Re: Water tight opt-in (yet another FUSSP)

On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Barry Shein <[email protected]> wrote:

>=20
> From: "John R. Levine" <[email protected]> (responding to me)
>>> I think you're missing my deeper point which is the lack of any
>>> "organic" push back, any economy.
>>=20
>> Well, there's everyone's bad idea of e-postage.  I wrote a white paper=20
>> about it a decade ago, and nothing of importance has changed.
>=20
> Well, DKIM is more or less isomorphic to e-postage.

No, it=92s pretty much entirely unrelated.

e-postage is about imposing a monetary cost - directly or indirectly - of
some sort on the sender for each email sent, in order to provide a
financial disincentive to the sender for sending each email. (Most
implementations of it are worthless, for a variety of reasons. Those
based on real currency have been tried, but with little real world
enthusiasm.)

DKIM does not impose any particular cost on the sender (over a trivial
amount of CPU for signing the message) - that=92s the point, it=92s supposed
to be fairly cheap to implement. It identifies the responsible
party or parties for the message.

> What it lacks is any sort of economy other than some vague hand-wave
> to self-interest.
>=20
> Sometimes I think the e-mail spam problem is a lot closer to the
> intellectual property counterfeiting problem.
>=20
> It's so easy to print music CDs or T-shirts with logos etc.

(For anyone who needs a refresher on authentication concepts, this
white paper from five years ago covers most of them:=20
http://www.maawg.org/sites/maawg/files/news/MAAWG_Email_Authentication_Pape=
r_2008-07.pdf=20
I=92m not sure if there=92s anything more recent other than blog posts. Any=
one?)

Cheers,
  Steve-
This is the asrg mailing list.  To change your subscription settings, see
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=3Dlists.gurus.org