h a l f b a k e r yI think this would be a great thing to not do.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Spammers put images in emails to see if anyone is reading
them. Instead of providing spammers this useful information,
email servers should instead load EVERY image in the email
and cache them for the end user, even for emails to invalid
addresses. (Obviously some bandwidth limiting will be
necessary
to avoid DoS attacks.) Once the spammers pick up
on the fact that they'll always receive false positives from the
servers, the information provided by loading images will no
longer be useful.
The purpose here is to allow end users to see the images in
the email without having to override a security warning and
without having to compromise their online identity.
[link]
|
| |
Except the vast majority of spam is filtered out before it
reaches the intended recipient, so it never gets loaded at
all. All you're doing is increasing the amount of traffic due
to spam, likely by several orders of magnitude. Caching
would also have serious privacy and storage issues (how
long do you store the files? Indefinitely?) and would break
the use of dynamic inline images for legitimate purposes.
[-] |
|
| |
Apart from all the fundamental flaws raised by
[ytk], I quite like this idea. |
|
| |