1993-03-27 - Availability of filtering scripts

Header Data

From: stig@transam.ece.cmu.edu (Jonathan Stigelman)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 2f6e090aeaacc355210a837fc320831ad7e3669319d2fd345e2e3ed6f6715f31
Message ID: <223@x15remote.stigmobile.usa>
Reply To: _N/A

UTC Datetime: 1993-03-27 04:55:04 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 20:55:04 PST

Raw message

From: stig@transam.ece.cmu.edu (Jonathan Stigelman)
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 93 20:55:04 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Availability of filtering scripts
Message-ID: <223@x15_remote.stigmobile.usa>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

In message <9303260732.AA23550@soda.berkeley.edu> you write:

>Were such a utility posted to alt.sources, and if all a user had to do
>was ftp it from an archive, unpack it, and run it once, we would be in
>a much better position politically, (even if the utility received very
>little use).
>It is difficult to install mail filters.  Our argument for user
>filtering would be much stronger if installation were simple.
>A similar argument holds for anonymous posting filters in a global
>KILL file.

two points:

1.  An even more convienient way to distribute this filter would be
by having it available from the anonymizing server itself.  Mail to
filter-request@anon.foonet.bar to get a copy.  This is better for
sites that do not have ftp available.

1.5  A variant on this approach would be for the server itself to do
the blocking of mail.  Mail to block-my-mail@anon.foonet.bar.  Would
prevent that server from sending anonymous mail to you.  (the server
would, of course, send a receipt for the transaction to the user
who's mail is blocked...just in case of request forgery.)

2.  This would be a political win, but it would really be just a step
in the right direction since many people don't read their mail from
UNIX boxes....  PCs, Macs, Fidonet boards, VMS, etc.