(slashdot link)
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/14/198202
(stuff deleted)
HashCash / Penny Black proposals suffer from one flaw that I see... they
assume that there is no legitimate reason for a low-budget organization
to send high volumes of e-mail. Driving up the costs for spammers also
drives up the costs for things like public mailing list servers.
Unfortunately, I'll bet spammers have deeper pockets or else they'll
just hijack additional machines to meet their quotas (something the
legitimate low-budget organization can't/won't do).
It's still an interesting idea, but I'm not sure that it's practical in
the real-world.
Thanks, that was the article I referred to.
And, yes, I think you're absolutely right. There are legitimate reasons for
small businesses/organizations to send out large quantities of email. (like
this mailing list) The problem is, they can't possibly waste that much time
sending each email, which is why I think the SPF spec is such a good idea.
But, just for the sake of argument, can't we use MS's plan, then for those
email sources that can't waste the time, just whitelist on an individual
basis? I actively ferreted out this list, actively sent an email to
subscribe. The ASRG mailing list people didn't send me an email out of the
blue, asking me "Do you want to join this anti spam list?". I can't think of
any non spam situation that wouldn't be covered by the MS plan/Hashcash +
individual whitelisting. People I don't know that really want to contact me
(e.g. an old high school friend) can still contact me out of the blue, and
for the legitimate mass emailers, I can whitelist.
Of course, there are smarter people than me on this list. Anyone want to
point out deficiencies in my argument?
-Vinny
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg