> Though those are easy to whitelist. Is the philosophy here to assume
> that the user isn't whitelisting? (<- That's not a hostile question,
> I just don't know.)
It's generally the philosophy, I think. You have to assume that 90% of the
people who use any software aren't going to customize it
> > install SA and silently drop spam traffic.
> Oooo! that is clever. I like it I like it.
Remember it is droping the mail at source, not at destination.
Any why taking any precaution with identified spammers, that have been
going against the rules for years. If they are not happy they can
s
> There's a lot of nonspam which uses IMG too, thing like Amazon order
> confirmations, fancier newsletters, etc, etc. Still, might be the case
> that it's a useful rule with a low score.
But is it more useful than the HTML check?
Is there a reason to have both?
--
You are responsible for y
There's a lot of nonspam which uses IMG too, thing like Amazon order
confirmations, fancier newsletters, etc, etc. Still, might be the case that
it's a useful rule with a low score.
C
___
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking fo
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 05:23 PM, Kaitlin Duck Sherwood wrote:
> I don't even bother trying to parse to make sure it's an HTML tag: the
> only English-language word with I-M-G in it is the city Pri.m.ghar, Iowa
> -- population 950. There are a few acronyms -- Inside Macintosh Games,
> for e
