No such thing as a small change | |
PerlMonks |
Re: OT: Spam protectionby wufnik (Friar) |
on Jun 10, 2003 at 09:32 UTC ( [id://264588]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
hello i have a similar problem with aunts who have requested to be shielded from the world of organ enhancement etc, and recommended they use ...hushmail, my own mail address, for legacy reasons. why? it uses something rather grandiosely titled a 'human authenticator system' which, instead of requiring the user to stringify a figlet, asks them to click on an image. your system is certainly no worse than this. as a matter of fact, with spam assasin, it is *more* rigorous. though this might not be necessary, as i now never get mail from emarketers. there is some debate as to how user-friendly 'human authenticators' are in the politech mailing list, but it gets a thumbs up from me. if i had discovered spamgourmet earlier, though, there might never have been need for this. using this and a human authenticator would be overkill, and besides, you'd have to keep adding spamgourmet addresses to your allowed list. but if your children are older, you might consider this instead of the above. best of luck, (thank god my 3yr old cannot read) ...wufnik -- in the world of the mules there are no rules --
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
|
|