Re: [Asrg] ESPC Proposal

[Andrzej Filip <anfi@Box43.pl>]

Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

> Another piece of evidence here:
>
> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:35:38 -0500 (CDT) 
> From: AIOnetwork News6 <News6@AIOnetwork.com> 
> To: pbaker@verisign.com 
> Subject: Confirmation Needed - pbaker@verisign.com
>
> -- Attached spam deleted.
>
>
> The problem with C/R schemes is that there is no way to ensure that
> the challenge does not contain spam.
> [...]
It matters only if the challenge requires "manual processing", sending 
spam to auto responders is "less profitable" :-)
One possible way is to treat C/R as fully automatic two last stages of 
"three way handshake" (TCP like) initiaded by sending a "normal" message 
[weak sender authentication].

C from auto responder: I have received a message from you (sender, 
message-id,date,size ...). Have you sent it ?
R from auto responder: YES/no answer

BTW I am under impression that most people assume that messages is 
halted until the challenge is answered. Another possible method is to 
"delay" message:
message is delivered even when no response is received if "mass spam 
detection" (razor/pyzor/DCC) fails to classify it as spam during 
"recheck" after 1-2h

--
Andrzej [pl>en: Andrew] Adam Filip http://www.polbox.com/a/anfi/



_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg