You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It's not clear if there's any support for the Habeas Watermark anymore - it looks like the Haiku stuff isn't very effective anymore and was replaced by a difference system:
At its inception, Habeas licensed a copyrighted haiku to be used in email message headers as a method for receivers to identify legitimate, wanted email from senders that had passed the Habeas Certification process. Litigation would be pursued against those who used the haiku without being licensed to do so. Habeas successfully sued several spammers for unauthorized use of the haiku. However, so many spammers began using the haiku without authorization that it was impossible to pursue litigation against all of them. Consequently, Habeas developed the Safelist as an adjunct to the haiku. A message containing the haiku would trigger a check of the Safelist to determine if the message had originated from an authorized IP address.
As time passed, Habeas realized that the Safelist was a more efficient way of identifying Habeas Certified senders. Use of the haiku was disfavored, and two header lines were substituted. These two new headers also triggered a check of the Habeas Safelist, but the headers were not copyrighted and were not the basis for litigation. Senders using Confirmed Opt-in address collection practices may still use the haiku, but it is no longer a requirement.
This would be more of a .1 kind of change... I wouldn't mind replacing this with a more up to date system - whatever Return-Path has in mind. But it's not a super-duper priority for me as a bug fix kind of thing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It's not clear if there's any support for the Habeas Watermark anymore - it looks like the Haiku stuff isn't very effective anymore and was replaced by a difference system:
quote: http://www.returnpath.net/habeas/Knowledge-Base/Miscellaneous/
Isn't Habeas the company that uses a haiku as a way to identify legitimate email? What happened to the haiku?
At its inception, Habeas licensed a copyrighted haiku to be used in email message headers as a method for receivers to identify legitimate, wanted email from senders that had passed the Habeas Certification process. Litigation would be pursued against those who used the haiku without being licensed to do so. Habeas successfully sued several spammers for unauthorized use of the haiku. However, so many spammers began using the haiku without authorization that it was impossible to pursue litigation against all of them. Consequently, Habeas developed the Safelist as an adjunct to the haiku. A message containing the haiku would trigger a check of the Safelist to determine if the message had originated from an authorized IP address.
As time passed, Habeas realized that the Safelist was a more efficient way of identifying Habeas Certified senders. Use of the haiku was disfavored, and two header lines were substituted. These two new headers also triggered a check of the Habeas Safelist, but the headers were not copyrighted and were not the basis for litigation. Senders using Confirmed Opt-in address collection practices may still use the haiku, but it is no longer a requirement.
This would be more of a .1 kind of change... I wouldn't mind replacing this with a more up to date system - whatever Return-Path has in mind. But it's not a super-duper priority for me as a bug fix kind of thing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: