cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-08-21 - Re: Spamming (Good or Bad?)

Header Data

From: Jim Gillogly <jim@ACM.ORG>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 92e91c48adcb8ab9bbd1bdd1d5f74d727fc2518b61818abac0f87f78501de3e4
Message ID: <199608211740.KAA22683@mycroft.rand.org>
Reply To: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960821144412.10644C-100000@cor.sos.sll.se>
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-21 21:26:23 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 05:26:23 +0800

Raw message

From: Jim Gillogly <jim@ACM.ORG>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 05:26:23 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Spamming (Good or Bad?)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960821144412.10644C-100000@cor.sos.sll.se>
Message-ID: <199608211740.KAA22683@mycroft.rand.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Asgaard <asgaard@Cor.sos.sll.se> writes:
>In the meantime, before these technological fixes are easily implemented,
>what is the proper way to handle unwanted commercial mail?

>What if the spam says: 'Do only reply to this if you want
>further contact with us' etc?

Then you fix up the "Reply-to:" line to point back to them, helping them
debug their anti-loop procedures.  For extra credit use port 25 to create
the mail so that they can't easily ignore "Reply-to" and use the "From:"
line for their next salvo.

	Jim Gillogly
	Trewesday, 29 Wedmath S.R. 1996, 17:39

Thread