On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Dennis Henderson wrote: > > > > > > It might be that there is no solution for entirely dealing with spam, and > > I can think of a possible proof of this. But I don't need a total > > solution, I just need something that throttles it back considerably. > > > Well sometimes I tire of the folks that just sit back and poopoo any effort > or idea that actually works, even if only for today. > > If you're on the IT side of it, executives and associates alike, whether > they're stupid or not for using their company email address for non business > related stuff, get load of spam. They dont know why nor do they care. They > just want it to go away. > > By carefully analyzing characteristics of spam sources, we've been able to > apply serveral techniques that have been very effective on Spam. But all the > clues point to the source; residential PCs. Economics has everything do to > with it. So take away the port 25 vector and the tactical cost just came > close to infinity for some botherders.. Sure, you say, they will just switch > gears.. Well I think it would be great to force that change. It might expose > some of the activity that various groups have yet to be able to suss out. > > > > Solly, you had me there for a minute with your I know how to make the rain > stop.... I really expected a more global solution than an large > umbrella....
See, I don't mind if it rains on you. I only want to stop the rain on me. > Have a grand Christmas and a bully boxing day to follow! And a good Yule to you, or Saturnalia, or Samhein, or whatever you call your mid-winter festival. But the only boxes I'll be dealing with will be the ones containing chocolates. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
