On 05/09/02 16:13, krutch Replied As Follows: --- Original Message ---
> Jay Garcia wrote: >> On 05/09/02 11:42, krutch Replied As Follows: >> >> --- Original Message --- >> >> >>>Jay Garcia wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Many users, I for one, use the SECURE server(s) and I post with my REAL >>>>mail address. I don't particularly care to have my real address spread >>>>all over usenet. I have the good fortune to own my own mail server and >>>>therefore have many *throw-away* addresses mainly so that I can track >>>>where spam harvesting originates. >>> >>>Actually over in the <news.software.readers> group a couple of years ago >>>an individual did some testing. He found that harvesters often parse the >>> "from" line only and NOT the "reply-to". Therefore at this point in >>>time, the most effective way to spam protect is to use the following >>>format. Notice the proper use of the "invalid" domain. One shouldn't use >>>a remove spam tramp line. Ending in an invalid top level domain is the >>>proper way to spam trap <ie>: >>> >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>>That's the proper syntax and one won't receive much in the way of UCE, >>>at least whenever the foregoing example is used. >>> >>>Now, my issue is that Mozilla and NN7 don't work properly doing this. >>>Whenever I attempt to do this, with either, each post I respond to, >>>sends MY followup, or composition to the "Reply-To". This is the only >>>newsreader, e-mail client that has ever done this. >>> >> >> >> I got news (no pun intended) for you. The modern up-to-date harverting >> bots look for many things now, including the reply-to. They're also >> sophisticated enough to look for NOSPAM in your mail address as well as >> other munge tactics. > > Actually, harvesters by and large don't, repeat don't, harvest all the > headers and especially the reply-to. I don't receive any UCE to the > reply-to I use with my "other" nntp client [slrn] and I'm quite prolific > on Usenet and have been for years. The overhead for large parsing of all > headers is too time consuming for large scale harvesting operations. > >> As to your other problem, when you choose to "reply to all" or both >> "sender and newsgroup" this will happen. If you reply to "group only" it >> won't. > It does it on a reply - Control-R. Isn't the the same as followup to > group only? Hmm - I'll check it out to see if this is so. I'm pretty > sure I'm already tried this. > > Thanks for responding. > Not going to argue the point, I've been doing this since 1995, harvesting that is and I can harvest reply-to fields as well as email addresses such as <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and NO I don't harvest for spam purposes, for a Medical School client. Specially written software but nevertheless works as intended. What I was speaking of is if you choose to reply to "sender and newsgroup" the email goes to the "reply-to" as well as the reply going to the group. Replying to "just the group" is self-explanatory. -- Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion Novell MCNE-5/CNI-Networking Technologies-OSI UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org ** Post To Group ONLY, do NOT email **
