[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [h-e-w] spam problem, moderation [sic] enabled, members only
From: |
Bill Pringlemeir |
Subject: |
Re: [h-e-w] spam problem, moderation [sic] enabled, members only |
Date: |
05 Jan 2004 10:43:21 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 |
dv> Yes. Though what I wrote is unambiguous with respect to
dv> Michael's issue, when I wrote that I had configured the list "to
dv> restrict posting to subscribers only" "without moderation", I was
dv> oversimplifying a bit. It is still an unmoderated list for
dv> subscribers; and anyone can subscribe. However, a post from an
dv> account which is not subscribed _is_ moderated unless the account
dv> is on a list of non-subscribers whose posts are to be accepted
>>>>> "Bill" == Bill <address@hidden> writes:
Bill> Publicly visible lists which do not have a "members only"
Bill> posting restriction are just a more focused form of an open
Bill> SMTP relay. It's a modest pain to make someone subscribe to a
Bill> list just to post to it, but it's way below my threshold of
Bill> "pain that matters".
I am not so sure about this. The SPAMMERS are very clever. They can
use a subscription to harvest poster email addresses and then forge
SPAMs with these from addresses. I don't see how "From" addresses are
such a good form of authentication.
However, the bulk of present spam should be averted by David method. I
understand Michael's argument, but I think that the net benefit to
the list is on David's side at the moment. What expert is going to
listen to a mailing list full of spam to help the newcomers? If
spammers start to subvert this mechanism, then it should be
reconsidered.
fwiw,
Bill Pringlemeir.
- Re: [h-e-w] spam problem, moderation [sic] enabled, members only,
Bill Pringlemeir <=