On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
> Two things.
>
> [0] I'm still working on that ol' web site thing for ClassicCmp. One thing
> I'm looking at now is integrating the old archives with the new
> archives, which I've found *is* possible. More importantly, I now know
> how to spam-protect _every_ address in an archived message -- not just
BTW, I must say that the new site looks quite pretty.
> the poster's address. DUH, it's called *sed*!
sed rocks!
> That replaces the '_at_' in email addresses with ' [at] '. Is that
> sufficient to fool a harvester, or should a more sophisticated
> replacement be made? What replacement would that be?
Something more sophisticated needs to be implemented. Looking for an
"[at]" separator is part of the spammer arsenal.
> [1] I've written a procmail script that makes unknown senders go through a
> confirmation process similar to subscribing to a mailing list. I
> established backdoor, unfiltered addresses that I will hand out to
> companies, one for each business that wants one. That way, if spam
> starts coming to a particular address, I'll know exactly who is
> responsible and take appropriate steps.
Cool.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
Received on Tue Dec 03 2002 - 11:43:00 GMT