On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 12:26:45PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
|
| BTW, on *negative* accreditation -- SBL have shown that this is
| possible and works well.
Just to be picky here ---
SBL is a reputation system, because the value judgement is being made on
behalf of the recipient.
An accreditation system makes independently verifiable assertions on
behalf of the sender. Accreditation providers, while funded by senders,
are kept honest by the need to keep their own reputations high.
Right now there are many reputation providers --- eg. the blacklists
---- and very few accreditation providers --- eg bondedsender.com.
I want to emphasize this distinction because I'm at the SpamLaw
conference right now and there's a tremendous amount of confusion due to
the conflation of these two concepts. People are talking about
marketers paying Spamhaus to be taken off the list, etc. Until we start
thinking in terms of accreditation vs reputation, we're just adding
epicycles to the old paradigm.
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