> From: "escom" <escom@xxxxxxxx> > I work on an approach to block spam with a database of hash (md5) string of > spam email: > 1) Reporting a "verified" spam to the database server on the web > 2) the mail client check incoming mail, generate a hash string send to and > verify the presence on the server, is yes block email. > 3) download a hot list to block directly on the machine > > i don't know if it's a good or bad idea. The several existing implementations of something like that idea suggest that some people think it is a reasonable idea. I think it is useful but has limitations. See http://www.google.com/search?q=vipul+razor and http://cloudmark.com for one (set of?) implementation(s). See http://www.dcc-servers.net/ for another. The DCC is often used with SpanAssassin. Refusing mail that has been seen anywhere else (i.e. with non-zero DCC target counts) seems like a perfect fit for a mailing list, but I'm probably biased and so won't suggest that. I vote "no" if someone is taking a vote about trashing the Subject headers. Access to this mailing list should be more, not less difficult. Anyone who cannot figure out how to sort mail from this list based on its existing headers and rewrite Subject headers or anything else to taste is not really interested in the nominal purpose of the list. If it were practical, it would be good to require subscribers or at least contributors to prove their interest by showing they can fetch, compile, install, configure, and operate a simple TCP application such as an SMTP server. Anyone who lacks sufficient interest to do (or already have done) something like that is unlikely to have anything interesting to say to this list, except to other go-ers. Such a test might reduce the number of people who are interested only in non-technical issues such as the administrative work of the IETF, the nasty evil power grabbing U.N., ICANN, or legacy internet engineers widening the digital divide, or whatever else concerns the people who are prompting the continued statements of the painfully obvious. (For some reason perhaps related to procmail, I'm not seeing the questions that prompt the obvious answers. It would be swell if those offering the answers would desist.) Anyone who cannot find a usable POP3 or SMTP server with which to subscribe to this list would certainly be better served and better serve the rest of us by using the web pages of its archive. See http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/maillist.html Vernon Schryver vjs@xxxxxxxxxxxx