>> One merely needs to disconnect without using QUIT, if the POP server is RFC >> 1939 compliant. So this seems to make the whole suggestion implausible, >since >> so easily to divert it. > >That's a big 'if'. I doubt it, unless a lot of POP servers want to be dropping user's email on common errors (<joke>such as all the times that Windows clients crash :) Again that is why I asked how prevelant it is, because in my logic it seems implausible suggestion to use it to defend against the misuse the designers intended, when it is trivial to subvert it. >It used to be that protocols only needed be error-resistant. Was that before or after wooden bridges and the treacherous harmonics of boots of foreign armies? > Nowadays, it >seems >they need to be treachery-resistant too..... Seems like the same thing to me. It is called engineering. Shelby Moore http://AntiViotic.com