1:14 PM
> To: test
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: A new technique to anti spam
>
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:52:26 +0800, =?gb2312?B?dGVzdA==?= said:
> > 3.The authority database guarantee all \"Email-content
> servers\" are related with lega
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:52:26 +0800, =?gb2312?B?dGVzdA==?= said:
> 3.The authority database guarantee all \"Email-content servers\" are related with
> legal ESPs.
This is somewhere between "highly unlikely" and "totally unworkable".
Problems:
1) Who controls the authority database? Why should I
Hi,Dave Aronson,
> (BTW, those two characters before the ! just show up as empty boxes
> here.)
These words are in Chinese.
I\'m not good at E
> I would certainly hope so. Otherwise it would be worse than useless.
Thankyou
>
> And in the case we are concerned with, that of the
Hi,Harald Tveit Alvestrand,
First,this tech is an \"anti-spam by macroeffect\" and also based \"human psychological warfare\",
it may not work right-now.
Then,it\'s a more complex system but only on server-side,simple on client-side.What we think
is if users need it?Maybe the answer
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 07:18:57PM +0800, test wrote:
>
>The advantages of the new technique: 1.As a receiver,you first
>judges the useful of the email by simple
>information(email-pointer:subject,from,to and etc).if is,you can
>refuse it to forbid download the body of the email(reducing the
>Inter
"test" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Aronson, äå!
(BTW, those two characters before the ! just show up as empty boxes
here.)
> This new tech is compatible with the other anti-spam techniques
I would certainly hope so. Otherwise it would be worse than useless.
> The last parameter is \
Worrisome side effect:
I can now only read the mail as long as the sender's mail server remains
online.
If the evaluation happens at read-time, not at fetch-time, this also means
that if I use "file-and-forget", as I do with many mailing lists, and
return to my archive a year later, many of the
Dave Aronson, 你好!
This new tech is compatible with the other anti-spam techniques(Such as filterings)
Do you notice the structure of mail-location in the new-tech?
Such as:
X-MPTR:svr=192.168.95.100;port=9110;id=20040707230823.GA29023;
md=1732457bac7b4d141732457bac7b4d14;size=2573;s
"test" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Notes:If server dones't supports new tech,just do it as traditional
> server.
In other words, the old way must still be supported. Therefore, the flow
of spam can (and therefore will) continue unabated, so long as the
spammers use the old way.
Furthermore
