From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 28 00:18:33 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1458316A4DD; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:18:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@freebsd.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65CBE43D46; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:18:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1603B291AFE; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:18:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52175-05; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:18:31 -0300 (ADT) Received: by hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1046) id E89E0291B01; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:18:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE46F291AFE; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:18:19 -0300 (ADT) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:18:19 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" X-X-Sender: freebsd@hub.org To: Max Laier In-Reply-To: <200608280208.29733.max@love2party.net> Message-ID: <20060827211100.N82634@hub.org> References: <20060825233420.V82634@hub.org> <200608261848.16513.max@love2party.net> <20060826165209.V82634@hub.org> <200608280208.29733.max@love2party.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSDStats - What is involved ... ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:18:33 -0000 On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Max Laier wrote: >> Actually, email would provide no ability to do the 'request-challenge' >> that we have currently implemented in an effort to *reduce* (although I >> know it won't eliminate) ppl "spamming" the system ... > > You can do as all the other websites and email a "confirmation link" > back to the sender that they have to click on in order to commit the > data to the system. Hrmmm, that's an idea ... k, it will involve a multie step process per server though ... run script, which sends the IDTOKEN to server ... server sends back email wtih confirmation link, which would return the two lines in /var/db/bsdstats that you'd have to cut-n-paste to the file, and then re-run the script a second time to actually send the data ... the only thing that needs the 'confirmation' step is getting the /var/db/bsdstats populated with valid data ... after that, the data only needs to be sent in, but confirmed, since the data in /var/db/bsdstats is the confirmation ... so subsequent months the data would just need to be 'bounced' through ... Does that sound reasonable?