Re: User-Agent in spam reporting

["Ted Zlatanov" <tzz@lifelogs.com>]

On  4 Feb 2006, phoner.ding@blah.pl wrote:

On the 3rd of February 2006 at 20:18, "Ted Zlatanov" <tzz#lifelogs.com> wrote:
>
>> What do you think about ROT13 of the sender's address?  It's fast,
>> transparent, and obfuscates enough for any casual snoopers.
>
> IMHO that's not a good idea. Using ROT13 on e-mail address can result in
> another *working* address. Silly example:
> abc.se -(rot13)-> nop.fr , both domains exist
> abc.it -(rot13)-> nop.vg , both domains exist
> ad.pn -(rot13)->  nq.ca , both domains exist
> etc.

OK, I see.  The suffix "R13" could be used to remove all doubt.  In
other words, even if nop.fr has a valid MX record, it will never get
used instead of abc.se, because the Gmane spam report says sender is
"vzz@nop.fr.R13".  This is nice also because there's no R13 TLD and
probably never will be, and if there was it would become E13.R13 ;)

Remember, this is just the spam *submitter* and not what's inside the
spam message itself, so it's probably not necessary to over-engineer
it.

Ted