zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Timothy Luoma]

Is there a way for someone to get a list of all the people subscribed to
this list?

I have had the address I use for subscribing here, and another address I
only use here, spammed within the last 24hrs.

TjL

ps -- this was the Erol's pager-spam

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Bruce Stephens]

luomat@peak.org said:
> Is there a way for someone to get a list of all the people subscribed
> to this list? 

Not directly, I think, but the mailing lists also appear on web pages, which 
seems like a probable way they might have got hold of email addresses.  It 
seems improbable that anybody would bother going through mailing lists 
nowadays (it's just too awkward, I'd have thought), but it's known that people 
do web crawling.

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Sweth Chandramouli]

On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 06:20:22PM +0000, Bruce Stephens wrote:
> luomat@peak.org said:
> > Is there a way for someone to get a list of all the people subscribed
> > to this list? 
> 
> Not directly, I think, but the mailing lists also appear on web pages, which 
> seems like a probable way they might have got hold of email addresses.  It 
> seems improbable that anybody would bother going through mailing lists 
> nowadays (it's just too awkward, I'd have thought), but it's known that people 
> do web crawling.

	if i were to start spamming people, actually, listservs are one of the 
first places i would turn to for addresses--since list-moms tend to prune out 
defunct addresses fairly quickly, the spammer would have a much higher ratio of 
valid-to-invalid addresses.  also, many lists don't alter the subject in any way 
to indicate that it is from a particular list, so unless the recipients use (as 
i do) filtering based on the headers, they are probably used to at least looking 
at many emails per day, none of which they know the contents of; spammers dream 
of a world full of people who will read every email that comes into their inbox. 
smartlist, listserv, and majordomo all also support (by default, i think) 
addresses to which a subscriber to the list can write in order to get 
information about the list; usually, one of those informational options is a 
list of all other subscribers (who haven't gone to the trouble of setting 
themselves up as "hidden").
	i'll bring this back to zsh by asking a question:
	i've been playing recently with the parameter expansion features of ls 
in zsh, and have been totally blown away by them.  as far as i can tell, they do 
almost everything that find can do (really, they do everything, if you count 
using them (in backquotes) as the input for a for-do loop), and in most cases, 
they do it faster.  has anyone done any comparisons of speed between find and 
the zsh ls?  how about taking into account time to start up zsh itself?  for 
scripts that i write for other people (who usually don't use zsh), i tend to use 
find, whereas for spur-of-the-moment command-line scripts, i use zsh-ls; would 
the faster execution of the ls verison be offset by the time to load zsh if i 
were to make all of my ksh scriptfiles into zsh verisons instead?  (actually, in 
that case, i guess it would be a question of how much longer than ksh zsh takes 
to load; i know zsh is much larger, but if it is loading dynamically, it 
shouldn't take that long to start up, right?)

	expanding parameters,
	sweth.
-- 
"Countin' on a remedy I've counted on before
Goin' with a cure that's never failed me
What you call the disease
I call the remedy"  -- The Mighty Mighty Bosstones

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Andrew Main]

Sweth Chandramouli wrote:
>	i've been playing recently with the parameter expansion features of ls 

ls doesn't do any parameter expansion.

>in zsh, and have been totally blown away by them.  as far as i can tell, they do 
>almost everything that find can do

I suppose you must be talking about zsh globbing?

>using them (in backquotes) as the input for a for-do loop),

I'm not sure precisely what you mean here, but if you're doing something
like

for f in `ls *(wibble)`

then you should change it to

for f in *(wibble)

which saves a process, and a pipe, and will handle special characters
properly.

>the faster execution of the ls verison be offset by the time to load zsh if i 
>were to make all of my ksh scriptfiles into zsh verisons instead?

Not if you link zsh statically and set its sticky bit.

Really, with demand-loading, particularly if you use zsh's module feature
(3.1+), there shouldn't be a great deal of difference.  I suggest you
experiment.

-zefram

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Mirar]

> for f in `ls *(wibble)`

I do things like
   ls -1d blah**blah 
to get newlines as separators. Is there a better way?

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Andrew Main]

Mirar wrote:
>I do things like
>   ls -1d blah**blah 
>to get newlines as separators. Is there a better way?

print -l blah**blah

Why do you want newline-separated filenames anyway?

-zefram

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Mirar]

> print -l blah**blah

Nice. Thanks.

> Why do you want newline-separated filenames anyway?

I run sed on the lines later. I don't want to be messed up with
filenames containing spaces, either. 

Right now i only find this script using ls -d1:


 compctl -k "(- -a -d -F -l -r -t -M -T -s -k -f)" \
 	 -K compmanfull \
 	 -x "C[-1,-s^],s[-s]" -K compmansections \
 	 - "r[-f,;]" -f \
 	 - "r[-k,;]" -k "()" \
 	 - "r[-s,;]" -K compmansection \
 	 -- man
 
 compmanfull() 
    { reply=(${^manpath}/man*/*(N:t:r)) }
 compmansections() 
    { reply=($(ls -d1 ${^manpath}/man*(N:/) | sed 's:^.*/man::')) }
 compmansection()
 {
    local a
    read -Ac a
    echo $a | sed -ne 's/^.* -s\([^ ]*\).*$/\1/p' | read prefix
    reply=(${^manpath}/man$prefix/*(N:t:r))
 }


if someone has better solutions, it would be interesting.

 compmansections() 
    { reply=($(ls -d1 ${^manpath}/man*(N:/) | sed 's:^.*/man::')) }

should be changed for

 compmansections() 
    { reply=($(print -l ${^manpath}/man*(N:/) | sed 's:^.*/man::')) }

for a start...

/Mirar

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Andrew Main]

Mirar wrote:
>    { reply=($(ls -d1 ${^manpath}/man*(N:/) | sed 's:^.*/man::')) }

reply=( ${^manpath}/man*(N/) )
reply=${reply##*/man}

-zefram

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Mirar]

Andrew Main <zefram@tao.co.uk> writes:

> Mirar wrote:
> >    { reply=($(ls -d1 ${^manpath}/man*(N:/) | sed 's:^.*/man::')) }
> 
> reply=( ${^manpath}/man*(N/) )
> reply=${reply##*/man}

close. 

  reply=( ${reply##*/man} ) 

worked better. Nice. *checking out ${name<stuff>pattern}*

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Richard Coleman]

> Is there a way for someone to get a list of all the people subscribed to
> this list?
> 
> I have had the address I use for subscribing here, and another address I
> only use here, spammed within the last 24hrs.

I'm using SmartList to run all the zsh lists.  It does not give
out a list of subscribers.

Of course, that doesn't prevent spammers from sending something
directly to the list, but they haven't done that in a while.

--
Richard Coleman
coleman@math.gatech.edu

completion hacking

[Mirar]

Could this be written in a better way?

cvsignore="*~ *# .#* *.o *.a CVS . .."

cvsaddp() {
    setopt localoptions nullglob
    [[ -e CVS/Entries ]] && reply=(`(sed -ne 's:^/\([^/]*\)/.*$:E\1:p' -e 's:^/\([^/]*\)/-.*$:E\1:p' <CVS/Entries; ( ls -a1 | sed 's:^\(.*\)$:D\1:g' ); (ls -ad1 $(echo "$cvsignore"; cat .cvsignore 2>/dev/null  ) 2>/dev/null | sed 's:^\(.*\)$:I\1:g' ) ) | sort +0.1 | uniq --skip-chars=1 -u | sed -ne 's/^[^I]\(.*\)$/\1/p'`)
}

The goal (which is reached) is to get a list of all possible things
that could be sent to "cvs add".

__________________________________________________________________________
Idonex AB               Telefon      Telefax      nalle
Skolgatan 10		013-376814   013-376801   0708-376867
582 34 Linköping        mirar@idonex.se           http://www.idonex.se/

Re: zsh lists being used for spam-gathering?

[Bruce Stephens]

sweth@astaroth.nit.gwu.edu said:
> if i were to start spamming people, actually, listservs are one of
> the  first places i would turn to for addresses--since list-moms tend
> to prune out  defunct addresses fairly quickly, the spammer would have
> a much higher ratio of  valid-to-invalid addresses.

Well, Peter's commented that the zsh list software won't give out addresses.  
In any case, I wonder how many addresses there are that are gettable from list 
servers?  I'd guess it would be perhaps O(10^4), perhaps O(10^5).  If I 
believe some of the spam I get offering email lists, O(10^6) is the kind of 
figure that's typical.  Mailing lists just strike me as too small to be worth 
the effort of writing the software to interrogate them all.

Re: completion hacking

[Andrew Main]

Mirar wrote:
>Could this be written in a better way?
>
>cvsaddp() {
>    setopt localoptions nullglob
>    [[ -e CVS/Entries ]] && reply=(`(sed -ne 's:^/\([^/]*\)/.*$:E\1:p' -e 's:^/\([^/]*\)/-.*$:E\1:p' <CVS/Entries; ( ls -a1 | sed 's:^\(.*\)$:D\1:g' ); (ls -ad1 $(echo "$cvsignore"; cat .cvsignore 2>/dev/null  ) 2>/dev/null | sed 's:^\(.*\)$:I\1:g' ) ) | sort +0.1 | uniq --skip-chars=1 -u | sed -ne 's/^[^I]\(.*\)$/\1/p'`)
>}

Probably.

-zefram