[Asrg] Re: comparisons

["Ian Rogers" <ian at iprcom.com>]

Matthew Elvey wrote:
> http://wiki.fastmail.fm/wiki/index.php/FightSpam  Shows the upside and
> downside of wikis... (note the hit-man references).

An interesting article (and with anonymising communications and payment
escrow the "go to jail" risk could be minimised :)

> =-=-=-=-=
> Apropos fussp.info:
> A few schemes and scheme tweaks I've thought of.
>
> Universal adoption [ http://www.fussp.info/Article20.html ]  says:
> "A whitelist scheme can only be used to reject spam when *every*
> legitimate mail sender is part of the scheme. "
> Well, no.  Having a whitelist scheme in place means you can turn up the
> sensitivity on your spam-detection tools (i.e. lower SpamAssassin score
> thresholds and reject more spam) and maintain the same FP rate, or keep
> them at the current level and have a lower FP rate.

Yes that's exactly correct - a whitelist doesn't increase the positive
rate (ie. you can't use it on its own to reject spam) though it can be
used to lower the false-positive rate for next layer (though the whitelist
needs to be backed up by a working authenticated-sender scheme (which
doesn't exist yet??) to be reliable).

> Also, what does
> "Universal" mean?  Every sender? user? recipient? server? domain? needs
> to adopt it?

Yes, good comment, I am vague there (though perhaps usefully so :-) I'll
extend the article in due course.


> New scheme:
> "User support is expensive"
> e.g. Large ISPs will not adopt schemes that require each end-user make
> changes to their setups, such as installing new software or even just
> reconfiguring current software.  They are not willing to do something
> that will precipitate a deluge of support calls.

That's a scenario as opposed to a scheme, but please go ahead an submit
that as an article on the site (I'm keen not to steal authorship kudos for
myself).

> BTW, the current TOU (Terms of Use) are unreasonable:
> Too long.
> Undated.
> changes w/o notice???
> Usage of my account by another due to a security flaw in your system is
> not my responsibility.
> 12. Reservation of rights - NOT compatible with open content...
>
> Privacy policy:
> too long, etc.

I rushed up the current T&C as a guideline before people started writing
articles (I have a day-job so can't spend 8 hours a day on this :)  I'm
finding your comments very useful so please get in touch "offline" so to
speak and we'll work out an appropriate T&C.

Cheers,

Ian.

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