On 2023-10-15 00:36, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2023-10-14 16:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 14/10/2023 14:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 2023-10-14 14:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 14/10/2023 13:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was thinking of that, deny GG write access to Usenet, on all
>>>>>> servers. I don't know how they are connected, maybe doing that in a
>>>>>> few servers would work.
>>>>>>
>>>>> You lose very little by that action.
>>>>> I am not sure I didn't do that years ago,
>>>>
>>>> You did? Do you control a big server that feeds GG to the entire Usenet?
>>>>
>>> No, I control the little server where I read google groups.
>>> If everybody simply killfiles Google groups, it will achieve the desired
>>> result.
>>
>> If all the Usenet big servers lock out GG for write access, it is
>> possible that Google listens and does something about spam coming out of
>> their systems.
>
> I'm not sure how Google would know it was happening unless someone
> influential there reads Usenet directly themselves,

Not needed at all.

Someone at google servers will see an error in the /var/log/news.warn
file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for weeks. If not, someone
higher up will see the stats on the warnings.

And if they don't notice, that's fine.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> Not needed at all.
>
> Someone at google servers will see an error in the /var/log/news.warn
> file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for weeks. If not, someone
> higher up will see the stats on the warnings.
>
> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>

Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> Not needed at all.
>>
>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the /var/log/news.warn
>> file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for weeks. If not,
>> someone higher up will see the stats on the warnings.
>>
>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>
>
> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.

Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.

It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
their side, or keep it as independent.

Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 14/10/2023 15:16, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-10-14 16:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 14/10/2023 14:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-14 14:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 14/10/2023 13:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I was thinking of that, deny GG write access to Usenet, on all
>>>>> servers. I don't know how they are connected, maybe doing that in a
>>>>> few servers would work.
>>>>>
>>>> You lose very little by that action.
>>>> I am not sure I didn't do that years ago,
>>>>
>>>
>>> You did? Do you control a big server that feeds GG to the entire Usenet?
>>>
>>>
>> No, I control the little server where I read google groups.
>> If everybody simply killfiles Google groups, it will achieve the
>> desired result.
>
> If all the Usenet big servers lock out GG for write access, it is
> possible that Google listens and does something about spam coming out of
> their systems.
>
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride...

Expecting Google or any other server to do anything is a waste of time.
Like all socialism that expects some authority to fix the world to their
liking. Take control yourself. The conservative way. If you don't like
the world, change it yourself.

Build a filter file or build a better newsreader than e.g. thunderbird.

--
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan

On 14/10/2023 23:36, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> some obscure part of the mailing list gateway that was implemented eons
> ago by programmers long forgotten?

^^^^^^^^
this, probably.

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> Not needed at all.
>>>
>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the /var/log/news.warn
>>> file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for weeks. If not,
>>> someone higher up will see the stats on the warnings.
>>>
>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>
>>
>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>
> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>
> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
> their side, or keep it as independent.
>
> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>
There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive hardware
needed to run for very few users.

--
Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
gospel of envy.

Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill

In article <uggcun$ef9h$3@dont-email.me>,
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>
>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the /var/log/news.warn
>>>> file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for weeks. If not,
>>>> someone higher up will see the stats on the warnings.
>>>>
>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>
>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>
>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
>> their side, or keep it as independent.
>>
>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>>
>There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive hardware
>needed to run for very few users.
>

And that would be very costly!

>--
>Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
>gospel of envy.
>
>Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
>
>Winston Churchill
>
>

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
It is a fool who sees evil everywhere but the place that it is. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

On 2023-10-15 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>
>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the
>>>> /var/log/news.warn file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for
>>>> weeks. If not, someone higher up will see the stats on the warnings.
>>>>
>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>
>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>
>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
>> their side, or keep it as independent.
>>
>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>>
> There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive hardware
> needed to run for very few users.

Expensive? :-?

They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish internet
pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve binary groups.

