Re: Body filtering and delays

Joe St Sauver wrote:

> Kurt mentioned:
> 
> #The limitation in my method is just that, I need to have the domain in my 
> #database, before it works, but how do I catch the first one, if the ISPs 
> #filter doesn't. I'll think some other methods have the same problem. When 
> #reading the papers in link Yakov sent, I got a possible attack method, the  
> #question is how to utilize it without having every MTA changed? For it need 
> #to be on the MTA level.
> 
> One thing I've long believed is that we need to get past the notion that
> once articles getspooled to a user's mailbox, whether they're spam or not, 
> those articles are untouchable. Bad articles need to be de-deliverable
> (deleteable or quarantineable or able to be moved to a likely-to-be-spam
> folder, whatever). 

This is why it is important to look at the possibility of standards for 
MUA to MTA communications. If such standards were in place, the MTA can 
signal the MUA after delivery took place and let the MUA know that 
specific messages that were delivered before are actually spam messages, 
so the MUA can move them to the spam folder.

Yakov