Re: [patch] abuse-proof zif_mail()

From: Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 17:56:21 +0000
Subject: Re: [patch] abuse-proof zif_mail()
References: 1 2  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-10190@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ilia Alshanetsky" <ilia@prohost.org> To: <internals@lists.php.net> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 1:33 PM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [patch] abuse-proof zif_mail() > Strong -1. > > Ilia ilia, out of curiosity, what are the arguments against the idea and the implementation respectively? you seem to be with a hosting company - how do you handle the situation i described? not trying to be defensive, i am genuinely interested in everyone's thoughts on this. my thoughts on this are: *if* we agree that at least in certain situations being able to track the source of abuse is a Good Idea, then we agree that having a feature (for lack of a better word) that provides a way to identify the source is a Good Idea as well. it need not be enabled by default, mind you. however, i would venture a guess that sysadmins running *amp boxes with untrusted users (a large portion of *amp boxes) would find this useful. if there is something wrong with the way i've done it, which is entirely and even likely possible, then there is a good chance that there is also a better way of doing it. the worth of the idea and the implementation are obviously decoupled and i am open to education through cluebat as it may pertain to reworking the patch to be correct, as opposed to just working. thoughts? paul

« previous php.internals (#10190) next »