jdow wrote:
From: "John Rudd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If you return a 5xx error, what is to prevent the spammer from
clicking to release? CAPTCHA?
I'm actually not concerned about that. While that is a quality issue
for the user of the C/R system, it isn't something that pollutes the net.
THAT is where we disagree. C/R pollutes the net. There is no question
about it. It is the effort of a weak mind to defend itself from knowledge
as well as spam.
You misunderstood my point. I'm not saying C/R doesn't pollute the net.
I said the exact release mechanism isn't something I'm concerned
about. It is not an extra set of net pollution, above and beyond the
basic C/R system.
Also, the mentioned C/R system is at least less polluting than other C/R
mechanisms: it's rejecting instead of bouncing, so messages from direct
spam sending bots will just disappear instead of being backscattered.
Normal C/R systems would cause backscatter from those same messages.
But, as I pointed out, and as you agreed with me, it still has at least
2 features that remain unacceptable (and as the person who mentioned it
said, he doesn't know if the 3rd one is a problem in that implementation
or not; so it might be 3 features that remain unacceptable).
What if this system was in widespread use? It could be a serious
single point of failure.
Again, that's a quality issue for the user of the C/R system, not for
the rest of us. And, it's an implementation detail that might be
solvable with clustered web servers and databases, so a large scale
implementation might not have a single point of failure.
If you intend to email me Challenge/Response sets off a
a) I believe there is supposed to be a comma after "me" ... otherwise
the rant is a bit awkwardly worded.
b) I never said I plan to use C/R systems. I don't like C/R systems. I
never said anything that comes close to saying that I like them or would
use them. You of all people I would expect to intelligently read a
message instead of knee-jerking to a message which simply analyzes a
newly presented C/R mechanism (and still points out its flaws), while
dismissing some of its implementation details* as "not relevant to its
non-users".
(* the captcha question, and the single point of failure question)
