Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: Andrew DeFaria Subject: Re: [OT] PCYMTNQREAIYR, it really works. Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:31:11 -0700 Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.9.207.207 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) In-Reply-To: X-IsSubscribed: yes Note-from-DJ: This may be spam Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > Generally speaking, no measure is completely spam-proof, except > complete erasure of e-mail addresses (which will conflict with any > other legitimate use of "@" on the list). Spamming is more or less an > industry now, and one can imagine an industrious spammer (or spam > harvester -- not the same thing) writing a filter that looks for words > like "mail archive" on web pages and applies more elaborate spam > harvesting techniques for those pages that have them. Still, deterring > 99% of spam harvesters is better than not deterring any at all. > Anything that helps even a little bit should be done. I took a different approach and implemented my own spam filtering using LAMP. It's a permission based system (which I know some people dislike) but it works very well for me. I get ~1000 - 1500 emails a day, most of which are spam but my filter system only allows email from registered users therefore only the proper handful get through. As a result of this I post my email address without worry. YMMV. -- This is as bad as it can get, but don't bet on it. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/