 A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183006] |
Wed, 02 October 2013 19:07  |
bill
Messages: 310
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Just an idle comment on those who use invalid.com for e-mail addresses:
invalid.com is a legit e-mail address; try it.
Using it would be violating your tos and/or aup by your ISP for
impersonation.
It's also for sale: But if you like being associated with the following:
-----------
[Querying whois.verisign-grs.com]
[Redirected to whois.networksolutions.com]
[Querying whois.networksolutions.com]
[whois.networksolutions.com]
Welcome to the Network Solutions(R) Registrar WHOIS Server.
The IP address from which you have visited the Network Solutions
Registrar WHOIS
database is contained within a list of IP addresses that may have failed
to abide by Network Solutions' WHOIS policy. Failure to abide by this
policy can
adversely impact our systems and servers, preventing the processing of
other WHOIS requests.
To see the Network Solutions WHOIS Policy, click on or copy and paste
the following
URL into your browser:
http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/index.jhtml
If you feel that you have received this message in error, please email
us using the online
form at http://www.networksolutions.com/help/email.jsp with the
following information:
Whois Query: invalid.com
YOUR IP address is 198.171.79.36
Date and Time of Query: Wed Oct 02 14:08:30 EDT 2013
Reason Code: IE
--------------
Go ahead and keep using it. I'd think twice about associating myself
with them, though.
My gosh dolts, use an actual non-existant address and check it out! Or
better yet, use one of the thousands of addresses set up for just that
purpose; they're all over the place and many from reputable company
sources, too. Beware the scammers though, as in all things internet.
I haven't looked in years, but heypete.com used to have a lot of them
available, and spamcop.NET maintains a couple also. As do many other
places, or even create your own freebie and just never use the account.
HTH
Twayne`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183035 is a reply to message #183033] |
Fri, 04 October 2013 08:08  |
Mr Oldies
Messages: 241
Registered: October 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 03:50:55 +0000 (UTC), Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> richard @shut.the.fuck.up.stupid wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Twayne wrote:
>>>> Just an idle comment on those who use invalid.com for e-mail
>>>> addresses:
>>>>
>>>> invalid.com is a legit e-mail address; try it.
>>>
>>> Better is to use example.com as it is designed for the purpose. Even
>>> better than that is example.invalid
>>>
>>> Any made-up user name to the left of the @ that uses a valid domain
>>> name to the right will flood the server of the owner of that valid
>>> domain, regardless if the user name is legitimate or not.
>>>
>>> Thanks for pointing out this problem.
>>
>> Really?
>
> Yes, bullis, really.
>
>> I wasn't aware that simply posting an addy cause email to be
>> sent to that addy.
>> Is this some new feature of usenet?
>
> In all your years, I suppose it is possible that you have never heard of
> email address harvesting on Usenet by spammers. Okay, I get that. You've
> learned something new tonight.
>
> BTW, bullis(at)shut(dot)the(dot)fuck(dot)up(dot)stupid will still cause the servers the
> spammers use to attempt to *send* mail to shut.the.fuck.up.stupid. They
> will *not* attempt to send to example.com or something.invalid (because
> they are configured that way).
Yes you have it wrong.
Usenet addy's by themselves DO NOT send email.
They are collected and abused by spammers.
Which is why I have NEVER used my real addy.
mail(at)newsguy(dot)com
Is a valid addy.
Which I did use, with permission.
I was told that since it is not active, any mail sent to it is
automagically trashed.
And then there are the more sophisticated spammers who will use programs to
crack your login password so they can send mail as if it came from you.
I know. I've been hit twice that way.
|
|
|
|
| Re: A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183036 is a reply to message #183035] |
Fri, 04 October 2013 12:55 |
Beauregard T. Shagnas
Messages: 154
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
richard the sto0pid wrote:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> richard @shut.the.fuck.up.stupid wrote:
>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>> Twayne wrote:
>>>> > Just an idle comment on those who use invalid.com for e-mail
>>>> > addresses:
>>>> >
>>>> > invalid.com is a legit e-mail address; try it.
>>>>
>>>> Better is to use example.com as it is designed for the purpose. Even
>>>> better than that is example.invalid
>>>>
>>>> Any made-up user name to the left of the @ that uses a valid domain
>>>> name to the right will flood the server of the owner of that valid
>>>> domain, regardless if the user name is legitimate or not.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for pointing out this problem.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>
>> Yes, bullis, really.
>>
>>> I wasn't aware that simply posting an addy cause email to be sent to
>>> that addy.
>>> Is this some new feature of usenet?
>>
>> In all your years, I suppose it is possible that you have never heard
>> of email address harvesting on Usenet by spammers. Okay, I get that.
>> You've learned something new tonight.
>>
>> BTW, bullis(at)shut(dot)the(dot)fuck(dot)up(dot)stupid will still cause the servers the
>> spammers use to attempt to *send* mail to shut.the.fuck.up.stupid. They
>> will *not* attempt to send to example.com or something.invalid (because
>> they are configured that way).
>
> Yes you have it wrong.
> Usenet addy's by themselves DO NOT send email.
