ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] SMTP over SSL

2003-04-02 14:27:44
Is there a webpage for JamSpam meeting or list of presentations or notes 
on what was discussed?

On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

 

----- Bob
I find it hard to believe that if you told the administrators for Hotmail,
Yahoo, AOL, Earthlink, etc., that you had  a way to decrease the amount of
e-mail arriving on their network by ~50%, they wouldn't soil themselves with
excitement?
 

At the JamSpam meeting there was a lot of interest from the representatives
of these companies in developing some form of open authentication mechanism.
 
The problem here is that you can't just put those folk in a room and have
them talk about their business. That would be what lawyers call a PROBLEM.

Additionally, I don't think I have the same view of liability that everyone
else does.  The reason that I'm such a big advocate of a certificate based
system, similar to SSL, is that the certificates can be revoked.  Instead of
asking networks to pay huge sums of money to other people, why not charge
them a very large amount of money to get their certificate back (such as
$10,000).  Anyone who accidentally got the certificate revoked could get it
back, but it would cause them sufficient pain to ensure that they correct
their practices.  Also, you make the cost of  spamming much higher...
everyone who deals with spammers will charge them at least as much money as
required to get their certificate back once it's revoked.

Eric
 

There are a lot of strategies that can be employed. Including having a
rating service rather than a revocation service. There is no reason for the
CA to have to run the rating service, it could be an independent entity. It
does not have to be black/white listing, it could be a 5 point scale of
spamminess coupled with a 'member since' indicator.
 
        Phill

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>