On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:09 AM, Werner Koch<w...@gnupg.org> wrote: > On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 20:20, jesse200808+gpg-us...@gmail.com said: > >> Does it count if I put a human-readable address like johndoe AT >> example DOT org? I know it (in such a form) is still fairly easy to >> parse, but it's at least not as straightforward > > Right, any mail program must implement such a parser to make sending > encrypted mails easy. I should have made myself clearer: I was saying even if I used an alternative spelling of my email address, I knew it would still be possible to be parsed by a spammer. But it wouldn't be worth the effort (to a spammer) coz any implementation would be easily broken by other free form yet still human-readable spellings.
At the moment I would be using signatures much more often than receiving encrypted emails, so hopefully this shouldn't cause much trouble. Since I still feel totally green in this area I am still listening to opinions on the list and haven't pushed my key yet :P > >> An off-topic question: what's your free/libre solution to spams ? Is >> anything doing as well as Gmail? > > Greylisting, ix.dnsbl.manitu.net based blacklisting and sending all > mails with at lest one html part to the bitbucket. Thanks for the info, it's a really useful piece Cheers, Jesse _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