Then there is the staff, the admin. Some had just one person.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-10-15 11:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 14/10/2023 15:16, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-10-14 16:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 14/10/2023 14:51, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 2023-10-14 14:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 14/10/2023 13:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was thinking of that, deny GG write access to Usenet, on all
>>>>>> servers. I don't know how they are connected, maybe doing that in
>>>>>> a few servers would work.
>>>>>>
>>>>> You lose very little by that action.
>>>>> I am not sure I didn't do that years ago,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You did? Do you control a big server that feeds GG to the entire
>>>> Usenet?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> No, I control the little server where I read google groups.
>>> If everybody simply killfiles Google groups, it will achieve the
>>> desired result.
>>
>> If all the Usenet big servers lock out GG for write access, it is
>> possible that Google listens and does something about spam coming out
>> of their systems.
>>
> If wishes were horses, beggars would ride...
>
> Expecting Google or any other server to do anything is a waste of time.
> Like all socialism that expects some authority to fix the world to their
> liking. Take control yourself. The conservative way. If you don't like
> the world, change it yourself.
>
> Build a filter file or build a better newsreader than e.g. thunderbird.

If they don't do anything, that's fine, their service would be dead on
the water with no impact to us.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 15/10/2023 13:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-10-15 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the
>>>>> /var/log/news.warn file that say "connection refused" repeatedly
>>>>> for weeks. If not, someone higher up will see the stats on the
>>>>> warnings.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>>
>>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>>
>>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
>>> their side, or keep it as independent.
>>>
>>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>>>
>> There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive
>> hardware needed to run for very few users.
>
> Expensive? :-?
>
> They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish internet
> pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve binary groups.

The 'some disk space' is terabytes of RAIDED disks, unless you simply
discard most Usenet traffic. Hosed in a dark office where there is good
backbone connectivity

None of that is uber cheap

And the income stream is precisely *zero*, except for giganews.

>
> Then there is the staff, the admin. Some had just one person.
>
'Had' being the operative word.

A zero sun income stream doesn't even justify one persons salary.,

>

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

In article <kp23stF6j58U1@mid.individual.net>,
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>On 2023-10-15 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the
>>>>> /var/log/news.warn file that say "connection refused" repeatedly for
>>>>> weeks. If not, someone higher up will see the stats on the warnings.
>>>>>
>>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>>
>>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>>
>>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
>>> their side, or keep it as independent.
>>>
>>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>>>
>> There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive hardware
>> needed to run for very few users.
>
>Expensive? :-?
>
>They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish internet
>pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve binary groups.
>
>Then there is the staff, the admin. Some had just one person.
>

Automation does not count!

>
>--
>Cheers,
> Carlos E.R.
>

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
It is a fool who sees evil everywhere but the place that it is. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
> On 15/10/2023 13:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:

>> They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish internet
>> pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve binary groups.
>
> The 'some disk space' is terabytes of RAIDED disks, unless you simply
> discard most Usenet traffic. Hosed in a dark office where there is
> good backbone connectivity

If you carry binaries, yes; that’ll cost you.

If you only carry text groups in the language you can actually read,
it’s basically free. My tenner-a-month VM doesn’t break a sweat.

If you have lots of users then it’ll scale up in cost a bit... but
there’s just not that many people using (text) Usenet now.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

On 2023-10-15 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/10/2023 13:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-10-15 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the
>>>>>> /var/log/news.warn file that say "connection refused" repeatedly
>>>>>> for weeks. If not, someone higher up will see the stats on the
>>>>>> warnings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>>>
>>>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it up
>>>> their side, or keep it as independent.
>>>>
>>>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>>>>
>>> There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive
>>> hardware needed to run for very few users.
>>
>> Expensive? :-?
>>
>> They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish internet
>> pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve binary groups.
>
> The 'some disk space' is terabytes of RAIDED disks, unless you simply
> discard most Usenet traffic. Hosed in a dark office where there is good
> backbone connectivity

Consider that Usenet is ancient. The software ran in ancient computers
with not that much space.

And I said "no binary groups". Ie, just text.

>
> None of that is uber cheap
>
> And the income stream is precisely *zero*, except for giganews.
>
>
>>
>> Then there is the staff, the admin. Some had just one person.
>>
> 'Had'  being the operative word.
>
> A zero sun income stream doesn't even justify one persons salary.,

Some servers have a fee.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 15/10/2023 16:40, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-10-15 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 15/10/2023 13:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-15 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the
>>>>>>> /var/log/news.warn file that say "connection refused" repeatedly
>>>>>>> for weeks. If not, someone higher up will see the stats on the
>>>>>>> warnings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it
>>>>> up their side, or keep it as independent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet servers.
>>>>>
>>>> There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive
>>>> hardware needed to run for very few users.
>>>
>>> Expensive? :-?
>>>
>>> They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish internet
>>> pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve binary groups.
>>
>> The 'some disk space' is terabytes of RAIDED disks, unless you simply
>> discard most Usenet traffic. Hosed in a dark office where there is
>> good backbone connectivity
>
> Consider that Usenet is ancient. The software ran in ancient computers
> with not that much space.
>
Er no, even without binaries it used to pretty much fill a huge amount
of disk space if you wanted any sort of archive potential at all,

> And I said "no binary groups". Ie, just text.
>
>>
>> None of that is uber cheap
>>
>> And the income stream is precisely *zero*, except for giganews.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Then there is the staff, the admin. Some had just one person.
>>>
>> 'Had'  being the operative word.
>>
>> A zero sun income stream doesn't even justify one persons salary.,
>
> Some servers have a fee.
>

indeed. But if it is so easy, why notr set up a free server we can all
use that rejects all google groups?

--
There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent
renewable energy.

On 2023-10-15 17:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/10/2023 16:40, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-10-15 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 15/10/2023 13:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 2023-10-15 11:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 15/10/2023 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>> On 2023-10-15 01:51, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/14/23 18:37, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>>>>> Not needed at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Someone at google servers will see an error in the
>>>>>>>> /var/log/news.warn file that say "connection refused" repeatedly
>>>>>>>> for weeks. If not, someone higher up will see the stats on the
>>>>>>>> warnings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And if they don't notice, that's fine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who knows, they might shut down the service entirely.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, it would be us shutting down their service.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be their choice then, talk to us, or give up and shut it
>>>>>> up their side, or keep it as independent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, not us like you and me, but whoever controls the Usenet
>>>>>> servers.
>>>>>>
>>>>> There are less than a dozen these days I think. Very expensive
>>>>> hardware needed to run for very few users.
>>>>
>>>> Expensive? :-?
>>>>
>>>> They just need a computer and some disk space, and a largish
>>>> internet pipe. I don't think the load is high, unless you serve
>>>> binary groups.
>>>
>>> The 'some disk space' is terabytes of RAIDED disks, unless you simply
>>> discard most Usenet traffic. Hosed in a dark office where there is
>>> good backbone connectivity
>>
>> Consider that Usenet is ancient. The software ran in ancient computers
>> with not that much space.
>>
> Er no, even without binaries it used to pretty much fill a huge amount
> of disk space if you wanted any sort of archive potential at all,
>
>> And I said "no binary groups". Ie, just text.
>>
>>>
>>> None of that is uber cheap
>>>
>>> And the income stream is precisely *zero*, except for giganews.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then there is the staff, the admin. Some had just one person.
>>>>
>>> 'Had'  being the operative word.
>>>
>>> A zero sun income stream doesn't even justify one persons salary.,
>>
>> Some servers have a fee.
>>
>
> indeed. But if it is so easy, why notr set up a free server we can all
> use that rejects all google groups?

It still needs work and maintenance.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

Put this filter on the top-level folder:

Filter name: Block Google Groups

Apply filter when: Manually Run, Getting New Mail: Filter before Junk
Classification

Match any of the following:
Message-ID (You will need to add this as a custom header) contains
googlegroups.com

Perform these actions:
Delete Message

The Usenet is much better after I did that.

On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:21:07 -0500
rdh <rdh@tilde.institute> wrote:

> Put this filter on the top-level folder:
>
> Filter name: Block Google Groups
>
> Apply filter when: Manually Run, Getting New Mail: Filter before Junk
> Classification
>
> Match any of the following:
> Message-ID (You will need to add this as a custom header) contains
> googlegroups.com
>
> Perform these actions:
> Delete Message
>
> The Usenet is much better after I did that.

I use Claws Mail. It will filter on anything in the headers. I just
filter on G2/1.0 and Google Groups are gone.

On 19.10.23 17:21, rdh wrote:
> Put this filter on the top-level folder:
>
> Filter name: Block Google Groups
>
> Apply filter when: Manually Run, Getting New Mail: Filter before Junk
> Classification
>
> Match any of the following:
> Message-ID (You will need to add this as a custom header) contains
> googlegroups.com
>
> Perform these actions:
> Delete Message
>
> The Usenet is much better after I did that.

Match any of the following:

If Injection-Info contains "google-groups.googlegroups.com"
If Path contains "news-out.google.com"

Perform these actions:

Ignore Subthread

You won't see any quotes
The thread-tree stay intact
Can be done automatically

--
Manus manum lavat

Any solution for thunderbird?

On 10/13/23 20:25, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> I notice since a day or two that this group is being bombarded with spam
>> in Thai (with a gmail address). Depending when I look at the group, if I
>> click on one Thunderbird says the article has expired and suggest to
>> remove all expired articles, which I do.
>
> It seems to be spreading through vaious groups. comp.arch was affected
> earlier, and people have been complaining loudly about the same spam in
> comp.lang.c and sci.crypt for a few days. All from Google Groups, as
> usual.
>
>> Sometimes I can read the spam (it is about gambling, so they have money
>> backing their nuisance).
>
> I've got Tin built without UTF-8 support so all the foreign
> characters are just represented as "?". This made it easy to craft
> some filters based on the subject line of these, allegedly Thai,
> spam messages:
>
> comment=Thai Google Groups Spam
> group=comp.*
> case=0
> score=kill
> subj=\?*
>
> comment=Thai Google Groups Spam
> group=comp.*
> case=0
> score=kill
> subj=*\?\?\?\?\?\?\?*
>
> In wildcard pattern matching mode, this filters out any post with
> a subject line starting with "?", or with seven "?" in a row.
> Anyone who genuinely uses "?" like that in a subject line is
> obviously an idiot, so I don't mind filtering them out by accident.
> For now only comp.* groups that I subscribe to are affected, but I
> might soon need to apply it to all groups.
>
>> So I assume that someone at some usenet server is purging them somewhat
>> later (minutes). I don't know if that cleaning job works for the entire
>> internet or only for my upstream.
>
> news.admin.net-abuse.usenet has much discussion about it, including
> efforts by a couple of server admins with filtering it out. The
> server I'm using seems to still be sucking in all of it, but the
> above rules are serving me fine for filtering it out at my end
> anyway.
>
> In the worst case most newsreaders should have a way to filter out
> all posts from Google Groups, as many have suggested. Unfortunately
> some of the affected groups have a few real human GG users.
>
>> Fortunately, so far only seems to happen on one of my subscribed groups,
>> this one.
>>
>> Why does some one thinks that spamming Usenet is a good idea?
>
> Again already much discussed at news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, but
> mainly it's just because, with Google asleep at the wheel, they
> can. If it _might_ help with their search engine rankings or
> whatever, then there's little cost for them to try. The real
> problem is Google for letting it happen, even though they're vastly
> better resourced to deal with the issue than any other news server
> operator, they just don't care.
>
>> Unfortunately, Thunderbird has no spam filters on Usenet.
>
> That's surprising. I've never used Thunderbird myself, but I wonder
> if there's a separate filter system for NNTP, because unlike when
> getting Email via POP, the contents of a post can't be fully
> scanned until you view it because only then is the body of the
> message downloaded (in most news readers anyway).
>

