, I'll have to give it some thought. > -- > Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ > mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $ --- My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information

1 0

New crypto bill to be introduced
by Declan B. McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At CFP today, we heard about a new crypto bill being introduced tomorrow, which will be similar to Leahy's bill with the crypto-being-used-in-furtherance-of-crime portion removed and an explicit no-government-mandated-escrow provision added. John Gilmore asked wonderful questions after the moot Supreme Court session. We have put our "List of Shame" numbers on our nametags. -Declan

1 0

Re: Why Americans feel no compulsion to learn foreign languages
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 11:49 AM 03/28/96 -0800, frantz(a)netcom.com (Bill Frantz) wrote: >I, at least, want to know something of the language of the countries I >travel in. Being able to get a meal or a room for the night is useful. As >a rock bottom minimum, I want to know the phrases: Hello, Good by, Please, >Thank You, More beer please, and Where's the bathroom. Indeed, I've found that pretty much covers the essentials :-) First things I've always tried to learn in a foreign language are "please" and "thank you". > >The look of pleased surprise on the face of the Budapest resident when I >said "Thank you" to in Hungarian as he gave up his seat to me because I was >loaded down with caving equipment is something I still treasure. > Sounds much similar to the reaction I got in Japan, speaking broken Japanese. Atrocious accent, of course; abysmal grammar, and a fair share of mispronunciation tossed in - but I was *trying*, and that counted for a _lot_. I also have to concur with the point about the language/point-of-view argument. I never have learned to _think_ in a foreign language (a prerequisite for fluency, I believe :-), but have gotten sufficiently skilled to be able to understand some of the subtleties of the languages I've (kind of) learned. Regarding the notoriety of British (and, yes, Americans), I met up with a Brit in Japan who complained about the 'bloody foreigners that don't understand proper English'. I pointed out to him that *we* were the foreigners, and that the Japanese had a nicely organized society about the same time that his ancestors and mine were still smearing themselves with blue mud. That earned me an Evil Look. Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMVpW7MVrTvyYOzAZAQE/xQP/WhYi/LAT2M/QYJ+b2PW7sOrRg2r0ZNcU gl3gk50RWY7AOUeEaifNM2ZWMl5oqqKSjA+eV5pnFZBlQBgrbnuzRHLi2F9IigZ6 Uu2V3/DHaTGY9ZVdWok0deU8DnkoY0W07pafggB9qpTCgqTGhU0NNOVxeWlU2HsT 6Yu9l5QduHM= =XMSb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P. J. O'Rourke (b. 1947), U.S. journalist. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> http://www.shellback.com/personal/merriman/index.htm

1 0

Free Insurance Quote
by sara＠iddqd.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

DO YOU WANT LIFE INSURANCE FROM THE BEST COMPANIES AT THE LOWEST PRICE? COMPANIES LIKE: Security Connecticut, First Colony Life, Lincoln Benefit Life, Life of Virginia, Midland, Mutual of Omaha, New York Life, and many, many others! COMPARE YOUR CURRENT COVERAGE to these 10-year level term sampler, monthly premiums for super-preferred non-smokers. Age $100,000 $250,000 $500,000 Male Female Male Female Male Female 30 $10.00 $10.00 $17.00 $15.00 $28.00 $24.00 40 $12.00 $11.00 $21.00 $19.00 $36.00 $32.00 50 $21.00 $17.00 $44.00 $33.00 $82.00 $59.00 60 $43.00 $29.00 $99.00 $63.00 $193.00 $119.00 Are you paying too much for coverage? Chances are we can help! With past cases, our insurance professionals have SAVED THEIR CLIENTS AS MUCH AS 60% IN ANNUAL PREMIUMS! Visit http://www.servicebrokers.com/life_insurance.htm for a FREE rate quote TODAY! Our members shop the market for you to offer the lowest priced "A" and above rated Life Insurance companies in your state! Why waste YOUR time and MONEY with a one-company agent? To receive your FREE NO OBLIGATION quote, please: Visit http://www.servicebrokers.com/life_insurance.htm or http://www.servicebrokers.com/health_insurance.htm for individuals and businesses If you do not wish to receive information regarding, life, health and other insurance related offers as well as information on home loans. please click here: mailto:sara@iddqd.org?subject=remove

1 0

suggestions for starting an e-bank
by brookfld＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi! If I were going to start an e-bank, what would you suggest? 1. What type of e-cash system? 2. What services to offer? 3. Where would I get information? 4. Where is there a need in the marketplace? A friend of mine has the means and desire to do this, and he wanted me to ask and then forward the answers to him. Thank you in advance. --Richard

2 1

Re: Open Systems, Closed Systems, & Killer Apps
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:14 AM 4/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >Various correspondents have pointed out that X.25 is an "open system" in >that it is not proprietary. I knew that. I was thinking more of >hierarchical vs peer-to-peer. I have been under the impression that >TCP/IP connections are more peer-to-peer between different sorts of >networks (or nodes) than X.25. Isn't X.25 more of a standard for a >single network? Don't X.25 networks need someone more "in charge" than >TCP/IP networks, or am I mixing up different layers on the OSI reference >model? X.25 is an interface between a Data Terminal Equipment and a Data Communications Equipment, rather than a whole-network format like IP and TCP. X.25 networks often have random proprietary internals, and they're designed for a world where there IS only one network, because after all, there's only one Phone Company; the X.75 protocol lets X.25 networks talk to each other. But if you look at the higher levels of the protocols, they're not really that different than TCP applications - you've typically got a listener application waiting around for connections from client programs. It feels a bit less peer-to-peer because usually the service you want is the X.3/X.28/X.29 stuff that's X.25's equivalent to telnet, so the server end is a MainFrame, and the client end is a terminal pad that you've connected your 3270 or dumb terminal to. But you can do other things as well, if your computer environment will support it. Simon Spero wrote: } you can call X.25 a lot of things, but proprietary is not one of them. } X.25 did not fail because it wasn't open; X.25 failed because it was crap It's not dead yet, and you can't even say it's failed, given that it's still in wide use in much of the world. X.25 was design to work on networks with really bad bit loss - we're talking modems on barbed wire here, or whatever the French use instead of barbed wire, and in days when computers were _slow_. Yes, it's bureaucratically designed, and parts of it genuinely are ugly, and it does lots of work at Layer 2 that these days you'd do at a higher layer. And, yes, it's a lousy environment to do full-duplex character echo over. But it works ok for a large fraction of the world's data communications, which are designed for less interactive environments. It's fine for email. It's fine for 3270 fill-in-the-blanks applications. It's fine for pre-Web online service applications like CompuServe. It reeks badly for client-server applications which do a dozen little handshakes per transaction, which are designed assuming they're on a LAN and fail badly when stretched across an ocean, but you'll find they often do badly on frame relay as well. Are the Internet and Frame Relay both better ways to do anything than X.25? Yeah. Would I want to do interactive work on it? Of course not. Would I like to do another project getting vendors to modify their X.25 and CLNP to support a set of seldom-used options that some security consultant once convinced one of my customers they needed? No way. Was I susprised that not only does AT&T still use X.25 in some of its older dialup networks, but that it's still very big overseas? Well, yeah :-) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215

1 0

Re: On "spammers" and "anti-spammers"
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Path: perun!dlv From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr. Dimitri Vulis) Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.e-mail,news.groups,news.admin.misc,news.admin.censorship,alt.fan.karl-malden.nose,soc.culture.russian Subject: On "spammers" and "anti-spammers" Message-ID: <JL9u2D1w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Date: Sun, 09 Feb 97 10:52:06 EST Organization: Death Camp #6 Several days ago one Robert Hicks, DM Group, Direct Marketing Management, 2774 National Pkwy, Brunswick, Ohio, retained one Thomas Gallman, Telysis Communications Ltd, to do a mass e-mail for them. Unfortunately, Telesys made a small typo when sending out their mass e-mail. DM Group's domain address is "dm1.com" and our domain address is "dm.com" (no digit). That happens a lot, and not always accidentally. Malcontents like Peter da Silva, Chris Lewis of BNR.CA, John Gilmore of EFF/Cygnus Support, Ray Arachelian of Earthlink.com, Sandy Sandfart of C2Net, Peter Vorobieff of LANL.GOV, and other well-known liars and forgers intentionally forge garbage traffic on the Internet with their enemies' domain names (including ours) and later complain about their own forgeries. I was surprised by Telysis's unintentional error, but I hold no grudge against them. However as the result of their mass mailing our site has received hundreds of flames from the self-appointed net.cops, ending up in mailboxes "postmaster" and "orphan" (sent to a non-existent mailbox "freeway(a)dm.com"). Many such flames were also sent to PSI, our upstream site. I am fairly dissatisfied with the way PSI handled this and other incidents involving forged traffic made to look like it came from dm.com. Their lines include "we've been receiving a lot of complaints about you" (and it doesn't matter whether any complaints are true) and "if you prove that this traffic did not originate at your site, then we won't hold you responsible" and "These messages are unwelcome intrusions that violate unwritten rules of the Internet, and are strongly resented. Please confirm that you are aware of these complaints and are taking measures to stop this practice." I also noticed a sharp contrast between the polite letter send out by dm1.com (who were trying to sell something, I presume; and you don't sell anything if you're rude to prospective clients) and the obnoxious, obscene, and threatening responses the net.cops sent to our site. I will quote a selection of these complaints to illustrate the kind of abuse many ISPs are subjected to. Please observe that one of the complainers claims to have received "death threats" from a nonexistent account at our site, several others claim to have received such junk e-mail from our site before, etc. If your e-mail to dm.com is quoted below, please consider the following: If someone sends you junk e-mail, it does not make it OK to send abusive and threatening e-mail to (what you believe to be) the spammer's ISP. Please try to use better manners, even when you deal with behavior that you consider to be rude. ========================================================================== Received: from localhost (vinylot@localhost) by panix.com (8.8.5/8.7/PanixU1.3) with SMTP id PAA18512; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 15:19:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 15:19:07 -0500 (EST) From: Vinylot <vinylot(a)panix.com> To: freeway(a)dm.com Cc: vinylot(a)panix.com, postmaster(a)dm.com Subject: DEATH THREAT In-Reply-To: <B0000010411(a)telysis3.telysis.com> Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.94.970206151319.15438E-100000(a)panix.com> Hey assholes why dont you configure yer fuckin spam properly so that when we try to remove ouselves from the list we don't get even more unwanted email you scumbags ========================================================================== Received: from localhost (vinylot@localhost) by panix.com (8.8.5/8.7/PanixU1.3) with SMTP id VAA23841; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 21:32:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 21:32:23 -0500 (EST) From: Vinylot <vinylot(a)panix.com> To: postmaster(a)bwalk.dm.com, postmaster(a)dm.com Cc: vinylot(a)panix.com Subject: In re: "Death Threat" *and* "Returned mail (fwd)" Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.94.970206212030.21557A-100000(a)panix.com> I see your customer has made themselves unreachable via email, in addition to sending out extremely annoying spam... I'm just sending this note to let u know that I *am not* making any death threats. Vinylot ========================================================================== Received: (from semmett@localhost) by adams.patriot.net (8.7.4/8.7.3) id LAA11132; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:10:04 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:10:03 -0500 (EST) From: Steve Emmett <semmett(a)adams.patriot.net> To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)telysis.com, abuse(a)telysis.com postmaster(a)telysis3.telysis.com, abuse(a)telysis3.telysis.com, freeway(a)dm.com Cc: Steve Emmett <semmett(a)adams.patriot.net> Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970206103706.8729A-100000(a)adams.patriot.net> Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970206104357.8729B-100000(a)adams.patriot.net> I just sent you a rejection before realizing that YOU have already spammed me and I have already given you a previous notice (28 January 1997). Therefore, since you have SPAMMED me again, you have accepted the terms of my licencing agreement you previously received from me - to wit, each subsequent use (including this most recent one) are now subject to a $1000 per-use fee. You have failed to provide a valid US Postal Address as required by the licence. You will immediately provide the address so that I can send you a bill. Violation of this license agreement is cause for civil suit. You are now on notice to immediately comply with the terms of the licensing agreement. ========================================================================== Received: by tfs.com (smail3.1.28.1) Message-Id: <m0vsYnR-0003vzC(a)TFS.COM> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 97 10:43 PST From: hiha(a)TFS.COM (Harry Iha) To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, freeway(a)dm.com Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! Cc: admin(a)206.222.107.196, admin(a)dm.com, admin(a)dm1.com, hiha(a)TFS.COM, postmaster(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm1.com This is the second instance of this unsolicited, commercial e-mail I've received. The first was from Freeway4(a)dm1.com, the second, identical message from what appears to be the same user. Both times, I've responded, as instructed, to be removed from this user's mailing list. Please remove me from your current mailing list, and do not include me in future lists. Thank you for your cooperation. hiha(a)tfs.com ========================================================================== Received: from bubbas.vnet.net (vts-cat1-s1.vnet.net [166.82.120.221]) by jazzmin.vnet.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA16984; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:52:06 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970206134940.0066f5f4(a)pop.vnet.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:49:40 -0500 To: freeway(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm.com, abuse(a)dm.com, admin(a)dm.com From: Brantley Smith <bubbas(a)vnet.net> Subject: FREE OFFER !!/ *GET A LIFE*!! Please do something to stop this spammer. This is the second message I've recieved from this dude. The whole message is below. ========================================================================== Received: from ioceram.jetcity.com (annex01-06.jetcity.com [204.201.228.106]) by jetcity.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA21385; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 14:47:53 -0800 Message-Id: <199702062247.OAA21385(a)jetcity.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is <ioceram(a)[204.201.228.10]> From: "Bryce Conner" <stars(a)jetcity.com> Organization: Procrastinate Later To: postmaster(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)dm.com Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 14:47:43 +0000 Subject: (Fwd) FREE OFFER !!: I want these mailings to stop immediately Reply-To: stars(a)jetcity.com Cc: bryce(a)jetcity.com This user has repeatedly sent me unsolicited advertising, even after I requested that they stop. I consider this a clear example of harrassment and net abuse. I request that you warn your customer or take the proper diciplinary action. This kind of activity (SPAMMING) is extremely frowned upon by the net in general, and one request to this person should be enough for them to remove me from their mailing list, especially since I did not request to be on it in the first place. Often this will result in the removal of the account in question. I promised to follow up with this action if they repeated, and so here it is. I would apprecate a reply to this email within 1 week. Sincerely, Bryce Conner ========================================================================== Received: (from nuucp@localhost) by gateway.ycrdi.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) id KAA13226; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:49:14 -0500 (EST) From: ralph_muha(a)ycrdi.com (Ralph Muha) Reply-To: ralph_muha(a)ycrdi.com To: postmaster(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)telysis.com Subject: Fwd: FREE OFFER !! Date: 06 Feb 1997 15:54:01 GMT Message-Id: <649199615.3797450(a)ycrdi.com> Organization: Young Chang R & D Institute please keep this crap out of my mailbox! ========================================================================== Received: from koko (unverified [202.128.5.10]) by www.latte.net (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id <B0000002260(a)www.latte.net>; Fri, 07 Feb 1997 00:42:38 +1000 Message-Id: <B0000002260(a)www.latte.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is <alex(a)latte.net> From: "Alex Fields" <alex(a)latte.net> Organization: Latte Net Communications To: postmaster(a)dm.com Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 00:53:45 +10 Subject: (Fwd) Delivery failure tell this asshole to take me off his GD list. thank you. alex fields ========================================================================== Received: from nwlink.com (ip061.tu1.nwlink.com [206.129.228.61]) by montana.nwlink.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA02282; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:48:39 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Greenfield <redbeard(a)nwlink.com> To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, freeway(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm.com postmaster(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)dm1.com Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 08:49:10 +0500 Message-Id: <yam6976.511.138150712(a)mail.nwlink.com> Organization: Polymorph Digital Photography and Electronics Subject: Please read and respond I recieved the following unsolicited Email today. Please take the appropriate action. I am sick and tired of receiving multiple "junk" emails every day, despite the fact that my signature always includes info indicating that I do not welcome them, and in fact will not do business with anyone who does business this way. <snipped> -- Steve Greenfield redbeard(a)nwlink.com If you don't want my business, go ahead and junk Email. If you never want income from me, go ahead and spam. ========================================================================== Received: from gabubba.paradise.net (gabubba(a)adial095.paradise.net [205.216.68.95]) by q.paradise.net (8.7/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA21198; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 12:18:13 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970206171705.006d71c4(a)paradise.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 12:17:05 -0500 To: postmaster(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm1.com From: Bubba <gabubba(a)paradise.net> Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! Dear Postmaster, I received the following unsolicited e-mail, please ensure that this person no longer sends unsolicited e-mail. If I receive another message from this user, I will refer it to the proper autorities for investigation as an illegl scam. <snipped> Bubba "bubba69" or "BearPiss" on IRC, Atlanta, Georgia, USA 40 year old, big ol' cub's face fuckin', cigar smokin' tattooed leather top daddy bear, 6'2", 240#, 38" 501's, blue eyes, furry, BUSHY greying beard and 'stache, flags left black, red, and yellow, in Atlanta, GA If you enjoy bearcodes: B8 f+ t+ w+ d+ g++ k++ ========================================================================== Received: by ip143.van5.pacifier.com with Microsoft Mail id <01BC142A.585245A0(a)ip143.van5.pacifier.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 12:36:16 -0800 Message-Id: <01BC142A.585245A0(a)ip143.van5.pacifier.com> From: Tony Foulke <tonyf(a)pacifier.com> To: "'B0000010411(a)telysis3.telysis.com'" <B0000010411(a)telysis3.telysis.com>, "'freeway(a)206.222.107.196'" <freeway(a)206.222.107.196>, "'freeway(a)dm.com'" <freeway(a)dm.com> Subject: RE: FREE OFFER !! Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 12:36:11 -0800 This is a formal notice that bulk email is NOT to be sent to tonyf(a)pacifier.com It is not wanted. Any UCE coming from you or any clients of yours will be considered harassment. Not only will a bill for my service charge of $250 be received by you, but a criminal complaint will be filed as well. COMMERCIAL EMAIL IS NOT WANTED AT THIS ACCOUNT OR ANY OTHER ACCOUNT HELD BY ANTHONY FOULKE. This is your ONLY notice. --Anthony Foulke -- All unsolicited commercial e-mail coming to this account is subject to a service charge of $250 per piece of mail. Sending any UCE to this account constitutes acceptance of these terms. ========================================================================== Received: from localhost (snakeman@localhost) by thecore.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id SAA00892 for <root(a)dm.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:22:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:22:58 -0500 (EST) From: snakeman <snakeman(a)thecore.com> To: root(a)dm.com Subject: FREE OFFER !! (fwd) Message-Id: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970206181747.503A-100000(a)guardian.thecore.com> If you do not wish your mailbox to be flooded with complaints, and, possibly, unix kernels - please take the appropriate action with the below user who is spamming mailboxes. Any further posts from that user will result in a campaign on Usenet to ban your site. ========================================================================== Received: from h.m.ginsberg.worldnet.att.net ([207.146.7.96]) by mtigwc01.worldnet.att.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with SMTP id AAA28725; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 21:45:53 +0000 Message-Id: <32FA50AF.4AAB(a)worldnet.att.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 16:44:15 -0500 From: "Howard M. Ginsberg" <h.m.ginsberg(a)worldnet.att.net> Organization: Amateur Radio Operator W1HG/4 To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196 Cc: postmaster(a)telysis.com, freeway(a)dm.com Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! References: <B0000008087(a)telysis3.telysis.com> PLEASE IMMEDIATELY REMOVE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST. ANY FURTHER E-MAILS FROM YOU WILL RESULT IN THE AUTOMATIC GENERATION OF A MINIMUM OF 10,000+ E-MAILS TO YOU ON A DAILY BASIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE COOPERATION. ========================================================================== Received: from localhost (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id JAA16508; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:36:27 -0500 To: freeway(a)[206.222.107.196] Cc: postmaster(a)dm.com, psinet-domain-admin(a)PSI.COM, hostinfo(a)PSI.COM, domain-fee-contact(a)PSI.COM, postmaster(a)TELYSIS.COM Subject: JUNK: FREE OFFER !! (REMOVE DELETE UNSUBSCRIBE UN-SUBSCRIBE) In-Reply-To: Message <B0000008087(a)telysis3.telysis.com> of "Sun, 28 Jan 1996 08:17:36 EST" Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 09:36:26 -0500 Message-Id: <16506.855239786(a)interlog.com> From: John R MacMillan <john(a)interlog.com> Please remove me from your junk mailing list. If you are not the originator of this message, you may wish to know that a spammer is making use of your mail system. ISPs please consider having an ``Acceptable Use'' policy that forbids spamming. This junk mail appears to be from: freeway(a)206.222.107.196 To a junk mailing list maintained by: freeway(a)dm.com And appears to have been injected into the mail system at: telysis3.telysis.com Accordingly, the following addresses have been notified: freeway(a)[206.222.107.196] postmaster(a)dm.com psinet-domain-admin(a)PSI.COM hostinfo(a)psi.com domain-fee-contact(a)PSI.COM postmaster(a)TELYSIS.COM Further mail from freeway(a)206.222.107.196 will be automatically forwarded to the above addresses, and possibly to sites that maintain lists of abusive spammers. Mail from this address WILL NOT BE SEEN BY ME. This is an automated message. ========================================================================== Received: from BHeaton (dtp01-21.txdirect.net [204.57.92.245]) by legend.txdirect.net (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id KAA18681; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:06:02 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:06:02 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199702061606.KAA18681(a)legend.txdirect.net> From: Brian D Heaton <bheaton(a)txdirect.net> Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! -- SPAM To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, freeway(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)telysis.com Cc: abuse(a)psi.net, abuse(a)psi.com, postmaster(a)psi.net, postmaster(a)psi.com Sirs, Remove me from all mailings managed by you company immediately. This is my second request. Any further mailings from your organization will result in further action. PSI - This network abuser is a