From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <80e388192bc203ca179c6970e6553d02@collyer.net> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] spam filtering (again) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 01:52:45 -0800 From: geoff@collyer.net In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: f7da2836-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 validatesender isn't doing challenge/response, though I use that too. It's just insisting that the nominal MAIL FROM:<> address be valid, unless you've exempted it explicitly. I guess my reponse to the web page is that it's my inbox, so I'm justified in controlling what lands in it. I'm also paying for the bandwidth into my house, so I'm justified in preventing spam from crossing my DSL line. validatesender works really well (I had to watch the smtpd logs at first, but I tend to do that anyway), and challenge/response as implemented by presotto in pipeto (what I call pipeto.token) works well too. Actually the `next step' protocol I'm talking about is not RSMTP; I think that one is stuck in the wheels of the patent office and they've stopped turning. I call this new one NSTP (non-spam transfer protocol) and it includes some properties of RSMTP but is a new protocol. It's also not finished and I haven't found anyone who wants to pay me to finish it and implement it yet.