On 14 October 2011 01:08, Curtis Hovey <email address hidden> wrote:
> What spam-monitoring? The one written several years ago? This is not a
> bug in our code. Unless this bug is about detecting impersonations, thus
> bug can be closed.
If, as I suspect, they lost control of their mail client, detecting
impersonation is going to be hard.
I had a brief look through the logs for whether these messages came
through mail, but I can't see a record either way. It's probably
there somewhere.
To prevent things like this we could screen new urls for spamminess,
but that doesn't seem like a critical problem.
On 14 October 2011 01:08, Curtis Hovey <email address hidden> wrote:
> What spam-monitoring? The one written several years ago? This is not a
> bug in our code. Unless this bug is about detecting impersonations, thus
> bug can be closed.
If, as I suspect, they lost control of their mail client, detecting
impersonation is going to be hard.
I had a brief look through the logs for whether these messages came
through mail, but I can't see a record either way. It's probably
there somewhere.
To prevent things like this we could screen new urls for spamminess,
but that doesn't seem like a critical problem.