Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(May 2003)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: So I got this 411 spam this morning...
From: Tom Neff <tneff @ grassyhill . net>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 22:48:27 -0400
To: list-managers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: <7B4457A4-7BF1-11D7-8A7C-0003934516A8 @ plaidworks . com>
References: <7B4457A4-7BF1-11D7-8A7C-0003934516A8 @ plaidworks . com>

--On Thursday, May 01, 2003 9:25 AM -0700 Chuq Von Rospach
<chuqui @
 plaidworks .
 com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 1, 2003, at 08:31  AM, Tom Neff wrote:
>>   To be useful, at least some addresses must be
>> known.
>> 
> and those need to be protected by a challenge/response system.

All of them?

For example - a properly written challenge/response system should contain a
postmaster email address to be contacted in case the correspondent has
trouble navigating the challenge response.  (after all, mail systems do have
errors now and then)  Should that postmaster address also be
challenge/response protected - by the same buggy software?

I think it might actually violate an RFC to wall off 'postmaster' and a
couple of others, come to think of it.

Also, from a business standpoint, if you have a customer complaint address
and you encase it in a "how many GIF swirlies am I holding up" hoop-jump, you
could be liable under various consumer protection statutes.


Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: So I got this 411 spam this morning...
From: Nick Simicich <njs @ scifi . squawk . com>
Next: Re: So I got this 411 spam this morning...
From: Tom Neff <tneff @ grassyhill . net>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: So I got this 411 spam this morning...
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Next: Re: So I got this 411 spam this morning...
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com