client of your service. I would appreciate a notification of the action taken agains this organization. BDH ========================================================================== Received: from [207.8.3.19] by jump.net (8.8.4/BERK-6.8.11) id UAA08328; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 20:19:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <v01510100af20433e39a2(a)[207.8.2.23]> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 20:29:47 -0600 To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, freeway(a)dm.com From: netminder(a)jump.net (ERic V & Lisa S) Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! Cc: postmaster(a)206.222.107.196 I don't want any free stuff. In fact, I'm quite put out that I'm getting this junk. I'm copying your postmaster on the off chance that it's not you, on the hopes that you'll get a stern talking to or perhaps even removal from your service. Spamming like this is VERY frowned upon. It appears (as I've now received several of these 'type REMOVE' type messages) that someone is selling my email address. I would appreciate, if that is the case, that you send me their name and/or number and/or email address so that I can let them know personally my feelings. I also recommend, if that is indeed the case, that you contact the BBB and your State Comptroller and see what can be done about capturing the charlatans. Good luck with the barrage of nasty messages you're about to receive. ERic ========================================================================== Received: (from egburr@localhost) by kiowa.wildstar.net (8.8.3/8.7.3) id IAA21628; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:53:09 -0600 From: Edward Burr <egburr(a)kiowa.wildstar.net> Message-Id: <199702071453.IAA21628(a)kiowa.wildstar.net> Subject: ABUSE (was: FREE OFFER !!) To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, root(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)206.222.107.196 abuse(a)206.222.107.196, twalton(a)ACSI.NET, postmaster(a)TELYSIS.COM, psinet-domain-admin(a)PSI.COM, info(a)DM1.COM, root(a)CLEVER.NET, root(a)ACSI.NET, postmaster(a)ACSI.NET, abuse(a)ACSI.NET Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:53:09 -0600 (CST) Cc: root(a)TELYSIS.COM, postmaster(a)TELYSIS.COM, abuse(a)TELYSIS.COM, root(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm.com, abuse(a)dm.com, root(a)DM1.COM, postmaster(a)DM1.COM, abuse(a)DM1.COM In-Reply-To: <B0000008091(a)telysis3.telysis.com> from "freeway(a)206.222.107.196" at Jan 28, 96 08:17:40 am Dear junk email spammer, please REMOVE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST IMMEDIATELY. I charge for reading unsolicited email advertising. I did not sign up for this, and I should not have to request to not be made a victim of this. I have a limited amout of disk space available to me, and your junk email is wasting some of it. By the way, you really need to fix your clock; the current year is 1997. POSTMASTER/SYSADMIN: Please archive this notice in case I need proof that I sent it and it was received at your site. Thank you. ACSI.NET You are the last nameserved host along the route to the originating IP address of this spam. TELYSIS.COM You are the originating mail server. DM.COM (PSI.COM) You are who this spam is supposedly TO; this indicates you are probably being used as a mail list forwarder. DM1.COM (CLEVER.NET) You are hosting this spammer's web site. (offending junk email spam below...) --/Edward Burr/-------------------+---------------------------------- | Senior, Science Education, OU | Use of my e-mail address or URL | | egburr(a)wildstar.net | is restricted. Visit my home | | http://www.wildstar.net/~egburr | page for details. | \ / \ / \ Unless otherwise noted, all opinions here are solely my own./ ========================================================================== Received: from vfg-pa1-10.ix.netcom.com (vfg-pa1-10.ix.netcom.com [205.184.1.42]) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA13579 for <postmaster(a)dm.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 23:49:17 -0800 From: ISCHLANG(a)IX.NETCOM.COM To: postmaster(a)dm.com Subject: LEGAL WARNING Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:48:17 GMT Message-Id: <32fecec9.1097207(a)smtp.ix.netcom.com> Dear Postmaster, On two other occasions I have requested to be removed from your clients list, yet I am still receiving unsolicited email advertising from them. This is in direct violation of US CODE TITLE 47 under which I may collect 500 dollars for each occurrence. Please look into this and get back to me prior to my filing charges against you and your client for this continued harassment. ========================================================================== Received: (from hazmat@localhost) by nsa.ecosoft.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) id JAA02044; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:17:22 -0500 (EST) From: Ken W <hazmat(a)shore.net> Message-Id: <199702061417.JAA02044(a)nsa.ecosoft.com> Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)telysis.com, postmaster(a)dm1.com Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:17:22 -0500 (EST) Cc: freeway(a)dm.com In-Reply-To: <B0000008257(a)telysis3.telysis.com> from "freeway(a)206.222.107.196" at Jan 28, 1996 08:23:34 AM This is a spam is is hopefully grounds for immediate termination of your account. People like you make the Internet a place that is not very fun anymore. <snipped> -- hazmat(a)shore.net http://www.shore.net/~hazmat Shore.Net Web Administration webmaster(a)shore.net http://www.shore.net/ "...and the number of the beast is vivivi...." ========================================================================== Received: from [206.80.13.141] (sfmax2-141.ppp.wenet.net [206.80.13.141]) by mom.hooked.net (8.8.0/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA20127 for <postmaster(a)dm.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 13:13:34 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: acates(a)mailhost.hooked.net Message-Id: <l03010d00af1ff926c8b5(a)[206.80.13.141]> Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 13:12:19 -0800 To: postmaster(a)dm.com From: Alden Cates <acates(a)hooked.net> Subject: "FREE OFFER !!" Junk e-mail I tried to remove myself from this listing but I can't!! I did NOT signup to be on this list and I don't want this tye of crap in my e-mail box. I got a message saying that the address my "REMOVE: e-mail went to did not get there. I recently got this e-mail: ========================================================================== Received: from RICHARD.COMP-UNLTD.COM (richard.comp-unltd.com [204.212.166.234]) by cu.imt.net (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA12115; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:28:34 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199702061528.IAA12115(a)cu.imt.net> From: "Richard Barndt" <richard(a)imt.net> To: <freeway(a)dm.com> Cc: <postmaster(a)dm.com> Subject: REMOVE Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:30:42 -0700 Offense under US code Title 47, Sec 227(b) (1) (C) I have recently received UNSOLICITED and UNWANTED junk e-mail from an individual who appears to be using your site. A copy of that mail is attached herewith. Junk Mail is now regarded as the same as unwanted and unsolicited junk faxes and telemarketing calls - all of which are now ILLEGAL under US federal law: By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b) (1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for EACH violation. Please ensure this is stopped NOW. You have been put on notice. If you confirm to me promptly that effective action has been taken against those persons responsible, I will not take the matter further on this occasion. If you do not provide me with such confirmation in a timely manner, or if ANY further UNSOLICITED or UNWANTED junk mail should be received from your site, I will instruct my attorney to issue a writ WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE, and the matter will then be pursued under federal law. I will separately notify your upstream providers as they may also be liable for violations originating from your site. ========================================================================== Received: from lawr40.static.usit.net (lawr40.static.usit.net [199.1.57.110]) by SMTP.USIT.NET (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA14481; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 01:27:48 -0500 (EST) From: sstutts(a)usit.net (THE Lone Wolf) To: 206.222.107.196(a)abuse.networks.net, B0000008256(a)telysis3.telysis.com dm.com(a)abuse.networks.net, freeway(a)206.222.107.196, freeway(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)[206.222.107.196], postmaster(a)dm1.com, postmaster(a)telysis3.telysis.com, telysis3.telysis.com(a)abuse.networks.net Subject: Offence under US code Title 47, Sec 227(b) (1) (C) Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 06:15:55 GMT Message-Id: <32fec88e.867280(a)smtp.usit.net> I have recently received UNSOLICITED and UNWANTED junk e-mail from an individual who appears to be using your site. A copy of that mail is attached herewith. Junk Mail is now regarded as the same as unwanted and unsolicited junk faxes and telemarketing calls - all of which are now ILLEGAL under US federal law: By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b) (1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for EACH violation. Please ensure this is stopped NOW. You have been put on notice. If you confirm to me promptly that effective action has been taken against those persons responsible, I will not take the matter further on this occasion. If you do not provide me with such confirmation in a timely manner, or if ANY further UNSOLICITED or UNWANTED junk mail should be received from = your site, I may instruct my attorney to issue a writ WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE, and the matter will then be pursued under federal law. I will separately notify your upstream providers as they may also be liable for violations originating from your site. ========================================================================== Received: from gregspc (isabella-57.pagesz.net [208.194.157.57]) by pagesz.