As soon as new discussion began in the semi-dormant group, sci.crypt,
the spamtroller began flooding. It appears from the Path header that
xlned.com is facilitating this spam. It is past time to get rough with
highwinds media and pals.

Here are a few Message-IDs.

<aucrriltf1toqa1taegf71ioc9k7r546ue@4ax.com>
<qddrritthf49bfnoh1ehe3p0kq28j6mtbg@4ax.com>
<np8sri1gsoqui745ikvod4p8cvujba1v1b@4ax.com>
<mp8srihicdhnhgodr3450vah728vn0iu4t@4ax.com>
<kp8sri9p9mcat483pivm0voorotv48ngug@4ax.com>
<jp8sri1v4dbt8goldvk3lhl1g6o1q0dq75@4ax.com>
<hp8sri9i4phf9p4jd5r1pd9pmsqtrlaqpn@4ax.com>
<fp8sritfacsu5ubmi6ke94c9dmkst6n1na@4ax.com>
<ep8srihk5sue17ofl4aadfgqn18croj74v@4ax.com>
<cp8sri1fg4nf7733v093ld0v190qlh0vlj@4ax.com>

Spam Abuse Report avait prétendu :
> As soon as new discussion began in the semi-dormant group, sci.crypt,
> the spamtroller began flooding. It appears from the Path header that
> xlned.com is facilitating this spam. It is past time to get rough with
> highwinds media and pals.
>
> Here are a few Message-IDs.
>
> <aucrriltf1toqa1taegf71ioc9k7r546ue@4ax.com>
> <qddrritthf49bfnoh1ehe3p0kq28j6mtbg@4ax.com>
> <np8sri1gsoqui745ikvod4p8cvujba1v1b@4ax.com>
> <mp8srihicdhnhgodr3450vah728vn0iu4t@4ax.com>
> <kp8sri9p9mcat483pivm0voorotv48ngug@4ax.com>
> <jp8sri1v4dbt8goldvk3lhl1g6o1q0dq75@4ax.com>
> <hp8sri9i4phf9p4jd5r1pd9pmsqtrlaqpn@4ax.com>
> <fp8sritfacsu5ubmi6ke94c9dmkst6n1na@4ax.com>
> <ep8srihk5sue17ofl4aadfgqn18croj74v@4ax.com>
> <cp8sri1fg4nf7733v093ld0v190qlh0vlj@4ax.com>

I don't see these messages anywhere but on the paganini server.
Perhaps you should use another server...

A list of free server: <https://sybershock.com/#usenet>

--
Admin of news.usenet.ovh

Spam Abuse Report <spam@abuse.report> wrote:
> As soon as new discussion began in the semi-dormant group, sci.crypt,
> the spamtroller began flooding. It appears from the Path header that
> xlned.com is facilitating this spam. It is past time to get rough with
> highwinds media and pals.
>
> Here are a few Message-IDs.
>
> <aucrriltf1toqa1taegf71ioc9k7r546ue@4ax.com>

That seems similar to spam in comp.compression and a bunch of other
computer groups. When that group was flooded with over 90 posts in
a day advertising "OBS Truck Spares", coming from the same
newsserver and User-Agent as these sci.crypt spams, I reported it
to the abuse address complete with a list of example message-ids.

In some cruel irony, that email was rejected by their mail server
as spam, but I went through their www.usenetserver.com website,
where an anti-spam policy is described, and opened a support ticket
in late December. They responded as follows:

"Hello,

Thank you for contacting support! The content on Usenet is wholly user-
contributed. Unfortunately, due to the open nature of how content is shared,
we do not have any control (quality or otherwise) over what is posted. Content
is only removed from our servers in accordance with our abuse policies (for
example, upon receipt of a notice from the copyright holder). Those policies
are available for review on our website.

Rest assured that your report will be taken into consideration, for more
information please wait for the response of our abuse department.

We appreciate your business.

Regards,

UsenetServer Support"

Clearly whoever wrote that hadn't really understood the issue,
though I made it pretty clear, opening my message with "Your
Usenet news server is being abused to post spam messages to the
comp.compression newsgroup, along with many others". Unfortunately
I never heard anything from their alleged "abuse department". But
the spam did drop back to just the occasional single drug ad, so
_maybe_ they did something to stop the truck spares spam flood,
even though it looks like they're all from the same source (and I
included message-ids for the drugs spam too).

Opening a support ticket there at least got some response, so if
others do the same then perhaps UsenetServer will eventually follow
through and make a real effort to stop it.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

On 4 Feb 2024 11:58:39 +1000, not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
>Spam Abuse Report <spam@abuse.report> wrote:
>> As soon as new discussion began in the semi-dormant group, sci.crypt,
>> the spamtroller began flooding. It appears from the Path header that
>> xlned.com is facilitating this spam. It is past time to get rough with
>> highwinds media and pals.
>> Here are a few Message-IDs.
>> <aucrriltf1toqa1taegf71ioc9k7r546ue@4ax.com>
>
>That seems similar to spam in comp.compression and a bunch of other
>computer groups. When that group was flooded with over 90 posts in
>a day advertising "OBS Truck Spares", coming from the same
>newsserver and User-Agent as these sci.crypt spams, I reported it
>to the abuse address complete with a list of example message-ids.
>In some cruel irony, that email was rejected by their mail server
>as spam, but I went through their www.usenetserver.com website,
>where an anti-spam policy is described, and opened a support ticket
>in late December. They responded as follows:
>
>"Hello,
> Thank you for contacting support! The content on Usenet is wholly user-
> contributed. Unfortunately, due to the open nature of how content is shared,
> we do not have any control (quality or otherwise) over what is posted. Content
> is only removed from our servers in accordance with our abuse policies (for
> example, upon receipt of a notice from the copyright holder). Those policies
> are available for review on our website.
> Rest assured that your report will be taken into consideration, for more
> information please wait for the response of our abuse department.
> We appreciate your business.
> Regards,
> UsenetServer Support"
>
>Clearly whoever wrote that hadn't really understood the issue,
>though I made it pretty clear, opening my message with "Your
>Usenet news server is being abused to post spam messages to the
>comp.compression newsgroup, along with many others". Unfortunately
>I never heard anything from their alleged "abuse department". But
>the spam did drop back to just the occasional single drug ad, so
>_maybe_ they did something to stop the truck spares spam flood,
>even though it looks like they're all from the same source (and I
>included message-ids for the drugs spam too).
>Opening a support ticket there at least got some response, so if
>others do the same then perhaps UsenetServer will eventually follow
>through and make a real effort to stop it.

seems their zero-tolerance spam policies might be unenforceable . . .

(using Tor Browser 13.0.9)
https://www.usenetserver.com/terms-of-service
>Spam. UsenetServer enforces a zero-tolerance spam policy regarding our
>users posts to usenet through our network. It is the sole discretion
>of UsenetServer to determine if a user's posts are considered spam. If
>UsenetServer has determined that a user has posted 1 or more articles
>of spam, that user will be charged a $500 per hour clean-up fee and
>the user's account will be canceled immediately with no refunds and
>all reasonable efforts will be made by UsenetServer to prevent the
>user from using our network anytime thereafter.
[end quote]

https://easynews.com/agreement/
>SPAM. Easynews enforces a zero-tolerance spam policy regarding our
>users posts to usenet through our network. It is the sole discretion
>of Easynews to determine if a user's posts are considered spam. If
>Easynews has determined that a user has posted 1 or more articles
>of spam, that user will be charged a $500 per hour clean-up fee and
>the user's account will be canceled immediately and
>all reasonable efforts will be made by Easynews to prevent the
>user from using our network anytime thereafter.
[end quote]

usenet has long-since been continuously inundated by weaponized troll farm
spam from both google and non-google servers, so once google cuts the cord
will many dozens of other servers pick up the slack without missing a beat?

D <J@M> wrote:

[...]

> usenet has long-since been continuously inundated by weaponized troll farm
> spam from both google and non-google servers, so once google cuts the cord
> will many dozens of other servers pick up the slack without missing a
> beat?
>

I hope not but I suspect that they will. Will that cause further schism
between civilised Usenet and irresponsible barbarian servers beyond
the pale?

I think we'll know quite soon; meanwhile, fight the good fight.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon says:
The first duty of government is defence of the realm.

Sn!pe wrote:

> D <J@M> wrote:

> [...]

>> usenet has long-since been continuously inundated by weaponized troll farm
>> spam from both google and non-google servers, so once google cuts the cord
>> will many dozens of other servers pick up the slack without missing a
>> beat?
>>

> I hope not but I suspect that they will. Will that cause further schism
> between civilised Usenet and irresponsible barbarian servers beyond
> the pale?

> I think we'll know quite soon; meanwhile, fight the good fight.

I think the web interfaces will be hit first. They're easier. I already see this on my sites, though it's currently under control. Limiting post rates seems to make a huge difference. Google seems to allow someone to post as fast and as much as bandwidth allows. A web interface should regulate this (my sites do).

I'm sure some will migrate to nntp servers to spam (some already do), but it may not be to the extent that Google allows. Inn also has some features to help slow things down.

--
Retro Guy

On 04 Feb 2024, retro.guy@rocksolidbbs.com (Retro Guy) posted some
news:aaca3fbb8e6708ba68b8760b5fbfabf2@www.novabbs.org:

> Sn!pe wrote:
>
>> D <J@M> wrote:
>
>> [...]
>
>>> usenet has long-since been continuously inundated by weaponized
>>> troll farm spam from both google and non-google servers, so once
>>> google cuts the cord will many dozens of other servers pick up the
>>> slack without missing a beat?
>>>
>
>> I hope not but I suspect that they will. Will that cause further
>> schism between civilised Usenet and irresponsible barbarian servers
>> beyond the pale?
>
>> I think we'll know quite soon; meanwhile, fight the good fight.
>
> I think the web interfaces will be hit first. They're easier. I
> already see this on my sites, though it's currently under control.
> Limiting post rates seems to make a huge difference. Google seems to
> allow someone to post as fast and as much as bandwidth allows. A web
> interface should regulate this (my sites do).
>
> I'm sure some will migrate to nntp servers to spam (some already do),
> but it may not be to the extent that Google allows. Inn also has some
> features to help slow things down.

Ya'll gist keep reportin' them critters. Ah'll git mah hipcrime generator
oiled up and send the orijintaters some luv.

On 2/5/24 05:45, bernie wrote:
> Ya'll gist keep reportin' them critters. Ah'll git mah hipcrime generator
> oiled up and send the orijintaters some luv.

Ser, gewd, sahr, Ah thanks ye. Ah blesses ye. Ah salootz ye most
salubriously, yassah.

Hip Crime Boss <hip@crime.boss> wrote: <~~~[point, laugh]

> On 2/5/24 05:45, bernie wrote:
> > Ya'll gist keep reportin' them critters.
> > Ah'll git mah hipcrime generator oiled up
> > and send the orijintaters some luv.
>
> Ser, gewd, sahr, Ah thanks ye. Ah blesses ye.
> Ah salootz ye most salubriously, yassah.

Pesky darn A-busers. [spit]

--
\|/
(((Ï))) - Mr Ön!on
When we shake the ketchup bottle
At first none comes and then a lot'll.