Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!paganini.bofh.team!not-for-mail
From: R Daneel Olivaw <Danny@hyperspace.vogon.gov>
Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Subject: Re: strange message on alt.test
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 08:45:00 +0100
Organization: To protect and to server
Message-ID: <usp15t$3fb96$1@paganini.bofh.team>
References: <us8677$mpdb$1@news.usenet.ovh>
 <us95om$1r903$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <20240306144056.0aa3416e@wibble.sysadmininc.com>
 <6ee1eb7e8637398e589013eb22ea5f1d@dizum.com>
 <efef003ad67bc9a1cd933cd28412713b@dizum.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 07:45:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: paganini.bofh.team; logging-data="3648806"; posting-host="XBJBjenliTep7OIZ0g9xdw.user.paganini.bofh.team"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@bofh.team"; posting-account="9dIQLXBM7WM9KzA+yjdR4A";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.1
Cancel-Lock: sha256:hfSycWH4orQdBVO+ntQ3tbBYbQ2gyT8UUDtNPqYhCXU=
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.3
Bytes: 3187
Lines: 44

wolfgang rothe wrote:
> On 06 Mar 2024, D <J@M> posted some
> news:6ee1eb7e8637398e589013eb22ea5f1d@dizum.com:
> 
>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 14:40:56 -0600, Nigel Reed
>> <sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 08:25:11 +0100
>>> Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> wrote:
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> From: llp <contact@usenet.ovh>
>>>> Date: mar, mar 5 2024 10:26:46PM GMT+00:00
>>>> Subject: strange message on alt.test
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I've noticed that on the alt.test group, a user posts a message
>>>>> every 5 minutes from months.
>>>>> Do you have any idea what this is ?
>>>>> For example:
>>>>
>>>> It's a bot, testing reaching the system and "ping". It's used for
>>>> the Tor (or similar) network for testing reachability.
>>>> Have used my server too.
>>>
>>> Personally, I'm not a big fan of running a usenet server that's
>>> accessable via tor. While usenet can be fairly anonymous, there is
>>> still some sort of accountability for those users who abuse it. That
>>> said, I suppose it's like any other VPN or whatever.
>>
>> google didn't need tor to abuse usenet with impunity, temporarily;
>> sites and services that reject tor users tend to become isolated,
>> like moderated newsgroups, moderated social media, the "in-crowd"
> 
> google couldn't find a way to make groups / usenet pay to support
> themselves, so the cost cutting knife came out.  If they were really
> interested, they could have stopped the spamming easily enough.
> 
> Encountering Tor filtering will slow a skilled networker down for
> a bit to work out what is needed.  An adjustment or two and Tor access
> continues unabated. Most users in this category are not abusers, but
> there is the occasional exception.
> 

I understand that some clients (not the one I use) can set an expiry 
date on a posting, this would seem to be case where that should be 
mandatory - and anything more than a few days would also be a form of abuse.