Yay, a long-ish post. But I believe it's worth it.
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 13:14 -0700, an anonymous Nabble user wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > The problem is with the design itself. Only the real sender can and will
> > confirm. The challenge to the *forged* sender of spam will not be
> >
digital toast...
if you have a good system, them implement it for real with real email
addresses and reject all the fake (not valid) email addresses
to streamline, use a database of some sort if you have to
anything you do after that will at least follow more proper design flow...
isnt using a
On 12-May-2009, at 14:21, digitaltoast wrote:
LuKreme wrote:
Seriously, I've had family members who twaddled about with PYLM crap
and they simply stopped getting my emails until they learned.
Lucky them...
Ah, you're one of THOSE.
*plonk*
--
These are the thoughts that kept me out of th
On 12-May-2009, at 14:14, digitaltoast wrote:
often technical lists are full of people who spend their time doing
weird
things like trying to make their emails appear as attachments for
anyone not
using Elm via emacs, in the bizarre belief that:
Oddly, I've been reading mail for over 20 yea
LuKreme wrote:
> Seriously, I've had family members who twaddled about with PYLM crap
> and they simply stopped getting my emails until they learned.
Lucky them...
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Boxtrapper-and-Spamassassin-Cpanel-11-strang
e real hints about the
> challenge response sender-verification pest, and why it is BAD.
>
> Please, do NOT use challenge response sender-verification, do NOT use
> boxtrapper.
I can tell you're hinting at something...just say what you mean :)
Anyway, thanks for the help on thi
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 12:25 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 11-May-2009, at 12:15, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
[ OP and challenge response question goes here ]
> > The problem is with the design itself. Only the real sender can and will
> > confirm.
>
> Only the real sender CAN confirm, but the real
fwiw, I also confirm any CR mails that I get. I just wanted to paste
in this quote... :)
"challenge response is a great way to tell people they are less important
than you" - Dan Quinlan via IRC
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Dave Pooser wrote:
> Not necessarily true-- anytime I see o
> The problem is with the design itself. Only the real sender can and will
> confirm. The challenge to the *forged* sender of spam will not be
> responded to.
Not necessarily true-- anytime I see one of those challenges to a (forged
sender) address I control I'll click the confirmation link just t
On 11-May-2009, at 12:15, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
The problem is with the design itself. Only the real sender can and
will
confirm.
Only the real sender CAN confirm, but the real sender is UNLIKELY to
confirm. I have -=never=- confirmed for a Prove-You-Love-Me email.
Never have, neve
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 06:56 -0700, an anonymous Nabble user wrote:
> THE PROBLEM: I'm signed up to over 300 forums, shops, sites etc, so there's
> no way I could make an email address box for all of those "pseudoaddresses",
> as it were. So I can't turn the catchall off.
Sure can, why not? Just al
- help appreciated, but mainly on the first problem.
Thanks, and apology for the length of this, but over the 1.5 months I've
been battling this, I've built up quite some info!
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Boxtrapper-and-Spamassassin-Cpanel-11-strange-behaviour.-tp23483808p23483808.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
12 matches
Mail list logo
