----- Original Message -----
From: "Len Sassaman" <rabbi(_at_)abditum(_dot_)com>
To: "Paul Lambert" <PaulLambert(_at_)AirgoNetworks(_dot_)Com>
-- support for anonymous transport and anonymous headers
I absolutely concur. I may be biased, being the maintainer of the
anonymous remailer software Mixmaster and the security architect for
Anonymizer, Inc., but the ability to send anonymous messages is not on my
list of problems with the current email infrastructure.
In fact, I'd go further and say that there should be better support for
anonymity protocols.
Why can't you built a "trust" and still be anonymous?
How about this. What if I provided an email addresses such as called:
for-spammers-only(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com
bulletinboard(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com
and we used use to consolidate a "bulletin board" folder where interested
users can included in their reading/views? With smart filters users can
extract certain mail that they might be interested in.
Does this idea have any merit?
As for what I'd like to get out of this list: I'd like to see a listing of
the existing problems with email. Not things like "there's too much spam",
or "people shouldn't be anonymous", but architectural issues, such as "the
cost of mail delivery drastically skewed to be absorbed by the recipient"
and "encryption and optional sender authentication protocols are awkwardly
integrated".
We don't agree. We need to control the abuse. You might not be malicious,
but by far, the industry problem is based on malicious abuse. There is no
dispute there. I think we can design something that will satisfy all. But
you need to be traceable. It can't be open-ended any more.
Besides, regardless of your opinion about it, the US Federal Law called
CAN-SPAM now says it has to be traceable and IMO, I think it will be model
or basis for other nations to follow. The process has already begun.
--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com