"David T. Ashley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> But the sooner we play for the future, the easier the transition
> will be.

This assumes a transition will be necessary. 

> Does anyone have a vision of a challenge/response e-mail system that
> will identify humans, thwart any attempt at automated replies, and
> be minimally difficult for the humans?

Did you not see my last e-mail? I provided two methods that can't be
thwarted by auto-responders, but are still relatively easy for humans
to use.

To thwart these, a spammer would have to setup a system to accept all
auto-responses and bounces for the spam it sends, and parse the
message bodies looking for the confirmation e-mail address and/or URL,
and then fire-up an http client or send another e-mail message to
release it.

Read the FAQ for why this will probably never happen on a significant
scale.

> The best I've seen is the text word embedded in a graphics image
> with the confusing background (to thwart automated recognition).

This is nothing more than window-dressing. If this level of complexity
is not necessary, why do you want to give your correspondents an
excuse to "give-up" and not confirm their message because they don't
understand the instructions, or because the instructions are too time
consuming to complete?

Let's cross this bridge when we come to it.
_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to