On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 09:20:35PM -0500, dman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:57:02PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
> | In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> | >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
> | >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined?
> | >dunno
> |
> | Me neither. Since what it does is bombard the victim the spammer forged
> | in the headers, hopfully it's dead and won't be revived. If you want to
> | bounce spam, do it in the SMTP session you're receiving the message in.
>
> Oh, I didn't even know what it was. This is a _really_ bad idea since
> the From: address can very easily be forged.
>
Actually, doing that is entirely up to the user seting it up, and the default
not to. And it does a wonderful job of getting rid of the lieterally hunderds
of
spam messages I get each day.
However, I do beleive that if a site is allowing spam to be relayed, it should
be made well aware of how unpopulat that is.
--
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
