[hashcash] Re: Friday news
- From: Adam Back <adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 12:06:20 -0500
I notice in that article that it says CAMRAM requires 23 bit hashcash
stamps. This is a stamp considered of sufficient value to add a user
to a whitelist, right?
I wonder if it would make sense to take the default 20 bit hashcash
token as a once-off exemption from challenge-response / filtering
false-positive, to improve hashcash interop story. (Once-off so that
next time the hashcash user still needs to send a new token as no
auto-whitelisting has occurred.)
Adam
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 10:09:36AM -0500, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_johansson032604.asp
- Follow-Ups:
- [hashcash] Re: Friday news
- From: Eric S. Johansson
- [hashcash] hashcash for camram-spam list? (Re: [camram-spam] Re: Friday news)
- From: Adam Back
- References:
- [hashcash] Friday news
- From: Eric S. Johansson
Other related posts:
- » [hashcash] Friday news
- » [hashcash] Re: Friday news
- » [hashcash] Re: Friday news
- [hashcash] Re: Friday news
- From: Eric S. Johansson
- [hashcash] hashcash for camram-spam list? (Re: [camram-spam] Re: Friday news)
- From: Adam Back
- [hashcash] Friday news
- From: Eric S. Johansson