[hashcash] Re: Idea for alternative hashcash/antispam implementation.

Jonathan Morton wrote: 
The only negative thing I can come up with at the moment is that it
requires an SMTP-protocol update in order to work.


Which, unfortunately, is a very large point against it. Namely, it appears to require all legitimate senders to update their MTAs to support the newly modified protocol. Therefore, you might as well replace SMTP wholesale, which we already know isn't going to happen. 

Yes, I know that.

Another question worth asking is: What does it save versus checking hashcash after receiving the message? Bandwidth and a bit of storage is the answer, but neither of those are expensive resources in most of today's Internet (at the MTA level, not necessarily client level).

You, as recipient get to decide what the payment should be. Nobody gets to pay unless you (as recieving MTA decides so). And the recieving MTA has a pretty clear view of whom should pay and whom should not.

At the MUA-level, the client decides what to stamp a message with and have no idea wether it has any effect or not.

Jesper
--
Jesper Krogh, jesper@xxxxxxxx, JabberID: jesper@xxxxxxxxxxxx


Other related posts: