From: Dave Sill (extropians@dave.sill.org)
Date: Thu Apr 11 2002 - 06:33:42 MDT
Eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Dave Sill wrote:
>
> > True. Dan Bernstein's IM2000 would fix, though, by having senders
> > store messages locally until recipients accept them. See:
> >
> > http://cr.yp.to/im2000.html
>
> Haven't read it,
Go ahead. It's not long.
> but Bernsteinware typically doesn't play well with others.
That's not true. qmail and djbdns work very well with other mailers
and name servers.
> Is this a proposed standard, or a qmail feature?
It's a project to design a new Internet mail infrastructure.
> > Recognizing spam is practically impossible. Any heuristic that's
> > easily implemented is also easily worked-around by spammers once
> > people start using it.
>
> Spam = bulk email. As long as you don't start rewriting each message body
> for each recipient (or small groups of recipients),
Which some spammers are already doing, BTW.
> simple statistical
> analysis on P2P systems will tag such messages with a high probability.
>
> > Tracing spam back to the originating ISP is tricky. Most spammers use
> > an open relay, so DoS'ing them could get you trouble.
>
> Open relays are typically blocked at transport layer.
Except that there are no good, free RBL's.
-Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:24 MST