![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| |||||||
| Forums | Register | Groups | Awards | Arcade | Pets | T-Bucks / T-Store | Invite Your Friends | Blogs | Mark Forums Read |
| Web Design Forums and discussions on webdesign |
Web Design | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Civilians | Hello, I've got a couple of domains that I've only used for email addresses to a small circle of friends but I get scads of spam. One domain I haven't even used yet for email or web but it is hosted and it also gets buckets of spam - dictionary style to a bunch of names I've never used. I am suspecting someone else wants the domain and is spamming the daylights out of it in the hope of diminishing its utility and perhaps I'll give it up. I won't cave but I am curious how widespread this sort of thing is and if there is a formal name for this practice. I also wonder, if such a scheme were to succeed, wouldn't the new domain owner also have a problem with waves of spam or would they just let a small number of specific addresses through. Thanks Jay |
|
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Civilians | JJ wrote: > I am suspecting someone else wants the domain and is spamming the > daylights out of it in the hope of diminishing its utility and perhaps > I'll give it up. Sorry, but I just suspect that someone is spamming as per normal. To reduce the impact, drop any "catch all" e-mail addresses you use. -- Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact |
|
| | #3 (permalink) |
| Civilians | "Toby Inkster" wrote about spam: : To reduce the impact, drop any "catch all" e-mail addresses you use. To add to that, avoid firstname@ addresses, e.g. john@example.com. Other common spamming techniques are to send emails to sales@example.com, info@example.com, and other common email names attached to the domain names. These are other ones to avoid unless you're prepared for the spam. Lois |
|
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Civilians | Lois wrote: : "Toby Inkster" wrote about spam: :: To reduce the impact, drop any "catch all" e-mail addresses you : use. : : To add to that, avoid firstname@ addresses, e.g. john@example.com. But the question comes is what if you miss something important or relatively that would have gone to a catch all? Also if you only have so many allotted email accounts you can set up as individual email accounts but unlimited aliases then a catch all account is a necessary thing. |
|
| | #5 (permalink) |
| Civilians | "Heidi" wrote: : But the question comes is what if you miss something important or relatively : that would have gone to a catch all? If you don't have a catch-all, emails sent to non-existent addresses will bounce, and the sender will know to resend them to the correct address. OTOH, if you do have a catch-all, there's a bigger risk (IMO) that legit email will get lost among the spam. Also, how often do you check a catch-all account? Personally, I don't want to see spam even in a catch-all account. Spammers have a chance of reaching an audience with catch-all accounts, but they have no chance if spam is bounced. : Also if you only have so many allotted email accounts you can set up : as individual email accounts but unlimited aliases then a catch all account : is : a necessary thing. A limited number of email accounts is not a good thing for some of us. But as long as the aliases are unlimited, you can do a lot with them. Lois |
|
| | #6 (permalink) |
| Civilians | Lois wrote: > "Heidi" wrote: > : But the question comes is what if you miss something important or > relatively > : that would have gone to a catch all? > > If you don't have a catch-all, emails sent to non-existent addresses > will bounce, and the sender will know to resend them to the correct > address. OTOH, if you do have a catch-all, there's a bigger risk > (IMO) that legit email will get lost among the spam. Also, how often > do you check a catch-all account? > > Personally, I don't want to see spam even in a catch-all account. > Spammers have a chance of reaching an audience with catch-all > accounts, but they have no chance if spam is bounced. > > > : Also if you only have so many allotted email accounts you can set > up > : as individual email accounts but unlimited aliases then a catch all > account > : is > : a necessary thing. > > A limited number of email accounts is not a good thing for some of > us. But as long as the aliases are unlimited, you can do a lot with > them. > > Lois > > > I provide a form. If someone really wants to get in contact and they've never mailed me before, the web form is the first port of call. I use less obvious (not our names) accounts for our business email addresses. They're not really guessable. -- x theSpaceGirl (miranda) # lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com # # remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website # |
|
| | #7 (permalink) |
| Civilians | On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 06 30 GMT, JJ wrote:> Hello, > I've got a couple of domains that I've only used for email addresses > to a small circle of friends but I get scads of spam. One domain I > haven't even used yet for email or web but it is hosted and it also > gets buckets of spam - dictionary style to a bunch of names I've never > used. > > I am suspecting someone else wants the domain and is spamming the > daylights out of it in the hope of diminishing its utility and perhaps > I'll give it up. > > I won't cave but I am curious how widespread this sort of thing is and > if there is a formal name for this practice. > > I also wonder, if such a scheme were to succeed, wouldn't the new > domain owner also have a problem with waves of spam or would they just > let a small number of specific addresses through. This is the first time I hear about getting spam for the purpose of letting a domain name go. If you get a lot of spam, your host is doing a bad job about it. Your host should have different antispam measures deployed. At my host (below) for example, the measures include spam assassin, RBLs, content filters, static filters plus you can create your own filters through Webmail, client and server side including using regex. You can also use black and white lists and challenge/response. You can receive 0 spam if you want to make as tight as possible. A white list should enable you to get 0 spam. Worst case, keep the domain name and site and let a formal antispam company handle your emails to your domain name, for a price or just get a free Hotmail or Yahoo accounts. They handle spam pretty good. Karim -- http://www.cheapesthosting.com - Innovative Web Hosting since 1998 Spam and Virus protected email - Online calendars with email notification Camera phone photos automatic transfers to your photo album (RSS Enabled) |
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Email spam is dead. Long Live Spam! | Matt Probert | Web Design | 44 | 09-16-2005 20:00 |
| [News Feed] Spam Slayer: Slaying Spam-Spewing Zombie PCs | Forum Mouse | News Articles | 0 | 06-20-2005 04:00 |
| Real Free Domain Name Contest--NOT SPAM! | M_P | Web Design | 16 | 05-10-2005 20:00 |
| [News Feed] Spam Slayer: Spam Fighting Tips for the New Year | Forum Mouse | News Articles | 0 | 01-24-2005 10:00 |
| [News Feed] Spam Slayer: Tracking Spam to Its Source | Hannibal | News Articles | 0 | 10-18-2004 08:00 |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |