David Maxwell wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 02:50:14PM -0500, Jonathan A. Zdziarski wrote:
<snip>
Content Filters have their place. Access controls have their place.
Neither is a subset of the other. Neither can replace all the
functionality of the other. Access controls have substantially less
overhead, which means that in a well designed system, it should be
possible for people to choose to use them first, to save the resources
needed for Content Filtering.
Additionally, Access controls are a 'hard stop', while Content Filters
are a 'soft stop'.
Like the virus/anti-virus continual escalation, spammers can write
'smarter' spam to bypass the newest filters.
In the case of Access controls, if someone has a tight consent
definition such as 'I accept mail from these four people', and if mail
senders are authenticated, then this recipient will _never_ get
something outside of that consent definition.
<snip>
This is leading back towards the consent framework and consent. Our
charter calls for consent-based communications where a "super-system" is
defined where all various anti-spam tools are tied in together and users
can choose the tools they want to use.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg