on 9/23/02 2:17 AM, Brian Mailman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I think if it became widely used I'd unsub from mailing lists because I
> don't know who's subbed in and who isn't and I don't want to spend X
> amount of time every day every time I send a message confirming my
> address.
> 
> (and no, I'm not annoyed at the person who set this up.  I'm wanting to
> make an observation that this particular white list has a very visible
> flaw to it).
This illustrates the points I was making earlier about the technical flaws
of white lists, and points out an unintended consequence.

One would think that the service would provide an easy way to identify mail
from mailing lists. But even with a well designed system, that's a challenge
given the different ways lists can be configured. I can see unhappy and
confused users, mailing list admins who are responding to unhappy and
confused users, white list 'service' providers trying to explain the
intricacies of reply-to headers to people who don't understand email...

All to make life a little easier for spammers.

In my case, I elected not to 'verify' my email address. I don't know the
individual, and I don't know the service. I have no idea what their privacy
policies might be - if they have them, I don't know how they'll use the
address, what kind of security they have, and so on. That may be paranoid -
and somebody can get the address in other ways - but I figure why take the
chance.

Regards,

Dale

_______________________________________________
spamcon-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.spamcon.org/mailman/listinfo/spamcon-general#subscribers
Subscribe, unsubscribe, etc: Use the URL above or send "help" in body
    of message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Contact administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to