[Asrg] The Solution To Spam - The Third Response
2003-06-29 06:56:43
Thankyou once again for your comments. Please find my responses in the body
of the message. This post relates to the 'GIEIS' Anti-Spam system which can
be located at:
Http://homepage.ntlworld.com/giza.necropolis
Mark McCarron.
At 9:46 PM +0000 6/28/03, Mark McCarron wrote:
This list has had this type of discussion before.
Those are approximately the requirements=20
necessary for an SSL certificate. SSL=20
certificates currently last one year at about=20
$100/cert. The margins are such that virtually=20
This system does not use SSL nor will it ever. It will use (most likely)
a modified version of a PGP source as the basis of it's encryption method.
Therefore, the prices you quoted are not accurate.
I didn't say it would use SSL. I said that your background check
requirements are approximately equivalent to those required for getting an
SSL certificate. Therefore I would expect your costs to be (at a minimum)
the same. However since you have a great deal of verification requirements
*after* purchase that Certs don't have, your costs will be a great deal
more.
Mark's Response:
SSL background checks are designed to make a profit. The 'GIEIS' system is
not. Most information requests are automated between 'GIEIS' and ISP. The
costs would be minimal and nowhere near what you are suggesting.
Individuals who run mail servers for there own private use will not have
access to 'GIEIS'. They should move to an email client and connect
through an ISPs 'EAS'. Also, no credit card, no access.
If adopted by the major industry players of ISP and email, there would be
nothing the rest of the world could do about it. Even through legal
challanges. There is no law stating you cannot take all reasonable steps
to protect your network.
Both of these statements indicate that you are living in a very different
world that the rest of us. That's not how the world functions. You do not
have an accurate picture of how the email system is structured and how
companies do business. As a result you have created a system that does not
apply to reality.
Mark's response:
I have created a system that spammers do not like, not only that but the
same applies to a lot of software companies to. Spamming is a very
profitable business. So profitable in fact, that they hire people to sit on
Anti-Spam mailing lists and post nonsense all day long. Add to this, those
who are avocating the use of certain 'Anti-Spam' software by certain
companies and people's agenda's become clear. This system has been tested
in the real world, it stopped 100,000 spam emails with 100% sucess. Also,
just for your information, I have been the Director of E-business for
several major websites over the last few years and I have installed enough
networks in my time, so I know full well how companies do business. You
don't seem to be absorbing the fact that I am changing the way email is
structured.
This document and system is not here to pass a 'popularity' test with
Internet users. It is aimed at the large corporations with the cash-flow
to support
That cash flow comes because email is popular with users. Your system
would make email so difficult and expensive to use that the cash flow would
dry up. (Not that it's there to the extent that you seem to believe.)
Mark's Response:
Nonsense. Please post your financial breakdown which supports this view.
the system. Not only will this system eliminate spam, but the majority
of email based assaults on remote machines, chain-mail, and scam emails.
The system will be between 99-100% effective and will run a zero-tolerance
program.
So would a world-wide dictatorship. But that doesn't mean we want one.
Mark's response:
Not really an arguement now is it?
What is a "bonafide" website, and how do you tell?
Mark's response:
By making the hosting company part liable under our 'Terms of Agreement'
without which, they cannot send emails. Also, further checks are done
with the ISP involved, who must provide a written reference sponsoring
them to 'GIEIS'.
Whoa! Now you're not only going to require registration of email servers,
but also of everyone who hosts a web server that corresponds to an email
domain! You need to do some serious research on how email and hosting
really works.
Mark's response:
Again, I am changing the way email operates. If I didn't know how the
system works in the first place, how could I suggest a replacement? Also,
I don't see anyone posting here on how they could bypass the system. Looks
pretty solid to me.
fraudulent email of any form through forced measures. 'GIEIS' is designed
to be the equivilent of a digital army. Of course the infrastructure
exists, we
And I thought I was joking about the dictatorship thing.
Mark's response:
Under any democratic system you have the right to defend yourself. This is
no different.
can currently send that volume, there is no problem in analysing it too.
If government agencies can perform heuristics of over 50 Million voice
communications in 30 minutes
then analysing email will be a walk-in-the-park.
I know that some people fantasize about such things (and black
helicopters). But as you stated above, your experience is not on the
technical end. Transporting billions of email messages without content
analysis is something that the internet can currently do (on a good day).
Analyzing them all and coordinating authentication with a centralized
system is not. You'll just have to take my word on that as someone who's
been building mail systems for close to twenty years.
Mark's response:
My experience is on the technical side. You see, when your a mathematician,
technical subjects, especially digital communications is very easy. Add to
this an extensive background in network engineering, electronic engineering,
RF communications, Microwave Communications, Lazer DXing, software
engineering, web development, protocol development and database engineering
not to mention my business management skills. Then, I think you could say,
I know what I'm talking about. You may be 'building' mail systems, however,
I design that type of equiptment from board level up. Your not dealing with
some end luser here.
the world already have this capability. As for upgrading millions of
users, there is already a push for the new IP standard to be
implemented by the US Military. It would be no different than this, give
it 6
By the military? IPv6 has been "pushed" for years now by lots of people
(hadn't heard about the military though). The fact that it has not been
implemented is in fact often used as an example of why proposals like yours
are bound to fail.
Mark's Response:
Shows us how much you keep on top of this subject. The US military from
2004 will require IPv6 compatibility. Please refer to reuters for the press
release on this.
Social and political concerns are of no interest. It is technically
feasible,
Email is a social phenomenon, not a technical one. Anyone who thinks that
any solution can be deployed that does not take social and political
constraints into account needs to do a little work in the real world.
Mark's response:
Please list some 'political' constraints. I would like to see those. Also,
as far as the end user is concerned the only difference they will notice
will be a graphic being downloaded and a delay between emails. It would
take longer to send a message via Hotmail's web based interface and since
they have over 200 Million accounts, I think society in large has already
proved that point for me.
Mark McCarron.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail messages direct to your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
- [Asrg] The Solution To Spam - The Third Response,
Mark McCarron <=
|
|
|