[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000001c3abce$2e8c38a0$6101a8c0@fosi>
From: steve.wray at paradise.net.nz (Steve Wray)
Subject: SPAM and "undisclosed recipients"
[snip]
> Yeah, that's exactly what I needed to know. I have about 5 email
> accounts that I regulary check, but some SPAM came in this way and was
> hard to determine which account it went to. By checking the received
> header more carefully I was able to determine it. When the
> hell are we going to have a new RFC that eliminates the possibility of
SPAM and
> makes it secure by default? Is it really that difficult?
Call me offtopic but I do think it is that difficult; Its
occured to me that detecting spam is a variation of the
Turing Test (Google for it).
Spammers are trying to produce emails that look as if they
were produced by a human being and not by some massively automated
system.
Something like that.
>
> Kris Hermansen
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists