__/ [ Jan Luehr ] on Sunday 02 April 2006 14:00 \__
> J.O. Aho wrote:
>> Jan Luehr wrote:
>>> I recently switched from KMail (whatever is in 3.3.2) to KMail 1.9.1
>>> (3.5.1) and instantly missed the bounce feature. (In fact, it's a very
>>> nice way to tell some jerks - those address is verified - to stop sending
>>> mail). Is there a patch / port available for 1.9.1? I really do miss this
>> Think you have to port it from an older version, I guess the reason it's
>> removed is that many of thous bounces will go to people who don't have to
>> do with the spam and of course the extra bounces generated when the e-mail
>> is a fake one.
> Well, it depends. In general for a lot of people, it's really hard to say,
> whether this bounces are true or faked.( Of cause, nowadays bounces appear
> almost instantly within the smtp-process, but I know and use uucp <-> smtp
> gateways that cannot do simple smtp bounces by design)
> I do see why the programmers do have reasons for removing this or that
> feature and I don't sense in discussing it, I just ask, whether there _is_
> some port / patch.
> Keep smiling
Many Web hosts (including mine) continue to offer challenge/response E-mail
filters, which are server-side utilities similar to their desktop-side
counterpart: bounce. I have become aware of the fact that it nosifies
cyberspace, so in my Apache settings, I put SpamAssassin before BoxTrapper
as to avoid many 'bounces' earlier on, when spam has been identified (SA is
KMail no longer has this feature due to its impact on E-mail traffic, which
is on par in its severity to the case described above. It's a somewhat
selfish filter if you assume that spammers will abuse it (and they will!).
This KMail 'issue' was raised and discussed a couple of months ago in this
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Software sucks. Open Source sucks less."
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
7:50pm up 25 days 9:33, 10 users, load average: 0.50, 0.82, 0.84
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project