Re: [Asrg] Passive Spam Revocation

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Yao Ziyuan <yaoziyuan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What if the CAPTCHA needs to be solved before the status can be seen?
>> That would work?
>
> Right. The sender can set a "wait period" for every outgoing message

for important messages

> -- if the wait period is over and there is no reply, his mail client
> can remind him to solve the CAPTCHA to see and fix the status.
>
>>
>> pars
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:08:15AM +0100, Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz
>>> wrote:
>>> > On the other hand, consider valid the hypothesis that spammers don't
>>> > know what kind of filter is being used (by some particular site) is also
>>> > a bad idea.
>>>
>>> Oh, I agree.  It's long been known that [some] spammers have taken pains
>>> to track the characteristics of target sites/systems/networks/etc.  And
>>> some of those sites are (in various ways) "announcing" details of their
>>> configuration to the outside world, which makes that task easier.
>>>
>>> ---Rsk
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Asrg mailing list
>>> Asrg@irtf.org
>>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Asrg mailing list
>> Asrg@irtf.org
>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
>>
>>
>