From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 2 12:42:02 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16550 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:42:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcTIl-0000fB-UV for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:41:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i02HfZ4w002545 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:41:35 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcTIl-0000ey-PV for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:41:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16517 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:41:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcTIk-00031g-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:41:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AcTGb-0002uR-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:39:24 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcTF4-0002ni-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:37:46 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcTEL-0008NV-IW; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:37:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcTDW-0008Lo-Ii for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:36:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16371 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:36:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcTDU-0002jm-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:36:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AcTBW-0002eZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:34:09 -0500 Received: from jaguar.icir.org ([192.150.187.74]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcT9h-0002ZX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 12:32:13 -0500 Received: from jaguar.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i02HWCxA086434; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 09:32:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vern@jaguar.icir.org) Message-Id: <200401021732.i02HWCxA086434@jaguar.icir.org> To: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: Why SPAM is worse in SMTP than in other protocols In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:28:39 GMT. From: Vern Paxson Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 09:32:12 -0800 > Quite, but this refers to group formation. Not rechartering of an existing > group. My point was that formation is not a necessarily public process. I view rechartering the same way, and this is how I've done it in the past (e.g., the IPN RG -> DTN, the SMUG RG -> GSEC). It doesn't happen in a vacuum, though - the recharter is discussed with the IRSG and the IAB. Vern _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 3 05:30:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA27464 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 05:30:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Acj2z-0006Zo-8v for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:30:21 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i03AULIi025281 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 05:30:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Acj2z-0006Zg-26 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:30:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA27409 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 05:30:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Acj2v-0005NJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:30:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Acj11-0005DI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:28:20 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aciz8-00050q-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:26:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aciyo-0006H2-79; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:26:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aciy0-0006FQ-Sn for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:25:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA27070 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 05:25:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Acixx-0004qh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:25:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Acita-0004bj-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:20:38 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcipM-0004Lk-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:16:17 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Aciov-0002Se-K7; Sat, 03 Jan 2004 10:15:49 +0000 In-Reply-To: <200401021732.i02HWCxA086434@jaguar.icir.org> Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: Why SPAM is worse in SMTP than in other protocols To: "Vern Paxson" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 10:15:49 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > >My point was that formation is not a necessarily public process. I view >rechartering the same way, and this is how I've done it in the past (e.g., >the IPN RG -> DTN, the SMUG RG -> GSEC). It doesn't happen in a vacuum, >though - the recharter is discussed with the IRSG and the IAB. > You're saying that the rechartering (or winding up old-group and new-group formation) in the cases of IPN and SMUG was achieved by the chairs acting alone and presented to the community as a fait accompli without consultation? I'm sure many people will be surprised by this. Anyway, that wasn't the question - that rechartering should or shouldn't be a "necessarily public process". In the *particular* case of *this* (9 month old) group it appears to have been decided that the work of the group is either finished or not possible under the current charter. Is this the case? And why are the views of contributors not sought on this? That, I guess, is (are) the question(s). -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 02:46:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA13757 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 02:46:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad2xK-0004VB-Tg for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:45:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i047joh7017305 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 02:45:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad2xK-0004V2-57 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:45:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA13708 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 02:45:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2xG-0007Ks-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:45:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2vO-0006y0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:43:50 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2tJ-0006c7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:41:41 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Ad2tL-0002Pz-4K for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:41:43 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad2sh-000477-EQ; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:41:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad2sO-000460-4L for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:40:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA13157 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 02:40:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2sK-0006RP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:40:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2qS-00068m-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:38:44 -0500 Received: from jaguar.icir.org ([192.150.187.74]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2oO-0005iN-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:36:36 -0500 Received: from jaguar.