Re: [Asrg] Re: 6. Proposals: LMTP proposals]

["Alan DeKok" <aland@ox.org>]

Fridrik Skulason <frisk@f-prot.com> wrote:
> LMAP will never eliminate all cases of forgery - which actually has a
> rather nasty side-effect.  Think of it as the "survival of the fittest"
> in action.  If something like LMAP was universally adopted, any spam
> mechanism not affected by it would be "encouraged", so to speak.

  No.

  Adding security in one are of the network changes the cost-benefit
ratio for attacks in other areas of the network.  This is a very
different statement than what you made.

> In other words, widespread implementation of LMAP (which would be a good
> thing) would lead to more compromised machines (which would be a bad 
> thing) ;-)

  Tough sh*t for them.

  By the same argument, I shouldn't put locks or an alarm in my house,
because that encourages thieves to go after my neighbour, instead of
me.

  Such arguments are ridiculous, and either originate from a
misunderstanding of the security space, or a hidden agenda to prevent
*any* anti-spam measures from being implemented.

  To repeat what I've been saying since the start of ASRG: If one of
the requirements for this group is that nothing changes, then we
should all give up, and disband the group.

  Alan DeKok.

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