-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Seth Goodman wrote:
|>From: Daniel Taylor
|>Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 5:40 PM
<With various snippage for space>
|
| The Internet was not created to provide any of us with a livelihood.
If you
| can make one by using it, I am happy for you.
|
The world wasn't created to guarantee any of us a livelyhood.
The Internet is just part of it, and we all do what we can.
|
|>If I at times seem rude, brusque, or generally offensive when brushing
|>off the concerns of people who consider it good form to have businesses
|>shut down for sending them materials that _they_requested_, perhaps
|>it is because I like having a roof over my head and food for my kids.
|
|
| So do we all.
|
| It has been my experience that companies that take care in how they manage
| their electronic communications have few enough complaints that they are
| rarely, if ever, have mail delivery problems. It is telling that
companies
| that have problems always seem to blame their clients. How is it that
some
| companies seem to get all the stupid users who complain about advertising
| they requested while others don't have any problems at all?
|
To my knowledge, we had a couple complaints one time when the
unsubscribe script broke. Not an experience I care to repeat.
It is the people who favor "collateral damage" that bother me,
that the actions of a third pary could effectively shut a
business down for days to weeks is a risk that no-one likes
to take.
|
|>E-mail is my livelyhood.
|
|
| That is your choice. No one guarantees my livelihood.
|
Nor mine, which is why _I_ need to protect it. Hence why I
want solid, widespread, effective anti-forgery protocols out there.
Which is why I am here.
|
| With the activities you just listed, it sounds very unlikely that you
would
| run into trouble with blacklists. Perhaps you conduct other
activities that
| generated complaints. Maybe you should examine how you conduct those
| activities.
|
Complaints are rare, we have people joining and dropping all the
time and it is no worse than a typical mailing list.
|
|>Given my druthers I'd have mandatory header authentication
|>of _all_ 2821 and 2822 headers, cryptographicly signed, with
|>a wax seal on the crypto signature and stiff penalties for
|>forging or masquerading as someone you aren't.
|
|
| I don't think you'd get any arguments on that around here. We're just
| taking the first step, but it's a necessary one. I see you use PGP.
There
| is also S/MIME for the less technically inclined. Perhaps you might
| consider S/MIME signing for authentication on outgoing messages? Most
email
| clients that don't support it will at least show the message, so that
might
| be worth a try.
|
This is a _most_ interesting idea.
I'll have to give it some thought.
|
|>I'm not holding my breath.
|>
|>I'll settle for simple widely deployed systems that at least
|>can give me an edge over those who would cause problems for
|>my livelyhood.
|
|
| We are all working toward a system to provide at least 2821
authentication.
| While we can evangelize and tout the benefits, what people do with it is
| ultimately up to them. I would be pleased if it helped your business
solve
| any of its email problems.
|
Preventative. I see SPF primarily as a protection against
the actions of third parties. I also see it as a good foundation
for a set of changes to e-mail that will finally provide
a level of accountability to help tame the wild west as it were.
- --
Daniel Taylor VP Operations Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor(_at_)vocalabs(_dot_)com http://www.vocalabs.com/
(952)941-6580x203
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFA0uwb8/QSptFdBtURAl2wAJ90O8uFDa5xpXMp6LSfzhFXOYRidACfWqZ6
3jRBGSAtj6Bbz/Du5qLX4v8=
=1IFS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----