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i047aaxA007135; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:36:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vern@jaguar.icir.org) Message-Id: <200401040736.i047aaxA007135@jaguar.icir.org> To: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: Why SPAM is worse in SMTP than in other protocols In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 03 Jan 2004 10:15:49 GMT. From: Vern Paxson Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:36:36 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > In the *particular* case of *this* (9 month > old) group it appears to have been decided that the work of the group is > either finished No, definitely not finished. > or not possible under the current charter. Not exactly, but better focussed under a different charter. > And why are the views of contributors not sought on this? That, I > guess, is (are) the question(s). A significant part of charters concerns scoping efforts so that they can make useful progress without either ratholing or being too confined. It is rare that general discussions of scope are fruitful when conducted on a public mailing list, particularly one with a bumpy history concerning decorum and staying on topic (such as ASRG). My next message announces the new charter. Vern _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 03:13:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA15601 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 03:13:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad3NW-00066J-E7 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:12:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i048CsDU023450 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 03:12:54 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad3NW-000660-2M for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:12:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA15535 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 03:12:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad3NU-00028A-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:12:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad3Lj-00020c-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:11:04 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad3Ju-0001q0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:09:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad3Jl-0005rV-HZ; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:09:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad2vm-0004NX-4k for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:44:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA13474 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 02:44:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2vi-00071Y-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:44:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2tV-0006eO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:41:54 -0500 Received: from jaguar.icir.org ([192.150.187.74]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad2rg-0006N6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 02:40:00 -0500 Received: from jaguar.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i047e0xA007222; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:40:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vern@jaguar.icir.org) Message-Id: <200401040740.i047e0xA007222@jaguar.icir.org> From: irtf-chair@ietf.org To: asrg@ietf.org Cc: "John R. Levine" , Yakov Shafranovich Subject: [Asrg] new ASRG charter Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 23:40:00 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 ASRG has been rechartered, per http://www.irtf.org/charters/asrg.html. I've appended a copy of the main charter text. Vern Charter Problematic e-mail, informally called spam, has increased on the Internet markedly in recent years, to a point where it threatens to make e-mail unusable. The Anti-Spam Research Group (ASRG) investigates tools and techniques to mitigate the sending and effects of spam. Its focus is on approaches that can be defined, deployed and used in the near term, by addressing underlying characteristics of spam. Work areas include new or improved anti-spam tools and techniques, administrative tools and techniques, evaluation frameworks and measurement, and approaches that involve changes to the existing applications and protocols. As work areas are defined, the chairs will convene subgroups to work on them. * Anti-spam tools and techniques include those to prevent spam from being sent, to prevent spam from being received, to distinguish spam from legitimate mail, to facilitate management responses to spam activity, and to ensure that legitimate mail is delivered in the presence of other anti-spam measures. * Administrative tools and techniques include those to share information among server and network operators about filters and other anti-spam tools, those to help network managers identify and deal with sources of spam on their networks, and codification of best current practices in spam management. * Evaluation frameworks and measurement determine how well a tool or technique accomplishes its stated goal, and the costs of the tool or technique to both those who deploy it and others who may be affected by it. It may also be useful to create taxonomies of existing techniques to predict the effectiveness of new or modified techniques. One function of the ASRG is to look at well-specified problems that can be addressed by technical solutions. When formulated, with development of prototypes of the associated technology, these problem statements can then serve as a starting point for standardization efforts within the IETF. ASRG will choose topics likely to lead to usable results, and to avoid those that duplicate other efforts or that have proven unproductive in the past. ASRG will, insofar as possible, coordinate with industry groups to develop tools and techniques that both are technically sound and have sufficient industry interest to be widely deployed. Although the group's goals are technical, it may consider tools and techniques to aid the implementation of legal and other non-technical anti-spam measures. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 06:49:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA23538 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 06:49:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad6kc-000816-8A for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:48:58 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04BmweQ030812 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 06:48:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad6kc-00080t-0u for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:48:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA23530 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 06:48:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad6kX-0006rT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:48:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad6ij-0006nO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:47:02 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad6h1-0006i4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:45:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad6gp-0007pV-4W; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:45:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad6gZ-0007or-IM for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:44:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA23329 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 06:44:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad6gV-0006dw-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:44:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad6ec-0006Yh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:42:47 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad6ck-0006U2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:40:50 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Ad6cg-0004tF-Ua for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:40:46 +0000 To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:40:46 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Well, I might as well start this before someone else does... The new charter seems to define spam as "problematic email". I'm not sure what this means. It seems to me that, given the vagueness of the charter on this point, we'll need a definition before any progress can be made. There's the "unwanted