On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Malte S. Stretz wrote: > > Thus I suspect that using spamtrap addresses is like arresting the > > junkies while the cartel goes right on smuggling in the drugs. > > That's why I have the date, time and IP in the address; I compare them > to my access.log and if they aren't forged (and the Harvester didn't use > an anonymous proxy), I've got them.
Yes, I was speaking more to John's suggestion of reporting the spammer who sent mail to the address. However, I don't know of anyone who's actually tracking harvesters. What are you going to do? Block HTTP connections from the harvester's IPs? Email can take the performance hit of pausing to DNSBL every incoming connection, but web sites can't. > You're probably right. But if you feed the Harvester with many broken > addresses, the Spammer will probably demand a better reviewed list the > next time. I think that's wishful thinking. "The next time" will probably be an entirely different spammer who is only taking the harvester's word for how well the list was reviewed; and most of the rest don't want to expend the effort to find out how many addresses are broken, so they won't know to demand anything. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
