Re: Email Web of Trust - some actual experience

Alan DeKok wrote:

> Yakov Shafranovich <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>>What about a simpler system - Site A states that site B is a known MTA. 
>>The parameters for what is considered a known MTA is defined by 
>>something like X days, X volume/time period, etc.
> 
> 
>   That sounds more reasonable, because it can be emperically validated.
> 
>   If everyone says an MTA has been around for 6 months, you're pretty
> sure that either it's not a spammer, or it's in a blacklist somewhere.
> 

Then this would only address the issue of hijacked computers. Spam going 
through the ISP's mail servers is not addressed by this. Of course it 
does make the playing field smaller on one hand, but on the other hand 
how would new MTAs introduce themselves into the trust network?

I am not saying that is a bad thing, but simply trying to narrow down 
the type of spam such system would address.

Yakov