This particular thread about TitanKey and faking hard bounces has
degenerated. I believe that the reason is that the debate became based on
different opinions about a set of assumptions.
There is a simple process that can help avoid these situations:
Each party should realize the assumptions on which their proposal is based
and explicitly state them. Additionally, they should explain the reasoning
behind making such assumptions, preferably based on some real data. They
should be able to explain the effect on their system or idea if those
assumptions do not hold true. This is important in considering the
countermeasures against that system.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Wyman [mailto:bob(_at_)wyman(_dot_)us]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 2:57 PM
To: 'Vernon Schryver'; asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: [Asrg] The level of discourse has degenerated... It
ain't useful.
The kind of logic and the style of discussion which are
shown in the note below from Vernon Schryver are
unfortunately becoming the standard for this list. The result
is, I believe, that the utility of this list has all but been
disipated. No matter what is proposed here, there always
seems to be a flury of comments, typically from the same
small group of high-volume contributors, that are much more
focused on trying to find problems than on helping to craft a
solution. The result is that progress is not being made.
Basically Vernon's argument below is that "We can't
know what spammers do unless we are they and even if we did
know, if we took any action based on that knowledge, then
they would simply work around whatever we did." If this kind
of logic is accepted, then this entire discussion is a waste
of everybody's time.
I think the problem here is more the style of the
discussion than it is anything inherent to the problem space.
bob wyman
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
On
Behalf Of Vernon Schryver
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 10:00 PM
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Asrg] TitanKey and "white lies"... (Faking SMTP
hard errors "improves" C/R utility?)
From: Yakov Shafranovich <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com>
[..]
It would be really swell if people proposing or criticising
mechanisms would pay attention to what they know (e.g.
there's a lot
of spam), what they strongly suspect (*some* spammers do or do not
remove in response 550's), and what they wish (*most*
spammers do or
do not respond to 550's).
Is there anyone out here that has some info on what
spammers actually
do
with "550" and other error codes?
Part of paying attention to what one knows, strongly
suspects, and only wishes ought to be distinguishing what can
be known from that which can't.
Only spammers know what they actually do with SMTP error
codes, and they only know what they and their closest
colleagues do. A description of what "spammers actually do"
in this context makes less sense than the report of the
committee of blind men describing the elephant, because
elephants don't change. Whatever spammers do today, if they
need to, they might switch tomorrow.
What does it mean to talk about "spammers"? There are only
500-1500 serious spammers today, but they use many different
tools. They often use their tools quite differently.
Say you found that 87.345% of all spammers today respond to
550's. You could not conclude (or know) anything about
yesterday or tomorrow.
Would you count "spammers" by counting spammer noses or spam
email? What if one of the "leads clubs" manages to recruit
100 new "home workers"? (Yes, I'm mixing species of
spammers). Whether you count noses or spam, your percentage
would surely be invalidated by whatever the new spammers do.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg