This may sound like a far fetched idea but I would like to know if it is
possible.


Why can't they develop a method that would require the ISP to receive a
message,
install it in a queue while they return a message to the sender. If the
return
address is invalid or there is no acknowledgement the message would be
deleted..

If an acknowledgement is received, the message would be released from
the qeue and sent to the recipient..

Something like pinging the sender to make sure it is not Spam..

Everyone I talk to is receiving hundreds of messages showing pseudo
Rolex watches, Viagra and other objectionable messages; all coming
from the same sources..

??

JR

Bill beat you to it! See
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...hVisionPR.mspx
and http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/o...23wsjspam.mspx
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE, Shell/User, Security), Aumha.org VSOP, DTS-L.org

JR wrote:
> This may sound like a far fetched idea but I would like to know if it is
> possible.
>
>
> Why can't they develop a method that would require the ISP to receive a
> message,
> install it in a queue while they return a message to the sender. If the
> return
> address is invalid or there is no acknowledgement the message would be
> deleted..
>
> If an acknowledgement is received, the message would be released from
> the qeue and sent to the recipient..
>
> Something like pinging the sender to make sure it is not Spam..
>
> Everyone I talk to is receiving hundreds of messages showing pseudo
> Rolex watches, Viagra and other objectionable messages; all coming
> from the same sources..
>
> ??
>
> JR

"JR" <rhondeau2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eZ5PRNzCGHA.272@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> This may sound like a far fetched idea but I would like to know if it is
> possible.
>
>
> Why can't they develop a method that would require the ISP to receive a
> message,
> install it in a queue while they return a message to the sender. If the
> return
> address is invalid or there is no acknowledgement the message would be
> deleted..
>
> If an acknowledgement is received, the message would be released from
> the qeue and sent to the recipient..
>
> Something like pinging the sender to make sure it is not Spam..
>
> Everyone I talk to is receiving hundreds of messages showing pseudo
> Rolex watches, Viagra and other objectionable messages; all coming
> from the same sources..


It is called challenge-response. The scheme is popular amongst users that
don't the consequences of using C-R and end up becoming part of the spam
problem. C-R is a bad idea. Gee, would you really want to get some idiot's
challenge for an e-mail that you never sent them because the C-R scheme
sends the challenge to the bogus e-mail address that they spammer claimed
was theirs? Duh.

Fact is, I *always* respond to those challenges. Their challenge was
unsolicited by me and this C-R user is sending out these challenges en masse
so their mails qualify as "challenge spam". By responding to their
challenge, they get that spam that they attempted to involuntarily enlist me
to perform as their spam filterer. It is not my job to filter their spam
mails. Clean up the turds in your own yard and stop throwing them over the
fence at innocents.

C-R is only attractive to irresponsible users, er, abusers.

http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Rants/...-response.html
http://richi.co.uk/blog/2005/05/why-...se-is-bad.html
http://www.google.com/search?q=%2B"challenge-response"+%2Bbad

--
__________________________________________________
Post replies to the newsgroup - Share with others.
E-mail: Remove "NIX" and append "#VC811" to Subject.
__________________________________________________