20 Nov 16 13:03, you wrote to Paul Hayton:   
      
    PH>> It's not the code I want to compare rather the way the end product   
    PH>> operates and what it does / does not do/support etc.   
      
    WV> Than you will have to depend on the docs and experience. But that   
    WV> probably won't tell you the exact details of the dupe checking   
    WV> algorithme for instance.   
      
   i remember, when i was working on some of my message tools, that i discovered   
   one particular tosser read the header plus another 40 bytes or so... based on   
   that, i decided that my code should be putting the MSGID control first (for   
   netmail) or right after the AREA control line (for echomail)... in this way,   
   it was pretty much guaranteed to calculate a different hash for each post...   
   especially if there were a number of posts imported into the message base   
   within one second... of course this doesn't do anything to alleviate false   
   positives due to hash collisions but it makes a best effort at putting the   
   different information up where said tosser can find and use it... if i had   
   placed the MSGID lower, it is very possible that other control lines would not   
   contain unique data from one message to another and that tosser would find   
   many false positives...   
      
   there is also at least one tosser that does or did look at the message body as   
   well as the headers... even if the headers were different but the message   
   bodies were identical, it would flag them as dupes and toss them out...   
   messages like this are very common... examples would be echo rules being   
   auto-posted monthly from a text file that rarely changes...   
      
   )\/(ark   
      
   Always Mount a Scratch Monkey   
   Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it   
   wrong...   
   ... All things considered, insanity may be the only reasonable alternative.   
   ---   
    * Origin:  (1:3634/12.73)