Why can't we have a different 'number' for the same word?
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:34 pmI only realized the algorithm for mail-eating was different from what my impression was after I read the FAQ.
I'll use word.4.user atmark spamgourmet.com for this.
What my original idea was, this address is created with a count of 0. Then, if the incoming mail has a Number greater than this counter, it is accepted, and the counter is increased +1 (unless it's a trusted sender).
Then, an outsider would be able to send more mail after it filled up by sending to word.20.user atmark spamgourmet.com, because the counter would have remained at 4 after being filled, and since 20>4, it would be accepted.
The only potential weakness in this would be IF a spammer were "spamgourmet-savvy," and had a script to check for spamgourmet addresses, and alter the number to 20.
I just though this'd be more flexible than repeatedly refilling a word-number address that may have been myopically small-numbered initially. 'Course one could always create a new, set-to-20 word-number, but this is all about convenience eh?
Is that feasible?
I'll use word.4.user atmark spamgourmet.com for this.
What my original idea was, this address is created with a count of 0. Then, if the incoming mail has a Number greater than this counter, it is accepted, and the counter is increased +1 (unless it's a trusted sender).
Then, an outsider would be able to send more mail after it filled up by sending to word.20.user atmark spamgourmet.com, because the counter would have remained at 4 after being filled, and since 20>4, it would be accepted.
The only potential weakness in this would be IF a spammer were "spamgourmet-savvy," and had a script to check for spamgourmet addresses, and alter the number to 20.
I just though this'd be more flexible than repeatedly refilling a word-number address that may have been myopically small-numbered initially. 'Course one could always create a new, set-to-20 word-number, but this is all about convenience eh?
Is that feasible?