Re: Fighting SPAM
From: John Thompson (john_at_starfleet.os2.dhs.org)
Date: 01/19/04
- Next message: John Thompson: "Re: ICS with RedHat behind W2K"
- Previous message: Tim Jackson: "Trustix"
- In reply to: Joe: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Next in thread: Alan Connor: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Reply: Alan Connor: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Reply: Kevin: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:01:27 GMT
On 2004-01-18, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
> I can just about see the point of spam, as it's so cheap, though I'd
> have thought the rate of return would go down with time, as all the
> world's idiots finally get robbed. What I can't see is the point of
> attempting to evade spam-traps. Anyone who uses any kind of anti-spam
> technique is certainly not going to pay any attention to the few that
> make it through, other than to refine their traps. The rate of return is
> not just tiny, but zero.
I think the efforts to evade spam traps are intended to sneak through ISPs
that filter mail for their customers. If the customers are clueless, a
spam that makes it through the filters is still a potential success.
-- -John (JohnThompson@new.rr.com)
- Next message: John Thompson: "Re: ICS with RedHat behind W2K"
- Previous message: Tim Jackson: "Trustix"
- In reply to: Joe: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Next in thread: Alan Connor: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Reply: Alan Connor: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Reply: Kevin: "Re: Fighting SPAM"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]