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA08671; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 20:07:09 -0500 Message-Id: <32FA7D27.63AE(a)pagesz.net> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 19:53:59 -0500 From: Gregory Boop <gboop(a)pagesz.net> To: 206.222.107.196(a)abuse.networks.net, abuse(a)206.222.107.196, abuse(a)dm.com abuse(a)dm1.com, abuse(a)telysis.com, abuse(a)telysis3.telysis.com, B0000008256(a)telysis3.telysis.com, dm.com(a)abuse.networks.net, freeway(a)206.222.107.196, freeway(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm1.com, postmaster(a)telysis.com, postmaster(a)telysis3.telysis.com, telysis3.telysis.com(a)abuse.networks.net Subject: Offence under US code Title 47, Sec 227(b) (1) (C) I have recently received UNSOLICITED and UNWANTED junk e-mail from an individual who appears to be using your site. A copy of that mail is attached herewith. Junk Mail is now regarded as the same as unwanted and unsolicited junk faxes and telemarketing calls - all of which are now ILLEGAL under US federal law: By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b) (1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for EACH violation. Please ensure this is stopped NOW. You have been put on notice. If you confirm to me promptly that effective action has been taken against those persons responsible, I will not take the matter further on this occasion. If you do not provide me with such confirmation in a timely manner, or if ANY further UNSOLICITED or UNWANTED junk mail should be received from your site, I will instruct my attorney to issue a writ WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE, and the matter will then be pursued under federal law. I will separately notify your upstream providers as they may also be liable for violations originating from your site. ========================================================================== Received: from kohn-b (cnc129043.concentric.net [206.173.9.43]) by newman.concentric.net (8.8.5/(97/01/29 1.12)) id IAA26653; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:01:05 -0500 (EST) [1-800-745-2747 The Concentric Network] Message-Id: <199702071301.IAA26653(a)newman.concentric.net> Reply-To: <bicker(a)concentric.net> From: "Brian Charles Kohn" <bicker(a)concentric.net> To: <abuse(a)dm.com> Subject: Fw: FREE OFFER !! Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 07:00:31 -0600 Please note that your subscriber "freeway" is sending out unsolicited commercial solicitations. Besides the legal issues, it is not appreciated. Please address this issue with your subscriber. ========================================================================== Received: (from larry@localhost) by casper.tvinet.com (8.8.4/8.8.2) id QAA26259; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 16:51:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 16:51:16 -0800 (PST) From: Larry Phillips <larry(a)casper.tvinet.com> To: freeway(a)206.222.107.196, root(a)206.222.107.196, postmaster(a)206.222.107.196 Cc: freeway(a)dm.com, root(a)dm.com, postmaster(a)dm.com Subject: Re: FREE OFFER !! In-Reply-To: <B0000010696(a)telysis3.telysis.com> Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.91.970206165006.25645A-100000@Casper> Bugger off ========================================================================== Received: from frankenputer (pmnet02-08.austin.texas.net [207.207.2.8]) by natashya.eden.com (8.8.5/8.8.1) with SMTP id SAA15421; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:58:00 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970206185637.009f1b40(a)mail.eden.com> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 18:56:40 -0600 To: postmaster(a)telysis.com, postmaster(a)dm.com From: "John D. Webb" <jdwebb(a)logiclabs.com> Subject: SPAM ABUSE: FREE OFFER !! To whom it may concern, I received this *unsolicited* SPAM mail originating from or referencing your domain. I do *not* appreciate receiving such junk mail. I request that you take whatever steps are necessary with the account holder to see that they desist such abuses. Thank you, John Webb ========================================================================== Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 11:06:21 -0500 (EST) From: FZR400(a)aol.com Message-Id: <970208110620_-1174326236(a)emout05.mail.aol.com> To: postmaster(a)bwalk.dm.com Subject: Re: Returned mail SOMEONE AT THIS DOMAIN HAS BEEN SENDING UNSOLICITED E-MAIL ADVERTISING. TELL THEM TO CEASE AND DESIST IMMEDIATELY. Member, Internet Advertising Relief Association http://users.aol.com/fzr400/junkmail.htm ========================================================================== Received: from benicia60.castles.com (benicia60.castles.com [206.54.43.80]) by mustang.via.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA26381; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 22:12:37 -0800 Message-Id: <199702090612.WAA26381(a)mustang.via.net> Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 22:13:02 -0800 To: abuse(a)PSI.COM, root(a)CLEVER.NET, abuse(a)CLEVER.NET From: Brad Albom <brada(a)via.net> Subject: SPAM: FREE OFFER !! Cc: freeway(a)dm.com Hi- This email is to notify you that one of the domains and/or users that you are resolving for is sending SPAM email. The email included below was unsolicited and unwelcome. I presume that you have policies regarding this type of activity and will take appropriate action. Thank you, <snipped> -brad albom Software Engineering Solutions, Inc 2685 Marine Way, Suite 1215, Mountain View, CA 94043 email: brada(a)sesinc.com <- Office address alt : brada(a)via.net <- Home address, checked more frequently phone: (415) 969-0141 alt : (707) 552-5248 ========================================================================== Meaw.

1 0