David Levine <levinedl(_at_)acm(_dot_)org> writes:
Non-qualified hostnames do get used, even to this list. I
looked at a small collection of spam and saw hardly any
random "hostname" parts, but the sample is biased (it got
through some filters) and very small.
I have a rather larger collection of spam handy ... and there's
quite a lot of unqualified hostnames in there, as well as quite
a lot of raw IP addresses.
I would suggest trying to make sure that the phony-hostname part
doesn't look like either of those categories. I don't personally
use such a thing as spam sign, but I bet some people do. Perhaps
it would do to intentionally insert a couple of dots in the otherwise
random string, ie instead of "...@QcTLPy+DeAJLdhEN" something like
"...@QcTLP.y+DeA.JLdhEN".
Personally I'd be inclined to limit the characters used for the "random"
data to alphanumerics, too, to make it look more like a hostname.
If you want 64 characters so that it works like base64, maybe add "-"
and "_" to the repertoire.
regards, tom lane
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers