Carey,
> Not to be horribly snide Jon:
Your question does not even sound slightly snide.
> But have you noticed a decrease in the number of overall emails you
> receive as well as the decrease in spam messages?
No.
I've been using TMDA for a few years now.
So far, so good.
> I'm always curious how many folks share Eugen's opinion-- I've rarely
> come into contact with c/r systems, and oddly enough, when I have,
> most of the challenges get routed to my system's spam filter.
These are probably either pseudo-challenges,
the result of a poor whitelist configuration.
> There's some sort of amusing irony in that.
Yes.
I think there is irony, but the irony is non-specific.
All available systems seem to fail in some manner; without
strong cryptographic signatures, commonly-agreed-upon
certifying authorities, revocation lists, and an automated
system to keep it all up-to-date, nothing seems to work
very well.
False positives/negatives will almost certainly occur
with any system that tries to infer what is spam
and/or what should be challenged.
I have not had anybody tell that their email could not
reach me since I began using TMDA in 2004. Email is not
the only channel of communication, so I think the idea
that I don't hear about problems because I can't get their
email does not make very much sense to me.
-Jon
>
> Carey
>
> On 3/13/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Eugen,
> >
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 07:22:13AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> > If someone emails you out of the blue, they must reply to a
> >> > trivial challenge to be placed in the "confirmed" list.
> >>
> >> I never answer to these on principle, and ban anyone who
> >> uses that spam source camouflaging as an antispam solution.
> >
> >
> >
> > That's fair.
> > There is a small cost of your time to talk to me out of the blue.
> >
> > If it's not worth it to you, clearly your communication to
> > me must not have been very important to you.
> >
> >
> >
> >> I would also send a nuclear missile to the ip2location, if I could.
> >> Unfortunately, I ran out of those, and need to restock.
> >>
> >> > There's no question for them to answer, the just need to hit
> >> > reply to the challenge the very 1st time (they do not need to
> >> > resend the original message). If this is too much, you
> >> > can pre-clear them, or hand out a temporary address (TMDA
> >> > makes this easy). You can also "whitelist" certain domains.
> >> > Read the docs for more info.
> >> >
> >> > At first, I was put off by the idea that I would be creating
> >> > a small amount of extra traffic, but when you count the bytes,
> >>
> >> You're not creating extra traffic. You're sending unsolicited
> >> bulk email.
> >
> >
> >
> > My on average, my confirm challenge is about 800 bytes.
> > Your reply will cost a few bytes too. Let's be generous,
> > and say the whole thing adds up to 1k bytes. Thus, I'm
> > generating about 300-400k bytes of traffic, total. That's
> > about the same amount of traffic you'd generate by looking
> > about about 5 extra news articles, or about 10 seconds of
> > a steaming video.
> >
> > While there was a day when the "wasted bandwidth" argument against
> > challenge/response was legitimate, that day has long past. There's
> > plenty of bandwidth to go around.
> >
> > I'd never object to someone watching an extra 10 seconds of
> > a news clip per day. Why would they begrudge me this?
> > If they did, I'd suspect our relationship has other problems. ;)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> > it's really nothing. I also worried it might be considered
> >> > anti-social. I've been using it since Nov 14, 2004, and so
> >> > far there has not been a single complaint from anybody. If you
> >>
> >> You won't receive a complaint from me either. I will just blackhole
> >> you for good, and that would be it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Fair enough.
> >
> > However, at that point the sender would be confirming
> > my suspicion they didn't really want to talk with me,
> > and our entire relationship (or our potential for a
> > relationship) was viewed as virtually worthless to
> > begin with! I'd be delighted to rid myself of such
> > would-be correspondents.
> >
> >
> >
> >> > are sick of spam and tired of "smart" filters that never quite
> >> > seem to work, give TMDA a try. You can also use TMDA along
> >>
> >> To paraphrase Alan Perlis:
> >> When someone says "I want a spam filter in which I need only
> >> say what I wish done," give him a lollipop.
> >
> >
> > Do Alan Perlis pat people on the head, and give out gold stars too?
> > An attitude like that won't get Alan Perlis very far.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -Jon
> >
> >
>
