[hashcash] Re: OmniMix with recipient related Hashcash

  • From: Adam Back <adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 03:19:48 -0500


I agree wholeheartedly with your comments about keeping it simple.

I think along those lines that adding hashcash verification to
heuristic calculations (as with spamassassin) to help avoid false
positives; and creating individual stamps on outgoing messages is
enough for a start.

To overlay as a next step to do whitelists etc to reduce the stamp
overhead can be thought of separately, eg as an optimization between
pairs of people who have installed the same extensions on both sides,
and so get some extra value and cost saving from that.

But the first value should come incrementally, from software installed
at one side.

So I think the two approaches are complimentary.  Ie I think it helps
Eric in deploying the more complex whitelist/brownlist/challenge
response/captcha etc if others start by deploying the basic hashcash.


On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 02:48:22PM +0100, Christian Danner wrote:
> I followed the recent discussion about methods to use Hashcash for
> spam protection. I have to admit that most of those strategies appear
> to me much too complex to achieve a better acceptance. IMHO in order
> to raise the approval rate deployment and practical operation have to
> be less complicated in the first place. Keep it simple! And later on,
> if it stands the test, add further gadgets or even build a dedicated
> infrastructure.

Other related posts: