Searching \ for '[OT]: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: techref.massmind.org/techref/index.htm?key=invitation+connect
Search entire site for: 'Invitation to connect on LinkedIn'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn'
2011\07\10@115308 by Michael Watterson

face picon face
On **/**/*** **:**, **** ******  via LinkedIn wrote:
> LinkedIn
> ------------
>
>
>
>
>      ***** ***** requested to add you as a connection on LinkedIn:
>
>
I have seen this a number of times. Presumably a mistake.

Why does the PIC List let them through as the "from:" is  "someone <spam_OUTmemberTakeThisOuTspamlinkedin.com>"

2011\07\11@005002 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 16:52 +0100, "Michael Watterson" <.....mikeKILLspamspam@spam@radioway.org>
wrote:
> On **/**/*** **:**, **** ******  via LinkedIn wrote:
> >
> >      ***** ***** requested to add you as a connection on LinkedIn:
> >
> >
> I have seen this a number of times. Presumably a mistake.
>
> Why does the PIC List let them through as the "from:" is  "someone
> <memberspamKILLspamlinkedin.com>" ?

Because Kari Laine is a subscribed member of the Piclist and it's a fake
LinkedIn invitation sent from Kari Laine's malware-ridden computer.

Don't click on the link.

Bob

-- http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users:
 http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html

2011\07\11@023742 by David

flavicon
face
On 11/07/2011 05:50, Bob Blick wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 16:52 +0100, "Michael Watterson"<.....mikeKILLspamspam.....radioway.org>
> wrote:
>> Why does the PIC List let them through as the "from:" is  "someone
>> <EraseMEmemberspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTlinkedin.com>" ?
>
> Because Kari Laine is a subscribed member of the Piclist and it's a fake
> LinkedIn invitation sent from Kari Laine's malware-ridden computer.

Doesn't at all look that way to me.

Received headers are fine, it also has a DomainKeys signature.  It seems to be an official email sent from LinkedIn because someone has used the "look through my addressbook and invite all my friends" feature. Unsolicited and perhaps annoying, but not fake.

Michael's question is quite sensible, it isn't from the address that the individual is subscribed with, so why does Mailman let it through?

Even if my computer were riddled with nasties, I shouldn't be able to send to the piclist from random email addresses.

Davi

2011\07\11@050327 by RussellMc

face picon face
FWIW - last time I looked at this the requester seemed to be a young
woman studying electrical engineering in Africa. She seemed to be a
genuine person* as far as I could  judge from internet information, so
it may be an attempt to garner EE contacts via Linkedin.

(* As opposed to the persistent 'young woman' refugee in ?Monrovia
who sent a very heart rending appeal and a very pleasant (family
friendly) photo of herself. "She" made the mistake of using a
watermarked photo. When she next contacted me I sent "her" several
other of her photos back, taken from the website where 'she" had got
the original photo. Sadly, I have not received any correspondence from
'her' since :-).

2011\07\11@063659 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
On 7/10/2011 9:50 PM, Bob Blick wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 16:52 +0100, "Michael Watterson"<mikespamspam_OUTradioway.org>
> wrote:
>> On **/**/*** **:**, **** ******  via LinkedIn wrote:
>>>       ***** ***** requested to add you as a connection on LinkedIn:
>>>
>>>
>> I have seen this a number of times. Presumably a mistake.
>>
>> Why does the PIC List let them through as the "from:" is  "someone
>> <@spam@memberKILLspamspamlinkedin.com>" ?
> Because Kari Laine is a subscribed member of the Piclist and it's a fake
> LinkedIn invitation sent from Kari Laine's malware-ridden computer.
>
> Don't click on the link.
>
> Bob
>
A few months ago, I became alarmed at how social sites seemed to encroach on privacy.

I have closed all "my" such sites, and no longer participate.

--Bob

2011\07\11@071137 by RussellMc

face picon face
> A few months ago, I became alarmed at how social sites seemed to
> encroach on privacy.

> I have closed all "my" such sites, and no longer participate.

A valid choice, out of the several valid choices available.

The following is independent of "security of data on the system" issues:

- Such sites can be very  well "locked down" so that you can restrict
how much unknown-users see. Even Facebook, at its most restricted
level, is annoyingly opaque to outsiders. A maximum privacy settings
Facebook site does not allow a non approved person even to send
messages to the owner, even though their Facebook ID is known. ie it
is like an email system that rejects messages as of right if the
sender is not preapproved. The only access method available is to send
a "friend request".  'Friend request' senders can be blocked
individually or ignored completely.

- A more open Facebook system can use closed & secret user groups to
allow fully private in-group communications.

- A good solution to most concerns is to not place information of
interest on the site. One can also use legally any name at all as your
visible 'persona'. I operate a number of Facebook pages for different
uses. My publically visible page is identifiably mine but the name is
human interpretable as me but probably not to search engines. I run
any filters etc fully open in most cases but don't place information
on the page which I don't want shared abroad. I also operate several
private and secret groups on the same page and can communicate and
send files without the groupings, members, conversations or files
being visible to anyone outside the group.

I assume as of right that I can't guarantee that any of the above can
be relied on.


                      Russel

2011\07\11@072422 by Carl Denk

flavicon
face
I'm not a member of any either, but, as I understand the "Default" settings tend toward be "Open", and non-knowledgeable users as a result will be vulnerable. A thought: Follow the money, the majority of these "Services", are very profitable. They are not getting rich from user fees, but by selling information. What is the information being sold??

On 7/11/2011 7:10 AM, RussellMc wrote:
>> A few months ago, I became alarmed at how social sites seemed to
>> encroach on privacy.
>>      

2011\07\11@224653 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
I think I fixed it so no LinkedIn invitations should get through the
Piclist ever again.

I subscribed their bot to the Piclist, but put it under moderation and
set the account to "nomail", so they won't be able to send or receive
messages.

We'll see if that works.

Bob

-- http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different...

2011\07\11@232056 by RussellMc

face picon face
> I subscribed their bot to the Piclist, but put it under moderation and
> set the account to "nomail", so they won't be able to send or receive
> messages.


Well done, I hope :-)

2011\07\12@065905 by Herbert Graf

picon face
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 15:20 +1200, RussellMc wrote:
> > I subscribed their bot to the Piclist, but put it under moderation and
> > set the account to "nomail", so they won't be able to send or receive
> > messages.
>
>
> Well done, I hope :-).

I also added the bot address to the automatically declined section. It
is VERY odd they were coming through though?

TTYL

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2011 , 2012 only
- Today
- New search...