from lugh.tuatha.org (root@lugh.tuatha.org [194.125.145.45]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g82AaFZ28780 for
    <zzzz-ilug@example.com>; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 11:36:15 +0100

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2385B440DA
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 13:12:27 -0400 (EDT)
from webnote.net (mail.webnote.net [193.120.211.219]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6MFIV903109 for
    <jm-ilug@jmason.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 16:18:31 +0100
from lugh.tuatha.org (root@lugh.tuatha.org [194.125.145.45]) by
    webnote.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA31180 for <jm-ilug@jmason.org>;
    Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:42:04 +0100
from lugh (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lugh.tuatha.org
    (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA19400; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:41:00 +0100
from ie.suberic.net (owsla.ie.suberic.net [62.17.162.83]) by
    lugh.tuatha.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA19364 for <ilug@linux.ie>;
    Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:40:48 +0100
from owsla.ie.suberic.net (owsla [127.0.0.1]) by ie.suberic.net
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6M9ek923178 for <ilug@linux.ie>;
    Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:40:46 +0100
From ilug-admin@linux.ie  Mon Jul 22 18:12:53 2002

On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 11:12:34PM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote:
> oh yes, see you've setup that tdma thingy, so here's a thought. do
> you reckon spammers (or the software they use) is/are smart enough to
>
> 	s/\(.\)+\+.*@\([a-zA-Z\.0-9\-]\)/\1@\2/
>
> on email addresses? it's a fairly old trick, so i dont see why they
> wouldnt.
the dated address that my from appears as is a good address for five days
for anyone.  after that it requires a confirm message from the sender.
my regular email address requires a confirm address if i haven't
explicitly given permission to the sender.
and yes, spammers could try to set up a system to reply to my confirm
messages, but that would require them to a) give out a valid email address
in their From headers, and b) use a lot more bandwidth then they do now
(thereby costing them more money).
oh, and they can't forge confirm messages.  the confirm message system
works something like this:
message goes in the pending q and is assigned an id.
that id is encrypted and used to create the from address of the
outgoing confirm mail - kevin+confirm+kghdsfg@ie.suberic.net
only a message to that address will work to free the message from
the q (or i can free it using tmda-pending).
all of this is discussed on http://tmda.sf.net/
kevin
--
kevin@suberic.net     that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to
fork()'ed on 37058400    the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier
meatspace place: home       than a sober one. the happiness of credulity is a
http://ie.suberic.net/~kevin   cheap & dangerous quality -- g.b. shaw
--
Irish Linux Users' Group: ilug@linux.ie
http://www.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug for (un)subscription information.
List maintainer: listmaster@linux.ie