[hashcash] Re: Opportunistic signatures - a proposed design
- From: "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 09:33:24 -0400
Atom 'Smasher' wrote:
i understand that implementing hashcash could be a big and costly step
in some settings... to those organizations i can only (in the most
respectful way) give a one finger salute...
it's clear we must agree to disagree. In my world, there is no
opportunity to modify desktops. There is opportunity to use an
interception box to implement stamped mail enterprisewide. There are
insufficient resources to stamp every single piece of e-mail every
single time. E-mail from known recipients must be allowed through
without subjecting them to content filters every time.
like it or not, political considerations come first, human factors come
second, technical considerations come pretty close to dead last. 100
percent stamping is a political nonstarter with serious technical
problems. This means, that any viable stamping system will consist of
something approximating stamping, a content filter and a forgery
friendly white list.
Yes, the white list has the same risks as signing only more so because
you can send messages faster with a plain white list. signatures could
protect us from simple forgery from anywhere. signatures would improve
the ability is legal action against spammers (i.e. provable theft of
data), improve the ability to detect zombie sources and make the machine
owner accountable.
but this is not to be anytime soon.
so, let's just agree to disagree.
---eric
Other related posts:
