I just come accross the article at http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042 which describes that each new sender must first himself identify by answering a return message.
I love that idea!
Is such a module available within SpamAssassin?
I would like the picture methode, rather, than the just reply meth
> -Original Message-
> From: Ronald Wiplinger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 21 November 2002 13:50
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in
> the future?
>
> I just come accross the article at
> http:
with matching codes, move that
address into the white list.
-Jason
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hoyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 6:46 AM
To: 'Ronald Wiplinger'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by r
---
> From: Tony Hoyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 6:46 AM
> To: 'Ronald Wiplinger'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary
> in the future?
>
>
> > -Original Message-
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:50:25PM +0800, Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
>
> I just come accross the article at http://slate.msn.com/?id=2074042 which
> describes that each new sender must first himself identify by answering a
> return message. I love that idea!
>
> Is such a module available within S
Jason Qualkenbush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think you're missing the point of the concept. [...] I'd love to
> use a system like that, but I never know ahead of time what email
> address a confirmation from amazon.com or whatever is going to come
> from.
>
> I would assume that it would n
> This is possible, but many (okay, I) consider it arrogant, obnoxious
> and just generally annoying. I've had users report bugs to me for
> Debian, and then when I respond, they want me to jump through a hoop
> so my mail (that THEY REQUESTED) gets to them.
I agree. I've never considered myself i
Hi,
I need to learn, that for SAhelp I need to change the To:, Grrr.
- Forwarded message from Claudio Clemens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 11:33:03PM -0700, Michael Moncur wrote:
> > This is possible, but many (okay, I) consider it arrogant, obnoxious
> > and just general
Tony Hoyle wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Ronald Wiplinger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 21 November 2002 13:50
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SAtalk] Is to identify yourself by return email necessary in
the future?
I just come accross the article at
http://slate.msn.com/?id
> And what about "password" Subjects? spamfilter has such a feature. If
> the user is wanting to send you something (and you have realy no idea
> who he is), he may find your address in the web, and the following
> comment: If you are sending your first e-mail to me, please write the
> following "p
> But can you afford to drop all spam?
> The ideal to reach is to /dev/null spam, not just copy it for
> sorting through later on...
I already effectively 'drop' everything with a score over 20, which accounts
for 90% of my spam, over 100 messages a day.
In practice, those messages go to a folde
Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
Tom,
I still want to give it a try.
I use sendmail and procmail uses spamd
tmda wants also in procmail, and I have no idea if that can be done,
just by putting the suggested procmail of tmda after the existing lines
of spamd. If yes, than I can go to the next level.
I d
12 matches
Mail list logo