On 10/21/23 13:12, Popping Mad wrote:
> Any solution for thunderbird?
>
>
> On 10/13/23 20:25, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> I notice since a day or two that this group is being bombarded with spam
>>> in Thai (with a gmail address). Depending when I look at the group, if I
>>> click on one Thunderbird says the article has expired and suggest to
>>> remove all expired articles, which I do.
>>
>> It seems to be spreading through vaious groups. comp.arch was affected
>> earlier, and people have been complaining loudly about the same spam in
>> comp.lang.c and sci.crypt for a few days. All from Google Groups, as
>> usual.
>>
>>> Sometimes I can read the spam (it is about gambling, so they have money
>>> backing their nuisance).
>>
>> I've got Tin built without UTF-8 support so all the foreign
>> characters are just represented as "?". This made it easy to craft
>> some filters based on the subject line of these, allegedly Thai,
>> spam messages:
>>
>> comment=Thai Google Groups Spam
>> group=comp.*
>> case=0
>> score=kill
>> subj=\?*
>>
>> comment=Thai Google Groups Spam
>> group=comp.*
>> case=0
>> score=kill
>> subj=*\?\?\?\?\?\?\?*
>>
>> In wildcard pattern matching mode, this filters out any post with
>> a subject line starting with "?", or with seven "?" in a row.
>> Anyone who genuinely uses "?" like that in a subject line is
>> obviously an idiot, so I don't mind filtering them out by accident.
>> For now only comp.* groups that I subscribe to are affected, but I
>> might soon need to apply it to all groups.
>>
>>> So I assume that someone at some usenet server is purging them somewhat
>>> later (minutes). I don't know if that cleaning job works for the entire
>>> internet or only for my upstream.
>>
>> news.admin.net-abuse.usenet has much discussion about it, including
>> efforts by a couple of server admins with filtering it out. The
>> server I'm using seems to still be sucking in all of it, but the
>> above rules are serving me fine for filtering it out at my end
>> anyway.
>>
>> In the worst case most newsreaders should have a way to filter out
>> all posts from Google Groups, as many have suggested. Unfortunately
>> some of the affected groups have a few real human GG users.
>>
>>> Fortunately, so far only seems to happen on one of my subscribed groups,
>>> this one.
>>>
>>> Why does some one thinks that spamming Usenet is a good idea?
>>
>> Again already much discussed at news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, but
>> mainly it's just because, with Google asleep at the wheel, they
>> can. If it _might_ help with their search engine rankings or
>> whatever, then there's little cost for them to try. The real
>> problem is Google for letting it happen, even though they're vastly
>> better resourced to deal with the issue than any other news server
>> operator, they just don't care.
>>
>>> Unfortunately, Thunderbird has no spam filters on Usenet.
>>
>> That's surprising. I've never used Thunderbird myself, but I wonder
>> if there's a separate filter system for NNTP, because unlike when
>> getting Email via POP, the contents of a post can't be fully
>> scanned until you view it because only then is the body of the
>> message downloaded (in most news readers anyway).

I understand from other posts that GMail can be blocked and the Usenet
news as well but I did things in an old fashioned way and created
filters for each post I found to be from Spammers or Trolls. These are
quite large but every day first time online I get new messages and
hundreds show up but are reduced to single or low double digits by my
filters.

Good luck...

bliss - Dell Precision E7730- PCLinuxOS 64- Linux 6.5.8- Plasma 5.27.8

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

On 2023-10-21 22:12, Popping Mad wrote:
> Any solution for thunderbird?

What, for blocking Google posters? That's easy.

Tools, message filters. Select the group you want the filter on, or the
entire news account. New filter.

Match all of the following.
User-Agent is G2/1.0
Perform these actions:
Tag message Google Groups

(The tag has to be defined externally in advance).

There are many other actions possible. Delete message, mark subthread
for ignore...

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

For Leafnode edit /etc/news/leafnode/filters and add there:

^Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com

Ahh, peace.
--

Harri

In article <mn7h1k-7ob.ln1@kallio.dynu.net>,
Harri <harri@kallio.tunk.org> wrote:
>For Leafnode edit /etc/news/leafnode/filters and add there:
>
>^Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com
>
>Ahh, peace.
>--
>
> Harri
>

The other way: Pursuade your news provide to drop google-groups.googlegroups.com
upon entry!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
If we are running from truth, we cannot be approaching God. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

* Harri <harri@kallio.tunk.org>

> For Leafnode edit /etc/news/leafnode/filters and add there:
>
> ^Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com
>
> Ahh, peace.

Add to that:

^X-Received: by [[:xdigit:]:]+ with SMTP.*

Even more peaceful. ;-)

Bye
Thomas
--
=-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
- Thomas "ZlatkO" Zajic <zlatko@gmx.at> Linux-6.1 & slrn-1.0.3a -
- "In layman's terms: speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out." -
=-------------------------------------------------------------------------=