On 2006-02-14, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> __/ [houghi] on Tuesday 14 February 2006 06:35 \__
>> houghi@penne : grep -A 4 User-Agent: slrn-0.9.8.1/src/post.c
>> /* post_printf (fcc_fp, "User-Agent: slrn/%s (%s)\n\n",
>> Slrn_Version,
>> system_os_name); */
>> post_printf (fcc_fp, "X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook
>> Express 6.0%s\nX-Newsitim: The X-Newsreader part is not realy
>> true.\n\n",
>> Slrn_Version);
>> header = 0;
>>
>> I wanted to get a random number, so the version would be different each
>> time. Unfortunatly my prgramming skills are not that good. Having a
>> different program each time I post would also be a neat idea. :-)
That can easily be arranged. All it would need is a static array of the
X-Newsreader strings, another array for the divisors, and one last array
for the format string matching each "supported" version.
First call to post an article could then seed the random number generator,
then pick a random number to chose which program to fake.
>> Another nice feature is that people who filter out the above suddenly do
>> not see any of my postings anymore. <g>
You say that like it's a good thing. Personally, I don't believe that to
be true.
> [friendly tone] You must be truly embarrassed to be using slrn. How would the
> developers have felt seeing their code bastardised like that?
If they didn't want others to "bastardise" their code, they wouldn't
have released it under the GPL.
One interesting thing that I've noticed is that it's quite possible to
include both the slrn User-Agent: header, as well as the Outlook Express
X-Newsreader: as User-Agent: isn't used by Express. In this case, it would
be possible to "not be embarrassed" about using slrn, at the same time as
pretending to be Express. That could make for an interesting test of the
stats generator.
|
|
