At 8:16 PM -0800 3/12/03, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
Which sounds awfully like a whitelist system to me. Implementable 
today, no protocol enhancements, minimal training, and decent 
systems can be pre--programmed to minimize the hassles to people you 
WANT sending to you....
the big issue on whitelists seems to be the social issue, the 
"jumping through hoops" issue. But I haven't yet seen a suggestion I 
thought didn't require at least that much hassle/work/retraining/etc 
and most require a lot more. So why not whitelistings as part of a 
solution as a lesser evil to all this other stuff?
Whitelisting works well for people who use mail for social 
communication.  They have a limited set of people they communicate 
with regularly.  My only real issue with it in that context is that 
it's a virus-writer's dream--lots of addresses to send viruses to, 
and they'll all work.  But that's really a different problem.
Whitelisting doesn't work at all for inbound company email.  I 
regularly get email addressed to me from people that I don't know and 
have never heard of before.  There are people on this list who are 
using challenge-response whitelists, and the complaints have been 
pretty loud.
However to be a true spam deterrent, whitelisting needs to do two other things.
1. It needs to *block* non-whitelisted email.  Anything that just 
puts them in a junk folder isn't a long term solution because you 
still have to read the spam every day.  It's a helpful tool, just as 
any filtering tool is--but it's not a solution, and it won't stop the 
spammers.  If it blocks the email, then you're back to the question 
of how you get past it.  Challenge response?  Assume that anyone who 
tries again is okay?  And how you deal with commercial mail systems 
that either don't read bounces, assume that the bounce is fatal, or 
don't have a system for retrying.  So you need some kind of standard 
there.
2. It needs authentication.  Otherwise the spammers just start 
forging email more than they already do.  This is a weaker need, 
because it more clearly puts spam on the illegal side of the fence, 
and greatly reduces the chance that legit companies will spam.
P.S.  Note that I'm changing the subject line.  People have 
complained about wading through the volume, so I am hoping it will be 
helpful if people are more aggressive than usual about changing 
subjects to reflect the specific content of the message when the 
thread topic forks.
--
Kee Hinckley
http://www.puremessaging.com/        Junk-Free Email Filtering
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/   Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg