ence and detection
>> of future abuses.
>> Would this sort of posting be welcomed or would it be unwelcome
>> noise? If the consensus is that it would be unwelcome noise then I
>> may create a new list specifically for it, but I would rather not do
>> so as then that is just another list that we have to raise awareness
>> of.
>> Please also note that those with an extremely low tolerance for
>> email noise may wish to quit this list and instead join the
>> "announce" list, as it contains only announcements from BitFolk with
>> no customer discussion whatsoever:
>> https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/announce
>> http://lists.bitfolk.com/lurker/list/announce.html
>> (just 19 threads this year)
>> Thoughts?
>> Cheers,
>> Andy
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users@???
> https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users
From matt@??? Fri Dec 07 10:05:34 2012
Received: from mx.bf.smtl.co.uk ([85.119.82.254])
by mail.bitfolk.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from <matt@???>) id 1TguoI-0003Ef-CM
for users@???; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:05:34 +0000
Received: from mailhost.smtl.co.uk (mailhost.smtl.co.uk [176.35.190.158])
by mx.bf.smtl.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B57694DEA
for <users@???>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:58:47 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mailhost.smtl.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFE214E947
for <users@???>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:58:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mailhost.smtl.co.uk ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (ktinga.smtl.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 28857-08 for <users@???>;
Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:58:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.187.129.148] (unknown [10.187.129.148])
by mailhost.smtl.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD28914FB6A
for <users@???>; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:58:46 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <50C1BDD7.8020703@???>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:58:47 +0000
From: Matthew Moore <matt@???>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:16.0) Gecko/20121028 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@???
References: <20121207021942.GT3867@???>
<1706451964.20121207095251@???>
<763976915.20121207095703@???>
In-Reply-To: <763976915.20121207095703@???>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at smtl.co.uk
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on mail.bitfolk.com at Fri,
07 Dec 2012 10:05:34 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 85.119.82.254
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: matt@???
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.bitfolk.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] Proposal: Security incidents postings
X-BeenThere: users@???
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users of BitFolk hosting <users.lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/options/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.bitfolk.com/lurker/list/users.html>
List-Post: <mailto:users@lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/listinfo/users>,
<mailto:users-request@lists.bitfolk.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:05:34 -0000
On 07/12/12 09:57, Tony Andersson wrote:
>
>>> So I was contemplating posting an email thread to this ("users")
>>> list every time we become aware of a customer compromise, and I was
>>> wondering what you thought of that idea.
>
Another vote from me. Sounds good.
In the unlikely event that it gets too much trafficwise (which I
strongly doubt) then just setup a new list.
Cheers,
--
Matthew Moore
Surgical Materials Testing Laboratory
System Administrator
Telephone: +44 (0)1656 752165
Email: matt@???
From rich@??? Fri Dec 07 10:21:59 2012
Received: from atomic-x.co.uk ([2001:ba8:1f1:f1dc::2])
by mail.bitfolk.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
(Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <rich@???>) id 1Tgv4B-0004G6-9V
for users@???; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:21:59 +0000
Received: from [2001:470:1f09:11bb:1d5c:11fa:44ca:2563]
by atomic-x.co.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
(Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <rich@???>) id 1Tgv4A-0006cu-9o
for users@???; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:21:58 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
From: Richard Green <rich@???>
In-Reply-To: <20121207021942.GT3867@???>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 10:21:57 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <35695F4B-2CC8-42D8-A735-2AC00F60D4FD@???>
References: <20121207021942.GT3867@???>
To: users@???
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
X-Virus-Scanner: Scanned by ClamAV on mail.bitfolk.com at Fri,
07 Dec 2012 10:21:59 +0000
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:ba8:1f1:f1dc::2
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rich@???
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
spamd1.lon.bitfolk.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-ASN:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT
shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Report: * -0.0 SHORTCIRCUIT Not all rules were run,
due to a shortcircuited rule
* -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 22 Mar 2010 06:51:10 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail.bitfolk.com)
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] Proposal: Security incidents postings
X-BeenThere: users@???
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users of BitFolk hosting <users.lists.bitfolk.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bitfolk.com/mailman/options/users>,
<mai
