[Mailman-Developers] Interesting study -- spam on posted addresses...

Keith Howanitz howanitz@nindo.com
Sun, 17 Feb 2002 22:16:59 -0600 (CST)

On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:

> On 2/17/02 7:48 PM, "Larry McVoy" <lm@bitmover.com> wrote:
> > Second, the point is that even if mailman is 100% perfect, it's not
> > at all clear that that would result in even 1% less spam hitting home.
> > If that's even remotely close, then it seems like efforts could be better
> > spent on screening technology.
> You can't assume your admins are going to want/have screening technology,
> unless you build it into mailman. And I don't think Mailman can simply say
> "hey, that's some other program's problem". We need to find ways to not
> become an easy source for the harvester machines. I DO know from my sites
> that addresses published ONLY as mailman admins get harvested and hit by
> spam.
> But at the same time -- I don't blame him. And Mailman has a responsibility
> to do something about that, the way we (as admins) have a responsibility ot
> our users not to make them easy fodder for the harvesters by publishing
> archives in an easy to harvest format...

I would just like to put in one thought... I like the whole small is
beautiful philosophy.  Maybe as you add more features, we can add some of
these things as distict modules?  I still feel the pipe is one of the best
things *NIX has going for it.  I worry about feature creap for a
number of reasons.  Just a thought.