From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Jan 3 1:55:37 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5122837B401 for ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:55:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (12-233-57-224.client.attbi.com [12.233.57.224]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 322C443EC2 for ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:55:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h039tPjU010283; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:55:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU) Received: (from das@localhost) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id h039t8q6010282; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:55:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:55:08 -0800 From: David Schultz To: Terry Lambert Cc: Dave Hayes , dever@getaclue.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter. Message-ID: <20030103095508.GA10237@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Terry Lambert , Dave Hayes , dever@getaclue.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200212302207.gBUM74175262@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> <20021230235954.GB2072@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3E10FD38.87438C83@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E10FD38.87438C83@mindspring.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Thus spake Terry Lambert : > David Schultz wrote: > > Thus spake Dave Hayes : > > > SPAM is not a technical/internet problem. It's a cultural problem. > > > > True, but what makes SPAM different from other forms of > > advertising is the cost model. > > > So change the culture. > > The nature of the culture is an emergent property of the medium; > therefore, even if it is not a technical problem, it is amenable > to a technical solution: modification of the medium. > > > > To fix the problem technically, you need to change the cost model, > > or have some sort of authentication for email. Both of these are > > a long way from general use, unfortunately. > > Actually, you want to have authorization, not authentication. You > could probably care less about authentication, and it seems to me > that authentication is the part that Dave objects to, anyway. > > The point of authorization is to change the cost model, anyway, so > in the limit, you are talking about economics in both your approaches. Authentication is a prerequisite to being able to enforce policies for authorization. I intentionally avoided trying to specify some sort of culture or policy for email because that's a highly debatable issue. I'm just pointing out that in order to enforce any policy in a way that can't be abused, you need an infrastructure that allows you to bind a key to every sender, or at least to each service provider. It needs to take more than an Internet connection to send email; it must require some sort of consent from the community. Moreover, that permission must be granted in a secure way. Clearly, basing it on IP addresses and artificial intelligence is unreliable and complicated, as evidenced by the existence of this thread. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message