From: "Olson, Margaret" <molson(_at_)roving(_dot_)com>
To: "'Yakov Shafranovich'" <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com>
Subject: RE: [Asrg] 2. Problem Characterization - Defining spam within con
sent paradigm
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:12:04 -0400
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
One issue that seems to me to be missing from the consent discussions
(pardon me if I just missed it amid the noise) is the problem of sender
authentication. On the Internet no one knows you are a dog - and therefore
no one knows you are not Disney either. My concern is that it will be all
to easy to obtain consent tokens by pretending to be someone you aren't. I
have already seen spam that purports to be a subscription confirmation
message (confirmed opt in) where the sender is spoofed.
(Contrary to popular belief, I have no problem with requiring consent to
send mail.)
Margaret.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yakov Shafranovich
[<mailto:research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com>mailto:research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:46 PM
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: [Asrg] 2. Problem Characterization - Defining spam within
consent paradigm
Before every jumps on me for reopening this can of worms again, I would
like to state that this definition only applies to spam WITHIN the consent
paradigm:
spam = "any email that does not have consent from the receiver"
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
<https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg