Re: More on spam
On Friday 17 October 2003 17:41, Paul Johnson wrote:
> If a human can read it, so can the spammers. They will write new
> filters to unmunge your munge. Spammers are ingenious malicious
> idiots, keep that in mind.
True, but the question is, can they be bothered? I friend of mine put a
simple trollbox on a webpage, with the simple "at" munge, and he never
got spam to that. For many years, just denying mail where the address
was not in To: and CC: was a highly effective measure against spam. It
is easy to put your address in there, but they didn't. They do now. It
can't eliminate the problem, but it can reduce it.
That's why I advocate putting a few trollboxes here and there munged
with different styles. Then you know what kind of munging works, and if
it changes, one can regenate the archives from the mbox files.
I wouldn't advocate munging in e-mail messages themselves. I've never
done that myself. But I would consider munging in a web-based archive.
email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/ OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC