"Karsten M. Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I see you and raise you.  You're arrogant, ignorant, rude, and you
> can't do math.

Constructive debate is both healthy and encouraged, but baseless and
petty insults are not, and I won't tolerate it.  You've been warned.

>     Now suppose that most of that spam spoofs legitimate email
>     addresses (not historically true, but becoming more so).  6
>     million C-R users send challenges to 150 million spams, every
>     day.  With a uniform distribution, the average email user gets a
>     challenge based on a spoofed header once every four days.

Whoa, whoa.  First, there is no way to predict that such a situation
will ever occur.  Second, why do you assume that nothing will be done
at the MTA level to stop/reduce forged messages as they become more
prevalent?  I really don't think this is a difficult problem to solve
at this level, it just hasn't been worth the effort in the past, but
that might change as virus/worm/spam behaviors continue in their
current direction.

> I would find C-R systems such as TMDA far less objectionable if they
> mandated C-R only as a last recourse:
>
>   - Mail that isn't viral in origin.

Install a virus checker.  Demanding that TMDA handle virus detection
makes even less sense than demanding that the MTAs build this in.
Have you approached the MTA authors with this request yet?

>   - Mail that isn't clearly spam.

This is impossible.

>   - Mail that isn't otherwise accounted for (whitelist, passkey, or
>   other system).

TMDA already does this.
_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to