[hashcash] Re: Microsoft apparently scuppers their own standards

  • From: "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:04:51 -0400

Jonathan Morton wrote:

Heard about this on IRC.  Any thoughts?

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1639880,00.asp

--------------------------------------------------------------
from:     Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton


Somehow that doesn't surprise me. That shouldn't affect the SPF initiative
though, should it? i.e. Is SPF a separate technology to SenderID?


Nor me. I don't know what the status of SPF is, though.

from what I have been seen on another mailing list, Microsoft was not willing to license their technology in a way acceptable to the open source community and the standards committee said *F*U* into Microsoft licensing requirements.

SPF is growing but not as fast as it had before (apparently) is really only useful as a anti forging technique which is a useful component in the fight against Bam but unfortunately, there are many things that bump up against it that are legitimate forgeries.

I think we can still be visible and credible in the anti-spam fight but we must become start the public campaign very soon.

--- eric


Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. hashcash
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2004