Yakov Shafranovich <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com> wrote:
Some spammers send spam for revenge ("joe jobs"). Yet some look for
time machines and send chain letters. Now given these categories,
which ones do we really care about? Probably only the first one or
maybe two. The third one is so small, that there is no reason to
address it. Therefore, given a proposal that addresses the third
one, we probably would not bother researching it, since the benefits
are negligable.
If they're using the same methods to spam, they're identical so far
as the recipient can tell. If they're using different methods, then
they are technically different, and technical methods of
distinguishing them can deal differently with each kind of spammer.
Given only the technical design flaws in the protocol, will not provide
us with a determination of whether specific flaws are significant enough
to be pursued.
Exactly.
What we should do, is once we have determined what the flaws are,
then analyze which of them are more significant then others, in
order to best concentrate our efforts.
And if we don't know what the flaws in SMTP are, we don't even know
what kinds of questions to ask, to see which behaviours are more
significant than others.
Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg