Subject: RE: [Asrg] Spam cannot be solved at the source

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:39:35 -0500

Not if the addresses only work once or in the appropriate context.

These are not names, they are capabilities.

(I'll try to write more tomorrow)

-----Original Message-----
From: Kee Hinckley [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 23:57
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Spam cannot be solved at the source

At 5:25 PM -0500 3/17/03, <[email-masked]> wrote:
>Rather than email addresses we would have access tokens or 
>capabilities that we can manage. The

Keep in mind that while this gives the user control, it gives the 
owner of the mail server hives.  Unless the costs significantly 
change the volume of email simply increases dramatically as the 
spammers try and figure out which of the many addresses you have 
published might be willing to receive their email.  Sure, *you* don't 
get them--but that doesn't mean the traffic isn't there.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 01:04:24 -0500

2^256 is a big number

{Apologies to Kee because I mistyped the from address so was rejected by
the list meister}
-----Original Message-----
From: Kee Hinckley [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 23:25
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Asrg] Spam cannot be solved at the source

>These are not names, they are capabilities.

But what is going to keep the spammers from testing everyone they 
find in the hopes that some of them will get through?  Remember, 
these are people who bounce millions of messages a day, and who even 
sell lists of email addresses that are computer generated.  They are 
perfectly happy to play long odds.

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:54:56 -0500

Well, now we're into design. If you leave your credit cards lying around
with your passwords written on them you're exposed. This is a bit better
in that you don't have to reuse the capabilities. If one escapes you can
determine the source and quench it. Ideally you wouldn't reuse them
anyway -- they would be used to establish the relationships and then you
can use another one for the specific messages and threads.

You will in fact get some used for "spam", it's called marketing and CRM
but you can determine if you want to read that particular catalog this
week or put it in the pile of boring stuff. A good marketer will even
mark the message as being a generic catalog or specific to a query or a
sales confirmation. It's in their interest in helping you find what you
want.

A bad marketer -- they'll just get quenched when their mail is ignored.

Will people still try to harvest addresses and sell a billion for a
buck? Perhaps and legacy addresses won't disappear but it will tax the
high speed connection of the spammers when the success rate decreases to
essentially zero.

Conversely it will be safer to put your addresses in organization and
other listings since you can determine the source. You can even choose
to add rating information if you want or other schemes as discussed
including, as I've mentioned, volunteering to read mail if the sender
has paid a third party to vouch for the address even if it is just
vouching that it was valuable enough to pay for.

For kids you can have a policy that requires messages first be approved
by you -- until their old enough to circumvent it. Perhaps that will be
the definition of maturity rather than age.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kee Hinckley [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 11:18
To: Bob Frankston
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Asrg] Spam cannot be solved at the source

>2^256 is a big number

Sorry, I should have been more specific.  What is going to keep them 
from testing every address they find?  The one you used to buy 
something on line.  The one you used to post to this list.  The one 
you used to send to a friend who then forwarded it to a friend who 
posted it to a list... and so on.