Motion for a new POST NSF AUP
William B. Norton
wbn at merit.edu
Tue Oct 17 15:17:38 UTC 1995
1) Yup, I agree with you that some smarter spammers may try to circumvent
whatever measures are implemented, but
2) Machines could automatically implement some rules before exploding,
forwarding, etc. and reduce the "subscribe me" and flagrant spamming.
Messages to the uninitiated culprits would as a side effect help to educate.
3) Some good would come from the existence of #2.
> > I personally think slightly smarter exploders might go a long way. For
> > example:
> > ...
> > 2) an exploder that "suspends" messages with more than, say 6 lists
> > and newsgroups, and notifies the sender. If the sender is not a real
> > address, it automatically is purged.
> But wouldn't a spammer just defeat this measure by using a shell script, say.
> Instead of sending one message to n lists, a script could easily send n
> messages each addressed to a single list.
> Rick Boivie
> rboivie at vnet.ibm.com
More information about the NANOG