Talk:Joe job

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

designed to tarnish the reputation of an innocent third party

Can this be rephrased? The primary purpose of the hijacking may not be tarnishing the victim's reputation. Instead it may be to use a 'clean' domain/email that is unlikely to be blocked due to obscurity or white-listing. --216.241.41.217 18:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the above. The phrase "joe-job" as currently used does not usually refer to revenge attacks; it's simply a spam strategy that causes honest domain owners to be among the innocent victims.

Also the story should probably include the term "backscatter" and a little more discussion of this.

--

Perhaps the article could be restructured along the lines of this change in meaning. It could explain how the original meaning came about and the motivations attached to the particular actions and then later explain the more current practice of "backscatter" and the technical advantages to spammers which motivate this.

Also, would someone who knows the "standard" form for disambiguation page do that number on this one between the "Joe Job" Canadian slang and the Internet use?

209.239.10.242 16:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)]

[edit] Wikipedia

Just a thought - might it be a good idea to include a small amount about how easy "joe jobbing" is on wikipedia? It is self referencing but its also a very good example of the aforementioned. Thedreamdied 18:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Please, how would they joe-job wiki?

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 03:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SPF

I think SPF would help... This may be part of 'sender authentication', but ISTM it should be mentioned separately. --Bobbozzo (talk) 20:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)