|
interesting-people message[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home] Subject: [IP] more on Fighting spam: raise the bridge or lower thewater?[risks] Risks Digest 22.92
>Delivered-To: dfarber+@ux13.sp.cs.cmu.edu >Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 01:46:21 -0400 >From: Bob Frankston <Bob2-19@bobf.frankston.com> >Subject: RE: [IP] Fighting spam: raise the bridge or lower the water?[risks] > Risks Digest 22.92 >Sender: Bob Frankston <rmfxixB@bobf.frankston.com> >To: dave@farber.net, ip@v2.listbox.com > > >This is a mild form of what I've been advocating. > >It's worth noting that we wouldn't be in such need of a "do not call bill" >if you could indeed use Caller-ID. The problem with the phone network is >that it is not end-to-end and thus you cannot implement caller ID yourself >and thus must rely on the Telco's version which just tells you who pays the >bills. > >I've long ago advocated letting the user just send any string. If you get a >phone that supports end-to-end caller-ID signaling then you could start to >require caller-ID. While the PSTN won't be able to do this it is a better >reason to go to VoIP and SIP than just saving money -- it is about saving >time. > >Letting people do their own strings, of course, makes spoofing irresistible >though one can treat it as fraud. > >To make this effective one would be able to give other's keys (digital, of >course) that give priority access. It's but a short step to the use of >capabilities. > >White lists, in themselves, are too easily defeated and don't deal with >creative use of email addresses. Here too you can use an active form of the >white list in terms of a capability token. > >The real point is not so much the specific solution as the contrast between >phone system thinking and waiting for the smart middle to save us (or, else >Congress will fix it but good) and the Internet where we need solutions at >the edges. The spam solutions are still too much PSTN-like but I expect >people will learn over time that having a level of indirection can give them >control. > >After all, the PSTN itself is becoming IP-based. Just a few leaks between >the PSTN VoIP world and the rest and, well, my current image is of the ice >dam that broke and let the sea in Canada carve out the formations in the US >Northwest during the last ice age. > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com [mailto:owner-ip@v2.listbox.com] On Behalf Of >Dave Farber >Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 21:14 >To: ip@v2.listbox.com >Subject: [IP] Fighting spam: raise the bridge or lower the water?[risks] >Risks Digest 22.92 > > > > >Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 09:46:36 -0700 > >From: "NewsScan" <newsscan@newsscan.com> > >Subject: Fighting spam: raise the bridge or lower the water? > > > >Many software experts now believe that the best way to fight spam is not by > >targeting it directly but instead by concentrating on the identification of > >legitimate mail. VeriSign executive Nico Popp explains, "People have been > >spending all their time creating filters to find the bad guys. We want to > >turn that on its head and find ways to identify the good guys and let them > >in." The idea would be to develop the Internet equivalent of caller ID, > >with a technology that identifies senders and lets receivers presume that > >unidentified senders are sending junk mail. Richard Reichgut of > >AuthentiDate says, "It's not easy to change something as successful and > >widely used as e-mail. But the only way to fix e-mail is to have a strong > >way to know who is sending you mail." [*The New York Times*, 6 Oct 2003; > >NewsScan Daily, 6 Oct 2003] > > http://partners.nytimes.com/2003/10/06/technology/06SPAM.html > > > > [Once again, see Lauren Weinstein's Tripoli proposal -- > > http://www.pfir.org/tripoli-overview > > -- which is a sensible approach to giving users control over how to > > confront the e-mail dilemma. BEWARE of ceding this authority to ISPs! > > PGN] > > > > [Also, see "Four Internet pioneers discuss the sorry state of online > > communication today. The consensus: It's a real mess." by > > Katharine Mieszkowski, Salon.com: > > http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/10/02/e_mail/ > > She quotes Dave Farber, Dave Crocker, Brad Templeton, and Jakob Nielsen. > > PGN] > >------------------------------------- >You are subscribed as BobIP@Bobf.Frankston.com >To manage your subscription, go to > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip > >Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ > ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people@lists.elistx.com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home] Search: Match: Sort by: Powered by eList eXpress LLC |