> They are collected and abused by spammers.
Well, duh! Is that some sort of backpedalling statement? What part of
"harvesting" was too far over your brow?
> Which is why I have NEVER used my real addy.
> mail(at)newsguy(dot)com Is a valid addy.
> Which I did use, with permission.
> I was told that since it is not active, any mail sent to it is
> automagically trashed.
Sure, the mail can be trashed. The idea with using an .invalid TLD is to
prevent the *sending* of any mail *in the first place.* Why clog the pipe
if you don't have to?
> And then there are the more sophisticated spammers who will use programs
> to crack your login password so they can send mail as if it came from
> you.
> I know. I've been hit twice that way.
...none of which has anything to do with the topic being discussed.
--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183042 is a reply to message #183033] |
Fri, 04 October 2013 23:33 |
bill
Messages: 310
Registered: October 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2013-10-03 11:50 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> richard @shut.the.fuck.up.stupid wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Twayne wrote:
>>>> Just an idle comment on those who use invalid.com for e-mail
>>>> addresses:
>>>>
>>>> invalid.com is a legit e-mail address; try it.
>>>
>>> Better is to use example.com as it is designed for the purpose. Even
>>> better than that is example.invalid
>>>
>>> Any made-up user name to the left of the @ that uses a valid domain
>>> name to the right will flood the server of the owner of that valid
>>> domain, regardless if the user name is legitimate or not.
>>>
>>> Thanks for pointing out this problem.
>>
>> Really?
>
> Yes, bullis, really.
>
>> I wasn't aware that simply posting an addy cause email to be
>> sent to that addy.
>> Is this some new feature of usenet?
>
> In all your years, I suppose it is possible that you have never heard of
> email address harvesting on Usenet by spammers. Okay, I get that. You've
> learned something new tonight.
>
> BTW, bullis(at)shut(dot)the(dot)fuck(dot)up(dot)stupid will still cause the servers the
> spammers use to attempt to *send* mail to shut.the.fuck.up.stupid. They
> will *not* attempt to send to example.com or something.invalid (because
> they are configured that way).
>
You forget, invalid.com will load into your browser; they used to have
email addresses too, before the registrars started threatening them.
example.com is in the same boat with several derivatives already
floating around.
Bass turds like you abound around the 'net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183056 is a reply to message #183055] |
Sun, 06 October 2013 01:47 |
Beauregard T. Shagnas
Messages: 154
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Twayne, a person-without-clue, wrote:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> Twayne wrote:
>>> You forget, invalid.com will load into your browser; they used to have
>>> email addresses too, before the registrars started threatening them.
>>> example.com is in the same boat with several derivatives already
>>> floating around.
>>
>> They are not the same. Peter has already explained that to you.
>>
>>> Bass turds like you abound around the 'net.
>>
>> Persons-without-clue, such as yourself, are even more prevalent.
>
> LOL, you're a real gag on the ass of progress, aren't you?
One day you might wake up and understand. I don't expect it will be soon,
though. You and knowledge: never the twayne shall meet.
--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high
|
|
|
|
| Re: A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183057 is a reply to message #183056] |
Sun, 06 October 2013 02:45 |
Jerry Stuckle
Messages: 2598
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 10/5/2013 9:47 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> Twayne, a person-without-clue, wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Twayne wrote:
>>>> You forget, invalid.com will load into your browser; they used to have
>>>> email addresses too, before the registrars started threatening them.
>>>> example.com is in the same boat with several derivatives already
>>>> floating around.
>>>
>>> They are not the same. Peter has already explained that to you.
>>>
>>>> Bass turds like you abound around the 'net.
>>>
>>> Persons-without-clue, such as yourself, are even more prevalent.
>>
>> LOL, you're a real gag on the ass of progress, aren't you?
>
> One day you might wake up and understand. I don't expect it will be soon,
> though. You and knowledge: never the twayne shall meet.
>
ROFLMAO. Best I've heard in a long time, Beauregard!
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net
==================
|
|
|
|
| Re: A general note on invalid.com and others like it [message #183058 is a reply to message #183057] |
Sun, 06 October 2013 02:54 |
Beauregard T. Shagnas
Messages: 154
Registered: September 2010
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> Twayne, a person-without-clue, wrote:
>>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>> Twayne wrote:
>>>> > You forget, invalid.com will load into your browser; they used to
>>>> > have email addresses too, before the registrars started threatening
>>>> > them.
>>>> > example.com is in the same boat with several derivatives
>>>> > already floating around.
>>>>
>>>> They are not the same. Peter has already explained that to you.
>>>>
>>>> > Bass turds like you abound around the 'net.
>>>>
>>>> Persons-without-clue, such as yourself, are even more prevalent.
>>>
>>> LOL, you're a real gag on the ass of progress, aren't you?
>>
>> One day you might wake up and understand. I don't expect it will be
>> soon, though. You and knowledge: never the twayne shall meet.
>
> ROFLMAO. Best I've heard in a long time, Beauregard!
Rudyard is probably rolling over in his grave, too, I'll bet. ;-)
--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]