Quoting kevin lyda ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > rick, i think karsten needs a good long session in a pub. take him > out and get him good and drunk. next time you're in dublin/galway > i'll pay you back.
He and I could both use that. And I've always wanted to hang out in Galway, rain or no. > and maybe, you know, recommend a hobby or something - like outside of > email? please? Although Karsten's quite firm on the subject, his position's almost certainly much more thoughtful & nuanced than you're giving him credit for. For example, please note that he said "I'd like to at least make clear [i.e., make certain; ascertain] that anyone proceeding with a _pure_ C-R spam response solution is not acting out of ignorance". A _pure_ C-R solution (as pretty much universally implemented) sends out challenge messages to the claimed senders of mail received (excepting those on the cleared list). In doing so, it amplifies the effect of header forging, by sending completely inappropriate challenge mails to huge numbers of people who never sent mail in the first place -- which is what I cited on linux-elitists as the scheme's biggest problem. Anyway, if memory serves, Karsten's idea of "direct retaliation" entails nothing more violent than blackholing the offender or sending him appropriate SMTP reject messages. At least, I haven't yet heard of any high-explosive LARTs in his arsenal. -- Cheers, Rick Moen This space for rant. [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
