On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 10:45:44AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It is anti-social for every idiot on the net to think that they are important
enough to require a subscription from everyone who wants to send them email.
Like it or not (and I don't) that is where we are
headed if other solutions
Hello Alain,
Am 2004-06-10 22:03:54, schrieb Alain Tesio:
Not if the message if refused by the smtp server before it's delivered, right ?
It's not that antisocial to ask the 1% people who aren't subscribed to subscribe
before sending a message.
I am subscribed to severa mailinglists on
You might see a few, IMHO misguided, people implementing sender
pre-authentication systems. A very few high-profile people might
actually have justpficiation for a system that passes some senders to
them and everyone else via their helpers for dealing with fan mail.
Wide-scale deployment of
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:29, Dale Amon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 10:45:44AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It is anti-social for every idiot on the net to think that they are
important enough to require a subscription from everyone who wants to
send them email.
Like it
[snip]
If CR systems get popular then spammers will start replying to the
messages. Most spammers have working email addresses, so it would not be
difficult to automate a response to a CR system. Any CR system which just
requires that you reply to this email will be trivially broken by
Hello all,
I found message below on Changelog of cvs 1.11.17.
-
SERVER SECURITY FIXES
* Thanks to Stefan Esser Sebastian Krahmer, several potential security
problems have been fixed. The ones which were considered dangerous enough
to
Sent to list.
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 14:31, Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
Hello!
W licie z czw, 10-06-2004, godz. 19:06, Greg Folkert pisze:
Don't do it. Confirmation systems are just as bad as the problems that they
try to solve.
Here, here. Agreement on all fronts. If I get a challenge,
It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
agree with that consensus.
I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
other header signatures systems.
Patrick
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:38, Dale Amon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That said, those who can afford it will hire human
operators to act as email gatekeepers; those who can't
will use whatever a salesman can convince them is
affordable and works. Whether we like it or not will
not figure into the
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
agree with that consensus.
I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
other header signatures systems.
Currently you can't
In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has been seen
typing:
Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those signatures
anyway...
Why bother, when said windows machines will have perfectly good
signatures stored on them somewhere already?
--
Quoting Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Some of the anti-spam people are very enthusiastic about their work. I
wouldn't be surprised if someone writes a bot to deal with CR systems.
A bot to detect C-R queries and add them to the refused-mail ACL list
would be most useful. ;-
--
To
Incoming from Rick Moen:
Quoting Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Some of the anti-spam people are very enthusiastic about their work. I
wouldn't be surprised if someone writes a bot to deal with CR systems.
A bot to detect C-R queries and add them to the refused-mail ACL list
would
[EMAIL PROTECTED](B
$B!!(B
$B(B
$B$3$l$+$i$N![EMAIL PROTECTED]|1_0JeCy6b!! wrote:
In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has
been seen typing:
Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those
signatures anyway...
Why bother, when said windows machines will
On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 10:45:44AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It is anti-social for every idiot on the net to think that they are important
enough to require a subscription from everyone who wants to send them email.
Like it or not (and I don't) that is where we are
headed if other solutions
Hello Alain,
Am 2004-06-10 22:03:54, schrieb Alain Tesio:
Not if the message if refused by the smtp server before it's delivered, right ?
It's not that antisocial to ask the 1% people who aren't subscribed to
subscribe
before sending a message.
I am subscribed to severa mailinglists on
You might see a few, IMHO misguided, people implementing sender
pre-authentication systems. A very few high-profile people might
actually have justpficiation for a system that passes some senders to
them and everyone else via their helpers for dealing with fan mail.
Wide-scale deployment of
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:29, Dale Amon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 10:45:44AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It is anti-social for every idiot on the net to think that they are
important enough to require a subscription from everyone who wants to
send them email.
Like it
[snip]
If CR systems get popular then spammers will start replying to the
messages. Most spammers have working email addresses, so it would not be
difficult to automate a response to a CR system. Any CR system which just
requires that you reply to this email will be trivially broken by
On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 08:39:12PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It won't work because challenge-response systems are technically no good.
While CR systems are almost never used because the people who use them are
universally regarded as cretins, the spammers won't bother about trying to
Sent to list.
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 14:31, Jaroslaw Tabor wrote:
Hello!
W liście z czw, 10-06-2004, godz. 19:06, Greg Folkert pisze:
Don't do it. Confirmation systems are just as bad as the problems that
they
try to solve.
Here, here. Agreement on all fronts. If I get a
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:38, Dale Amon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That said, those who can afford it will hire human
operators to act as email gatekeepers; those who can't
will use whatever a salesman can convince them is
affordable and works. Whether we like it or not will
not figure into the
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
agree with that consensus.
I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
other header signatures systems.
Currently you can't
In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has been
seen typing:
Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those signatures
anyway...
Why bother, when said windows machines will have perfectly good
signatures stored on them somewhere already?
--
Quoting Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Some of the anti-spam people are very enthusiastic about their work. I
wouldn't be surprised if someone writes a bot to deal with CR systems.
A bot to detect C-R queries and add them to the refused-mail ACL list
would be most useful. ;-
[EMAIL PROTECTED](B
$B!!(B
$B(B
$B$3$l$+$i$N![EMAIL
PROTECTED]|1_0JeCy6b!! wrote:
In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has
been seen typing:
Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those
signatures anyway...
Why bother, when said windows machines will
28 matches
Mail list logo
