Re: Spam fights
I second that. If I receive a confirmation message I never respond to it!
(well, when I first received such a message, I wanted to try how it works -
that was the only confirmation I responded to). Maybe that's impolite, but I
do not want to waste my time answering to that spam.
Dmitry
On Thursday 10 June 2004 11:58, Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:21, Jaroslaw Tabor <jarek@srv.pl> wrote:
> > We are allowing all emails from whitelits.
>
> Who is "we" in this context? Individual users or mailing list
> administrators?
>
> > For unknown sender, automated confirmation request is send. If
>
> For mailing lists this can be achieved by making the list subscriber-only.
> For individual accounts such behaviour is very anti-social as it results in
> confirmation messages being sent in response to virus messages. This means
> that even though my anti-virus software is updated regularly I still get
> hit by viruses through those stupid confirmation messages!
>
> My response to these scumbags who send me the confirmation messages is that
> if they are on a mailing list I'm on then I black-list their email address
> if it's known (or their mail server if their email address is not clear).
> If a confirmation message appears to be in response to a virus then I
> respond to it. Let the scumbag get another copy of the virus...
>
> > I'm planning to develop this feauture, but It will be nice to hear from
> > what you thing about this idea.
>
> Don't do it. Confirmation systems are just as bad as the problems that
> they try to solve.
>
> --
> http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
> http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
> http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
> http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: