Subject: RE: [Asrg] 4.a Taxonomy -- Where would CHANNELS fit into the Taxonomy ?

From: "Eric D. Williams" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:51:27 -0400

On Sunday, April 06, 2003 1:49 PM, [email-masked] 
[SMTP:[email-masked]] wrote:
>
>
> Bob Hall at ATT Labs created a system called channels
>
> 	http://www.research.att.com/~hall/channels-project.html
>
> where proof of consent is in the form of a unguessable email address
> called a CHANNEL.  (Our system, ZoEmail is based on this approach.)

I think it is the 'random string' encoded in the address that sets the key 
mechanism - "The key idea is to give each user the capability of having 
arbitrarily many structured user names, each of which contains encoded within 
it a cryptographically secure (i.e., unguessable) random string."

8<...>8
>
>
>
>
> Would this fall into that taxonomy at
>
>        1 (a) (i) (2) c  Disposable email addresses
>
> since this system does contain Disposable email addresses, but they
> aren't generally meant to be "use once addresses" and users don't
> think of them as disposable.

No.  Although it may be disposable, to me that is not the primary intent or 
mechanism being leveraged.

> or at
>
>        1 (a) (i) (2) b Token supported
>
> since CHANNEL seems to be a token.
>
I think this is the place it is best represented.  The user configurable 
'unguessable' part is the stated key mechanism, and thus represents a 'token' 
based approach.  Even when the user may choose thier token or modify its basis 
that still appears to be the primary approach.

8<...>8

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