On 2/23/2012 4:32 PM, rg86...@airpost.net wrote: > in the actionable cases I'm considering, the spamtrap addressed -- yes, > they're 'converted' from prior valid usage -- were unique, > singly-purposed addresses, given to single vendors for sole usage by > them. in all cases of documented compromise, I contacted the vendor, > change my working, unique email to something else, and then and ONLY > then, converted the compromised address for spamtrap usage.
Ahh, ok. >> I get the impression that what you've done is taken mailboxes that were >> phished or password cracked > > no. accounts that vendors had for business transaction with me, that > were compromised on THEIR end. e.g., data breach. no shortage of those Heheh. At least it was someone else fault then. :) > as was the object of the compromise, they're now used by spammers to > send spam TO ... Ok, so what's the practical difference between this 'spamtrap' DISCARD solution and simply returning a 5xx unknown user for these addresses? Does this spammer always send to multiple recipients including at least one of these 'spamtrap' addresses? -- Stan
