On Friday, May 2, 2003, at 07:41 AM, Tom Neff wrote:
>>>> A challenge/response system is a form of spam protection.
>>> You spam protect it passively and read it religiously.
>> You might, Tom. How many companies out there actually do? look at
>> rfc-inorant.org recently?
> Most companies have gone to web-based customer contact. I am going to
> do an
> informal survey of some of the ones that still "accept" email at all.
Now that I think about it -- given one of the knocks of C/R last night
was "what if it goes bad?", the same is true of that spam protection
and web-based contacts. If you can't use a C/R system on postmater, you
shouldn't spam protect it, either, because what if they'r etrying to
tell you your spam protection is blocking their mail?
And as to web-based ocntact, for role accounts required by the RFC
(postmaster) that's against spec. And is against the spirit of the
abuse@ account, if not the letter of the law.
web-based contacts aren't allowed in some situations, so you NEED
direct email. And anythign you do to protect that direct email might
break. the question comes down to which approach is most reliable. The
nice thing about c/r is that the spam protection is going to block
based on assumptions, right or wrong, and the c/r can be gotten through
by a human action, unless a site has been explicitly blackholed for