[rescue] Spam (was: Perverse Question)

[Mike Hebel]

On Saturday, June 7, 2003, at 09:51 AM, Sheldon T. Hall wrote:

>  Yeah, but screw up _just_once_, and your address will be on every spam 
> list
> in China, and you'll get innundated.  In my case, the spam that gets 
> through
> outnumbers the legitimate e-mail; I have no idea how much goes in the
> bit-bucket before it gets to the company's POP server.

Which is why running my own mail server I have a spamtrap at nimizbrood.com

Personally since e-mail addresses are so cheap to make I think it would 
be an effective solution for each user to have two.  A public, read: 
spammable, address and a private one.  If they give out the wrong one - 
oh well.  But in most cases it wouldn't be an issue to setup two 
accounts on a client with some rules to forward the spam account to a 
spam folder.  They could then use the spam account for setting up online 
things.

> Until they apply the "illegal access" laws and make spamming a crime, 
> and
> the knowing transmission of it a civil offense, those of us who must be
> available will continue to seek technological defenses.

No argument from me on that one.  I didn't say Spamasssasin wasn't a 
good tool.  I merely point out that it wasn't necessary for most 
situations where you would be using an IPX/IPC for mail.  Besides, as 
Curtis pointed out in another e-mail the IPX maxes out at 64meg, or 128+ 
if you use two 64's in the first bank.  Depends on the box I think.  
Regardless that's more than enough RAM to handle the situation.  Even 
48meg on an IPC would be fine as long as you weren't running a lot 
(200+) account on the box.

Mike Hebel

--
Medieval Combat anyone? http://www.kingsofchaos.com/page.php?id=694655