| |||||||||||||
The MIT 2004 Spam ConferenceThe MIT 2004 Spam ConferencePosted Jan 22, 2004 15:42 UTC (Thu) by trutkin (guest, #3919)In reply to: The MIT 2004 Spam Conference by farnz Parent article: The MIT 2004 Spam Conference
That sounds pretty similar to the "stamp" idea that was mentioned in the conference where
(Log in to post comments)
The MIT 2004 Spam Conference Posted Jan 22, 2004 19:16 UTC (Thu) by farnz (guest, #17727) [Link] You're right, it is similar. The difference is that most of the infrastructure needed is already available. Mozilla Mail has the EnigMail extension. KMail handles OpenPGP messages. Evolution handles OpenPGP. There are plugins available for Outlook and Outlook Express. "All" (but it's a big all) that's needed is users to switch to signing all their mail, and encrypting where possible, and changing MTAs to look at PGP signatures is worthwhile.Granted, this is very much a Final Ultimate Solution to the Spam Problem, but it brings other side benefits as well as solving spam (it solves the problem of proving someone sent an e-mail, and it solves any issues with e-mail security.
The MIT 2004 Spam Conference Posted Jan 29, 2004 12:34 UTC (Thu) by AdamInPoland (guest, #19036) [Link] The other difference is that the stamp system can be setup fairly tranparently by sysadmins, thus overcoming the social barriers to implementing OpenPGP. It doesn't have to be obligatory, but stamped mail could start out by being another factor that a filtering system looks at. That way, it can very quickly become a standard. Obviously getting everyone to use PGP is a better solution, but while we're waiting for a solution to that one, stamping to me seems like a big part of the answer.
The MIT 2004 Spam Conference Posted Jan 29, 2004 12:40 UTC (Thu) by esjatharvee (guest, #19038) [Link] one of the things I hope to accomplish within the framework of the camram project is an opportunistic signature system. Two parties introduce themselves using proof of work stamps, then continue using signatures on e-mail as proof of identity. Opportunistic signatures increases the barriers against spammers ability to forge but do not create a centralized identity system which can be used for censorship or control.For more information, take a look at www.camram.org. ---eric
|
|||||||||||||