Re: e-postage stamps, was Welcome to the new(ish) ASRG list

I agree wholeheartedly on the idea of internal implementation.

I think the best way to "get things done" is to get the largest chunks 
of the greater ecosystem to co-operate with each other directly.

A (very small) example of this, and appropriate to your mentioning of 
banks, is that we have been asked by local banks to treat their SPF 
records as having "-all" no matter if they actually have that in the 
public DNS.

My own most recent idea involved a new authentication method, 
effectively single sign-on for outbound mail using 
automatically-generated keys. The "big thing" with my concept was that 
it would be trivial for a responsible ISP to cut off abused MUAs (and 
email accounts) in an entirely automated fashion.

The primary downside to the concept was that MTAs, MUAs, and Mail 
Exchangers would need to be modified to support the new authentication 
method before it could be effective.

Probably the biggest thing that could help would be if a large freemail 
organisation implemented one of these great ideas, made it publically 
functional, and ran with it (well ... that is generally what has worked 
in the past anyway).

On 17/03/13 12:15, Chris wrote:
> I agree with you on the point of "collect mail" I am aware of mail 
> 2000 researching it a long time ago.
>
> As I have stated the solution should be transport and legislation 
> agnostic. It should sit happily on top of SMTP. that way it does not 
> require a big change to the current ecosystem. just a recognition that 
> something needs to be done.
>
> If say a plugin could be developed for each of the major user agents 
> that made use of a stamp (or some other system such as collect mail) 
> then the job is to get security concious organisations to request 
> their users install the plugin. That's why I keep talking about banks.
>
> Another way is to get large independant ecosystems to implement the 
> solution internally. Universities are prime targets for the growth of 
> new technology.
>
> Of course. we could just read that list at craphound say its all too 
> hard and put our collective heads back in the sand.
>
>
> Regards
> Chris
>
> On 17/03/2013 6:48 PM, Brendan Hide wrote:
>> Hi, Chris
>>
>> Slightly off track to the previous topic:
>> The primary issue I see with any payment-type solution is that it 
>> advocates a big change in an existing ecosystem that many vendors 
>> simply will not support.
>>
>> Back on track:
>> The pull model was suggested by DJB a while ago - see 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Mail_2000
>> The idea certainly has its merits, except for the same vendor issue 
>> mentioned above. The project has a catch-22 issue. Vendors will not 
>> put resources into a project until it has momentum. The project will 
>> not have momentum until vendors input resources. Sigh.
>>
>> When considering my ideas, I use a list along these lines as a litmus 
>> test: http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt
>>
>> Though the list is most definitely cynical, it is so for a reason. 
>> Think critically about each item and how it really could affect your 
>> idea. The last thing email needs are interesting ideas that turn out 
>> to be worthwhile only in the short term - but with long-term 
>> consequences.
>>
>> On 17/03/13 07:09, Chris wrote:
>>> Hmm Maybe
>>>
>>> but nothing else has worked. Perhaps its time to revisit old ideas 
>>> with a fresh perspective.
>>>
>>> My favourite idea back then was collect mail. I could not believe 
>>> nor understand the attitude from many members of this list that it 
>>> was not the senders responsibilty to store emails until collected. 
>>> To me it was the sole responsibility of the sender (or their isp) to 
>>> store until collection. Data retention laws will soon do the same 
>>> thing anyway.
>>>
>>> It also has the added advantage that email lists are automatically 
>>> pruned.  To me it was a very good solution, particularly for 
>>> important emails such as the banking system. uncollected mail could 
>>> be automatically forwarded for follow up if the subject matter was 
>>> of high importance. such as "your account is overdue".
>>>
>>> But people as they are tend to poo poo any ideas which they didn't 
>>> think of.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> On 17/03/2013 3:27 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>>>>> Hadn't read that or anything like it. Even though its not new, a 
>>>>> system of refundable stamps may well be a system worth revisiting. 
>>>>> Nothing else has worked.
>>>>
>>>> I don't see anything that's changed since 2004 that would make them 
>>>> any more workable now than they were then.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> John Levine, [email protected], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet 
>>>> for Dummies",
>>>> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. 
>>>> http://jl.ly
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
__________
Brendan Hide
http://swiftspirit.co.za/
http://www.webafrica.co.za/?AFF1E97