On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:38:10AM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
tokens in order to get any effect from SpamAssassin. Other than using
zombies, I don't think spammers could afford to generate real tokens
for every recipient.
Well, since there are millions of vulnerable systems all over the 'net
th
> "Daniel" == Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Daniel> On 16 Jun 2004, Hubert Chan wrote:
>> SpamAssassin will check for hashcash in the future. Support is
>> already present in the development version of SpamAssassin.
Daniel> ...makes you wonder how long it will take before someon
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:38:10AM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
tokens in order to get any effect from SpamAssassin. Other than using
zombies, I don't think spammers could afford to generate real tokens
for every recipient.
Well, since there are millions of vulnerable systems all over the 'net
that d
> "Daniel" == Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Daniel> On 16 Jun 2004, Hubert Chan wrote:
>> SpamAssassin will check for hashcash in the future. Support is
>> already present in the development version of SpamAssassin.
Daniel> ...makes you wonder how long it will take before someon
On 16 Jun 2004, Hubert Chan wrote:
>> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russell> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> SpamAssassin will check for hashcash in the future. Support is already
> present in the development version of
> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rens Houben) wrote:
>> Why bother, when said windows machines will have perfectly good
>> signatures stored on them somewhere already?
Russell> Presumably the signature would be bas
> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
>> agree with that consensus.
>>
>> I'm just wondering what is the general feeling a
On 16 Jun 2004, Hubert Chan wrote:
>> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russell> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> SpamAssassin will check for hashcash in the future. Support is already
> present in the development version of
> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rens Houben) wrote:
>> Why bother, when said windows machines will have perfectly good
>> signatures stored on them somewhere already?
Russell> Presumably the signature would be bas
> "Russell" == Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russell> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
>> agree with that consensus.
>>
>> I'm just wondering what is the general feeling a
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rens Houben) wrote:
> In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has
been seen typing:
> > Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those
> > signatures anyway...
>
> Why bother, when said windows machines
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rens Houben) wrote:
> In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has
been seen typing:
> > Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those
> > signatures anyway...
>
> Why bother, when said windows machines
In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has been
seen typing:
> Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those signatures
> anyway...
Why bother, when said windows machines will have perfectly good
signatures stored on them somewhere already?
>
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
> agree with that consensus.
>
> I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
> other header signatures systems.
Currently you ca
It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
agree with that consensus.
I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
other header signatures systems.
Patrick
In other news for Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 11:24:05PM +1000, Russell Coker has been seen
typing:
> Besides, with an army of Windows Zombies you could generate those signatures
> anyway...
Why bother, when said windows machines will have perfectly good
signatures stored on them somewhere already?
>
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:34, Patrick Maheral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
> agree with that consensus.
>
> I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
> other header signatures systems.
Currently you ca
It seems that most people here don't like CR systems, and I'd have to
agree with that consensus.
I'm just wondering what is the general feeling about using hashcash and
other header signatures systems.
Patrick
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub
18 matches
Mail list logo