Events such as 'Joe's laptop gets stolen' are likely to be quite rare.
As such, the risk of receiving spam due to this situation is so low that
it doesn't present much of an argument to convince me that I should
spend CPU resources doing content based filtering on every mail I
receive (if there are other options for eliminating some quantity of
spam).
May I direct you to http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/25715.html ??
Pay special attention to the small paragraph which reads:
"According to CCC's data, up to 60 per cent of laptop claims received are
for accidental damange. The rest are for theft. From this it
extrapolates -
on the assumption that there are five million laptops in circulation in
the
UK (a bit high, maybe?) that 100,000 are damaged and c.67,000 are stolen
every year. Most thefts apparently occur in offices and schools (12 per
cent each)."
I would not call approx. 67.000 stolen laptops by year only in the UK a
"quite rare" event.
May you receive just one spam mail from each of these notebooks :)
But it doesn't really matter, because any sane anti-spam system using email
source authentication will not try to do sender authentication at the
receiver. The sending MUA authentication needs to be done by the sending
MTA, the receiver then verifies that the sending MTA is allowed to transmit
mail from that address.
It will make some types of roaming a bit harder. But, unlike smtp-auth and
other such end-to-end authentication systems, it will be usable for
assigning responsibility for spam.
Tom
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg