In <F41lgHIbIWWrimvb2gy000299f0(_at_)hotmail(_dot_)com> "John Constantinescu"
<pontifier(_at_)hotmail(_dot_)com> writes:
An Idea poped into my head the other day, about E-stamps, and
whitelists, and i think i have combined them in a way that truly has a
chance to stop spam. I would apreciate any suggestions.
my plan is at www.pontifier.com
I suggest that you research previous spam ideas more. While I didn't
read ever detail of your plan, this appears to be basically the age-old
challenge-response system. This kind of system has been discussed at
length on this mailing list.
I think c-r systems might be useful as a last ditch effort to prevent
a false positive from going undetected after the email has been
labelled as spam by other means. That is, before you toss the almost
certain spam into /dev/null, send a challenge email which outlines
*why* the original email was labelled as spam. A simplistic c-r
system, which appears to be the "new" idea you are proposing, will
yield many false positives as many people will not respond to the
challenge.
If this is not a basic c-r system, please explain why it is different
than the last half dozen similar proposals. Otherwise, I doubt too
many people will bother considering your system.
-wayne
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg