Possible to remove peter at gizmoman.net from users list Was: The "peter at gizmoman.net" dilemma

[Derek Broughton]

David Hart wrote:

> What are you talking about?  Here's the mx for gizmoman.net:
> 
> # david at mutt:~$ dig +short gizmoman.net mx
> # 10 mx1.conxion.com.au.
> 
>> > # Received: from beachbum-server.beach-bum-solutions.com (unknown
>> > [202.87.14.34]) #         by mutt.jynn.tonix.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
>> > id DBD906E89 #         for <ubuntu at tonix.org>; Thu,  4 Jan 2007
>> > 07:29:08 +0000 (GMT)
> 
> You snipped out the bit where I explained that the above header was
> generated by _my_ MTA. It's under _my_ control, humming away under _my_
> desk here where I type. I _know_ that header isn't forged.
> 
> The mx for gizmoman.net isn't beachbum-server.beach-bum-solutions.com,
> it's mx1.conxion.com.au. The IP address of
> beachbum-server.beach-bum-solutions.com isn't 202.87.14.34 it's
> 64.15.205.242.  

Well, actually, it isn't.  beach-bum-solutions.com is simply a domain held
by afternic.com, a domain reseller,  The odds are still fair to middling
that peter at gizmoman once owned it and that's how his SMTP server is
announcing itself.  Bad configuration, but still no evidence that he's
intentionally spamming anyone.  beach-bum-solutions.com once produced
shareware software (sms2email) but clearly isn't a valid domain anymore.

It's a fairly safe bet that peter at gizmoman.net is "Peter May"
<peter at beach-bum-solutions.com> - and sure enough that name shows up on
google searches associated with both addresses.

Remember Hanlon's Razor...
-- 
derek