Re: Responding to Spam
From: Lord Shaolin (abuse_at_127.0.0.1)
Date: 10/02/03
- Next message: armin walland: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Previous message: Kevin Buhr: "Re: Linux is as buggy as Windows"
- In reply to: Dave: "Responding to Spam"
- Next in thread: Dave: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Reply: Dave: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Reply: Dave: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 10:49:01 +0100
"Dave" <shuvit@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:vnmafir9tj1m68@corp.supernews.com...
> My question is this. Why do email programs allow hidden codes that
respond
> automatically to emails that are opened? Seems like this would be the
> easiest thing in the world to block.
>
>
>
> A few months ago, I discovered to my horror, that Microsoft Outlook was
> sending such responses on my behalf. It's no wonder I got flooded with
> everything from Nigerian scam letters to child pornography. Now, I'm
using
> Eudora, and assuming it doesn't do this. I still see lots of porn,
> previewed without ever clicking on a link, but it's mostly to my old email
> address.
>
There are other ways than read receipt..
If they put a 1 pixel gif or jpg in the mail linked to a cgi/php/asp script
with an ID number specific to you and your email address and you read it
HTML enabled (which the majority do) it will confirm you exist and have
opened said mail.
Why do e-mail clients allow this?
They don't if you set them up/use them properly :)
--
-+ Shaolin +-
Discard what is useless, absorb what is not and
add what is uniquely your own.
.: http://www.security-forums.com :.
- Next message: armin walland: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Previous message: Kevin Buhr: "Re: Linux is as buggy as Windows"
- In reply to: Dave: "Responding to Spam"
- Next in thread: Dave: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Reply: Dave: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Reply: Dave: "Re: Responding to Spam"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
