Re: anti-spam software for home use

From: Alan Connor (zzzzzz_at_xxx.yyy)
Date: 03/08/04

  • Next message: FRANK: "SPWARE" 
    Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 02:32:00 GMT

    On Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:43:59 -0600, *Vanguard* <no-email@post-reply-in-newsgroup.invalid> wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Alan Connor" said in
    > news:YtM2c.26847$aT1.9641@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
    ><snip>
    >> I run Linux here, and wrote my own spam killing program, which you can
    >> find at http://tinyurl.com/3c3ag.
    >>
    >> It's just a bunch of scripts with procmail at its heart, but I get no
    >> spam at all and *I* am in control of my mail, no one else.
    >>
    ><snip>
    >
    > Much shorter description: another C-R (challenge-response) e-mail
    > scheme, this one being a one-man home-brew concoction. Apparently works
    > great for him and some folks he says uses his setup. Lots of C-R
    > products available.
    >

    Fair enough...

    But it doesn't just use C-Rs. It uses a passlist and a content-filter BEFORE
    the C-R, which keeps them to an absolute minimum.

    This way you don't have to rely SOLELY on apps like SA, because they just
    can't ever be fine-tuned enough to get all the spam without eating
    other mail too.

    > Hey, Alan, I think it was you that referred to an RFC draft regarding
    > C-R. Remember where I could go read it?
    >

    I posted a *mock* RFC a long time ago, an attempt at arriving at some
    standards for the use of C-Rs in internet mail, but know of no actual
    RFC on the subject.

    It wasn't really an impressive article, frankly. If you want to work
    on another one I'd be happy to chip in.

    > Anyone know if Internet2 is doing a parallel development of improved
    > e-mail that might eventually show up on regular Internet? I didn't
    > notice anything obvious at www.internet2.org. Trying to ride atop the
    > 20-year protocols and trusting server relationships is no longer
    > appropriate. Putting on more duct tape on a leaky pipe isn't the
    > long-term solution. We need a new pipe developed in parallel so
    > eventually the old leaky one can be removed. Seems like the Internet2
    > provides the ideal parallel environment to wrench out a new e-mail
    > system.
    >

    Not me. Are you talking about a replacement for SMTP, which a lot of
    mail pros think is badly in need of replacing?

    In my opinion, it needs only this change:

    The number of Bcc addresses, not the addresses themselves, should
    be included in the headers.

    The problems with spam and viruses are mostly a matter of practice.

    The "home-brew" program I use keeps all spam and viruses out of my
    mailbox, and if I could install it on the POP server I use, no one
    with an account there would get any.

    No anonymous mail accepted....

    AC 

    -- 
ed(1) Check out the original tutorials by Brian W.
Kernighan at the Ed Home Page  http://tinyurl.com/2aa6g
  • Next message: FRANK: "SPWARE"

    Relevant Pages