Subject:
|
Re: Enhanced verification (was: Re: What the F.......)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 15 Dec 1999 00:55:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
248 times
|
| |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 21:40:32 GMT, "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com>
wrote:
> Hmm, if the code word was sent via a custom NNTP header, and then stripped
> after verification but before injecting the article, then it could also work
> via NNTP for newsreaders that support writing in custom headers. The danger
> there though is if someone gets cc'd via email on a posting -- then the
> headers would be exposed. So that's not a good idea, even though it -could-
> work if someone was very careful. But we don't want people to have to be
> quite that careful, because cc'ing people via email is relatively common.
I just did a little test with sending a Distribution: header via
Agent, and it gets stripped off the mail (somewhere). Presumably
because Distribution: is only defined for NNTP, and not SMTP.
I was actually thinking of using the Approved: header, though,
because, well, the similarities between what it's supposed to do and
what it would do are obvious.
I didn't test that because my Lugnet copy of Agent isn't set up for
using custom Approved: fields, though I suspect that it works the same
as Distribution:.
The main problem I can see with this is either if a) other newsreaders
don't strip this header when cc'ing to mail and the biggie, b) that
redefining headers is Evil. However, since, well, this ain't Usenet, I
don't think it's _very_ evil.
Jasper
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
7 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
