On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 09:47:07PM -0600, mathew wrote:
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 13:20, Rich Kulawiec <rsk(_at_)gsp(_dot_)org> wrote:
It's irrelevant because it doesn't matter which of the two scenarios
above prevails; all of these schemes are pre-failed because they
all presume that something is true which is emphatically false: network
endpoints are secure. All of these proposals thus amount to attempts
to layer a trust mechanism on top of an already-known badly-broken base.
I think you're on the wrong mailing list. You should be on the "how do we
un-pwn a few million Windows PCs" list, if you think that that's an
essential prerequisite to doing anything technical about spam.
First, it's not a few million, it's a few hundred million.
Second, it's not a prerequisite to doing anything technical about spam.
It's a prerequisite to doing anything technical about spam *that requires
treating those systems as trustworthy*.
---Rsk
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg