Re: UseNet Gateway One Way ok?
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
25 May 1997 03:20:18 -0700
In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.3.96.970525104859.21232A-100000@bartlet.df.lth.se>,
Peter Svensson <petersv@df.lth.se> wrote:
>On 25 May 1997, david parsons wrote:
>
>> >I tend to agree here. Unless the feed can be restricted to people with a
>> >certified clue, I tend to be against such a one way feed. I have enough
>> >problems with the fuckwits at agis.net as it is without having to deal
>> >with other, admittidly lesser, spamming idiots.
>>
>> If it's a one-way feed, it could be set up to mangle headers so that
>> only a human can figure them out. Rot13 the from: address, or put
>> spaces in it, or anything along those lines.
>
>I disagree very strongly about this. Why should we go through a lot of
>trouble? Just configure procmail/sendmail
If you corrupt email addresses at the gateway, it is done in one
place. If you rely on the end user to filter out spam, it needs
to be done on all of the sites.
(And, for what it's worth, I maintain some moderately active antispam
filters on my network, and they're only catching about 20% of the
spam rolling on in.)
____
david parsons \bi/ abuse@localhost
\/