From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32539 invoked by alias); 9 Sep 2014 19:06:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 32529 invoked by uid 89); 9 Sep 2014 19:06:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 19:06:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s89J6Bmj021238 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 15:06:11 -0400 Received: from stumpy.slc.redhat.com ([10.3.113.15]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s89J6BJp026187; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 15:06:11 -0400 Message-ID: <540F4FA3.7010407@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 19:06:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gerald Pfeifer , overseers@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Remove or obfuscate spam in the *-bugs mailing lists? References: <20140909162820.GA3335@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20140909185315.GA6643@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20140909185315.GA6643@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-q3/txt/msg00151.txt.bz2 On 09/09/14 12:53, Christopher Faylor wrote: > Right. There are similar words in sourceware.org/lists.html (which I > may have even written). It's usually pointless to edit the archives > because the information eventually leaks out to the interwebs. That + > it could become a full-time job to tweak the archives. > > But, it really bugs me that some evil dudes could try to subvert our > system so I'd like to eliminate any remaining benefit they could see > from sending spam here. Yea, and that's probably the biggest reason to delete the crap. > Nevertheless, I'm willing to do either. If no one objects, I'll do > the deletion. Otherwise, I'll just nuke content and subjects. No strong preference, particularly since you're doing the work. I'm happy with either choice. jeff