On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 10:28:51PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> Martin> is there any chance that the list's admin would consider
> Martin> removing the header info that shows the adress of the sender
> Martin> before sending it on to the list?
> I wouldn't recommend this...how then can we do personal replies when a
> list reply is not necessary? We will have to do it usenet-style and
> put "Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove _nospam)" in our
> signature files. Lucky for us Gnus users we can make those be
> processed automatically, but it is still messy.
Hmm. Lemme get this right. You're telling me that people modify
their email addresses so that spammers cannot automatically harvest
them yet you then say that Gnus has code that automatically processes
them? Are all harvester programmers too dumb to make this connection?
I doubt it.
In other words I'm sceptical of some of these strategies. If I were a
harvest programmer I'd be more than happy to slice and dice such addresses
to get all reasonable permutations. If a harvest gets a few bogus
addresses out of it, do they care? I doubt it.
> A better alternative, IMHO, is to use a certain anti-spam e-mail
> address (someone on this list uses it but I can't remember who) that
> only lasts like a week, and then its gone. This gives most ppl enuf
Indeed this is an excellent strategy - if done properly. The problem
is, a lot of people don't have the ability to capture all addresses
in a domain - and of course user-random@domain is trivially defeated by
a competent slicer and dicer if user@domain is valid. So this strategy
only truly works for personal domains.
> time to reply. This won't cut down your bandwidth, however, but it
If you can control your DNS you can apply a similar strategy to your
domain by generating a reply address of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
where @domain is not a valid mail target. But again, the number of
people who have the opportunity, or capability to do this, are low.
Regards.