email messages" idea (see http://www.irtf.org/asrg/ ) Is that good enough? ;-) -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 09:41:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA27218 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 09:41:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad9RD-0004d5-T8 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:41:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04Ef7s7017789 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 09:41:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad9RD-0004cq-Lf for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:41:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA27209 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 09:41:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9RB-0005YY-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:41:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9PL-0005T0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:39:11 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9OO-0005Mg-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:38:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad9OD-0004Tb-I3; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:38:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad9NE-0004Bu-MM for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:37:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA27099 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 09:36:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9NC-0005JR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:36:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9LL-0005Ej-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:35:04 -0500 Received: from mta-ms-be-03.sunrise.ch ([194.158.229.97] helo=mail-ms.sunrise.ch) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9Kw-0005AP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 09:34:38 -0500 Received: from [192.168.2.100] (62.167.36.65) by mail-ms.sunrise.ch (7.0.020.2) id 3FC756EB001EDF22 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:34:38 +0100 From: Alok Menghrajani X-X-Sender: menghraj@alok To: asrg@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:34:22 +0100 (MET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, I have been thinking about designing something like penny black for a long time, but I never really had the time to do anything serious. Anyways, I'm now motivated to work on my idea, and I would like to have your comments on this matter. (I really don't want ms designing this kind of stuff, they have done enough harm to the world). Before I begin, I would like to thank Marty Lamb (www.martiansoftware.com) for all the emails we exchanged together. He has developed a very interesting anti-spam method (called tarproxy), which inspired me a lot. (You should checkout his website if you have never heard of tarproxy). For several reasons, I think it would be good to define a new email protocol (this way we can fix a lot of things that weren't quite right with email, but that's a whole different discussion). The protocol would work like this: sender connects directly to receiver's server, does a processor intensive calculation, if sucessful the server will accept the email. All this is similar to penny black, and presents one major problem: what about mobile devices, pda's, mailing-lists, etc... So here is my solution: when the sender connects to the receiver's server, the server will use a baysien filter to give a score to the message. This score can be given in a 'dynamic way', that means it can change as the message is being received (you split the message and run each part through the filter). Depending on the score the message (or part of message) gets, the computation will be 'easy' (short) or 'difficult' (long to perform). So here is an example of what a communication would look like: Sender: connects to receiver's server. starts sending "hi, how are you..." Server: ok, this looks like 'legitimate' mail Sender: "i would like to propose you this new viagra..." Server: stop, that's spam. Server sends the sender a large number One of the questions I need to be answered is: will we need one filter per server, or one filter per user ? If it is one filter per server, then we must take into account that a server might have users speaking many different languages (something which is also true in the one filter per user case), and the users can be 'interested' in very different topics (their day to day emails can be of completely different topics). I think this method presents one really good point: the filter never creates false positive, since you will always receive the mail. We could also combine all this with whitelists (since most servers already allow users to have their address book online). But whitelists presents the problem of identifying the sender. Alok Menghrajani alok.menghrajani@epfl.ch alokm@cmu.edu _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 10:24:28 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29189 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:24:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdA6k-0005jv-7I for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:24:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04FO2vX022057 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:24:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdA6k-0005jg-2i for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:24:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29173 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:23:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdA6c-0006rG-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:23:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdA3U-0006kd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:20:40 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9zR-0006dm-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:16:29 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad9yz-0005Ti-DY; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:16:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ad9yo-0005TV-G0 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:15:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA28894 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:15:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9yh-0006dX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:15:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9vr-0006X3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:12:48 -0500 Received: from mta-ms-be-06.sunrise.ch ([194.158.229.114] helo=mail-ms.sunrise.ch) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ad9re-0006Qc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:08:26 -0500 Received: from [192.168.2.100] (62.167.36.65) by mail-ms.sunrise.ch (7.0.020.2) id 3FD9CEF60013284B for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 16:08:00 +0100 From: Alok Menghrajani X-X-Sender: menghraj@alok To: asrg@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Asrg] alok - encrypted email Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 16:07:43 +0100 (MET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi, Would using encrypted email affect spam ? Alok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 10:55:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA00052 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:55:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdAaj-0006nz-Kn for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:55:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04Ft1dX026156 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:55:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdAaj-0006nf-78 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:55:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA00022 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:54:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdAag-00005e-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:54:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdAYt-00000o-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:53:08 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdAX5-0007k8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:51:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdAWs-0006cL-Ne; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:51:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdAWm-0006V2-Cz for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:50:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29923 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:50:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdAWj-0007hn-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:50:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdAUp-0007dy-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:48:56 -0500 Received: from [209.216.76.58] (helo=mail.figuerres.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdATr-0007bM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:47:55 -0500 Received: from viper1 [65.34.96.63] by mail.figuerres.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.02) id A56030B008C; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:46:40 -0500 Reply-To: From: "Denny Figuerres" To: Subject: RE: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcPS0Gz8DzruJErwTF6DbXd2ObEDWwACIWDw In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-Id: <20040104104674.SM04408@viper1> X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALHELO: (51052684) X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALFROM: (51052684) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:46:48 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Alok Menghrajani > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 9:34 AM > To: asrg@ietf.org > Subject: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation > > Hi, > > I have been thinking about designing something like penny > black for a long time, but I never really had the time to do > anything serious. Anyways, I'm now motivated to work on my > idea, and I would like to have your comments on this matter. > (I really don't want ms designing this kind of stuff, they > have done enough harm to the world). > > Before I begin, I would like to thank Marty Lamb > (www.martiansoftware.com) for all the emails we exchanged > together. He has developed a very interesting anti-spam > method (called tarproxy), which inspired me a lot. > (You should checkout his website if you have never heard of tarproxy). > > For several reasons, I think it would be good to define a new > email protocol (this way we can fix a lot of things that > weren't quite right with email, but that's a whole different > discussion). While I understand your thoughts on this I do not belive this group has any interest in Any kind of "replacement" of SMTP as such. Please read the archives of perior email on this and the issues will be spelled out in them. As Far As I know / Understand this group is interested in methods to suppliment SMTP and possibly add features to it that do not "Break" current SMTP servers. This is difficult to do, but is more realistic today than replacement. But I do say that *IF* things do not change for the better there will be more folks who say "can it and start over" But to do so would create huge problems... > The protocol would work like this: sender > connects directly to receiver's server, does a processor > intensive calculation, if sucessful the server will accept > the email. All this is similar to penny black, and presents > one major problem: > what about mobile devices, pda's, mailing-lists, etc... > ... > ... > Alok Menghrajani > alok.menghrajani@epfl.ch > alokm@cmu.edu > > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg > _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 11:27:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA00905 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:27:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdB5y-0007jZ-Dj for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:27:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04GRIws029728 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:27:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdB5y-0007jP-7z for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:27:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA00864 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:27:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdB5x-0001Kd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:27:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdB58-0001DA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:26:27 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdB1F-0000zn-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:22:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdB0r-0007Nu-FP; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:22:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdB0f-0007Ni-9A for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:21:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA00548 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:21:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdB0Z-0000yd-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:21:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdAuh-0000lh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:15:41 -0500 Received: from [209.216.76.58] (helo=mail.figuerres.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdApT-0000Xl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:10:15 -0500 Received: from viper1 [65.34.96.63] by mail.figuerres.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.02) id AA8432B008C; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:08:36 -0500 Reply-To: From: "Denny Figuerres" To: "'ASRG'" Subject: RE: [Asrg] Re: Why SPAM is worse in SMTP than in other protocols MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcPSlkrl2pZ5udHUS2C8l5IGUSGyzQAQ/u5g In-Reply-To: <200401040736.i047aaxA007135@jaguar.icir.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-Id: <200401041108168.SM04408@viper1> X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALHELO: (53149836) X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALFROM: (53149836) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 11:08:44 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Vern Paxson > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 2:37 AM > To: Jon Kyme > Cc: ASRG > Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: Why SPAM is worse in SMTP than in > other protocols > > > In the *particular* case of *this* (9 month > > old) group it appears to have been decided that the work of > the group > > is either finished > > No, definitely not finished. > > > or not possible under the current charter. > > Not exactly, but better focussed under a different charter. > > > And why are the views of contributors not sought on this? That, I > > guess, is (are) the question(s). > > A significant part of charters concerns scoping efforts so > that they can make useful progress without either ratholing > or being too confined. It is rare that general discussions > of scope are fruitful when conducted on a public mailing > list, particularly one with a bumpy history concerning > decorum and staying on topic (such as ASRG). > Vern, I'd say IMHO that the "Bumby history" and related has a lot to do with the problem we are trying to wrangle. This whole area is one that can generate a kind of "Virtual Road Rage" in the best of us :-) Personaly I'd say that the word "SPAM" in and of it's self is a problem. Perhaps the group could be renamed and chartered as more of a "Finding methods and solutions to deal with current problems in email" Now that's to vague and open but the idea is drop the SPAM and replace it with What I think we want to realy do.... My interest here is that persons and groups are using SMTP to send unwanted messages. That often the messages are deceptive and hide the sender's identity. That it is very difficult for the average user to make the sender stop. That the volume of this kind of message is creating issues for operators of mail servers. That we need to have a way of establishing a "chain of trust" that the average user can rely on to stop the unwanted messages. What I mean by chain of trust in general is that if the email says it's from server a on behalf of user x@domain y that this be generaly true and if user x keeps up that server 'a' and domain 'y' are both accountable to the reciver to different degrees. If I can't get x@domain y to stop then I should still be able to tell domain 'a' about the problem and get them to stop acting as a relay. Perfered is to go back to the 'x' who started the mess. Notice that I have described the problem with out the use of the words "Advertising, Commercial,Bulk, SPAM" and such.... I think in the end there will always be some level of "Junk mail" in the system... Just not so DARN MUCH!!!! > My next message announces the new charter. > > Vern > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg > _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 13:02:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02854 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:02:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdCZq-0002bb-K0 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 13:02:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04I2E0x010015 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:02:14 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdCZq-0002bS-EE for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 13:02:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02850 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:02:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdCZj-0004Ld-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 13:02:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdCWd-0004Ie-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:58:55 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdCV2-0004GM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:57:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdCUm-0002Pw-Uj; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:57:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdCUj-0002PV-CQ for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:56:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02784 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 12:56:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdCUh-0004FM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:56:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdCSs-0004D3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:55:03 -0500 Received: from [209.216.76.58] (helo=mail.figuerres.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdCS8-00049q-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:54:17 -0500 Received: from viper1 [65.34.96.63] by mail.figuerres.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.02) id A2FA411008E; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:52:58 -0500 Reply-To: From: "Denny Figuerres" To: "'ASRG'" Subject: RE: [Asrg] 0. General - idea to reduce problems with message content. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcPSuFndyJlDLXcCTGuekr+r9TcgtwAMkJRw In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-Id: <200401041252412.SM04408@viper1> X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALHELO: (68223118) X-IMAIL-SPAM-VALFROM: (68223118) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 12:53:05 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I was just on a weblog talking about HTML in email. As I wrote a post I felt it should get read here also: for the interested folks.... the real problems with HTML email are as follows: 1) scripts in the email (JavaScript and such) 2) image links in the email that may tell the server you have read the email. 3) image links that look like SRC="http://www.domain.com/CGI-BIN/image.pl=dgfd36546" that windup logging your action and may also be a way for spyware and such. I'd like to see an open standard for a ML based on html but it would ban the above items, no external links to any image, program, style sheet, script file etc... no client side script tags. no "Malformed" HTML tags as used in spam to hide the message from filters!! if we could have a standard like that, it could help make HTML format safe for users and less of a problem for the folks who currently don't want it. infact I bet 90% of the "No HTML email" policy's would go away given the rules I just sugjested. Basicaly a minimal-html subset that would allow css inline's and attached in-the-email images but no outside links. So the content would "stand alone" and would not have any script. This could be a new mime-type standard that would allow current html rendering logic to work. A minimal set of software changes in email clients to verify the the decalred mime-type was compling with the rules. No breakage of SMTP,POP3 etc.... Just an idea. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 15:43:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08523 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:43:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdF5L-000848-Uz for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:42:56 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i04Kgtcm031000 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:42:55 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdF5L-00083v-O1 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:42:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08504 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:42:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdF5K-0002uq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:42:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdF3T-0002s2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:41:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdF26-0002pV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:39:34 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdF1Z-0007uN-2K; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:39:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdF1U-0007u9-6w for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:38:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08466 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:38:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdF1S-0002nz-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:38:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdEzb-0002m5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:37:00 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net ([216.148.227.85]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdEz1-0002jd-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:36:23 -0500 Received: from DCMSX411 (c-24-15-182-233.client.comcast.net[24.15.182.233]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with SMTP id <20040104203546014006439qe>; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 20:35:46 +0000 Message-ID: <002801c3d302$55304d10$e9b60f18@DCMSX411> From: "Vinny" To: , "'ASRG'" References: <200401041252412.SM04408@viper1> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - idea to reduce problems with message content. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 14:35:45 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yeah, I was thinking much the same thing recently. The real problem though, is not the fact that we have HTML mail, but that images embedded in HTML mail are sourced from a web site, and that the web site catalogs what images are accessed, therefore showing which email addresses are active. And your suggestion that we have no images in email... well, can you imagine what the public outcry would be against that? Joe Sixpack wants his images, and so do various e-tailors like barnes and noble, amazon, etc. A better idea would probably be to include the images inside the email as an attachment, as you suggested. I was thinking though, what about a whole new page description language? HTML has always seemed a bit wasteful to me, since you have to go explicitly set values like SRC, HREF, etc. What about something like NARF, where the first character in the opening tag represents the color (bLUE), the next two the text size (14), the next character the font weight (iTALIC)? Interesting line of thinking. I'd love to see this thread end up to becoming a project..... -Vinny ----- Original Message ----- From: "Denny Figuerres" To: "'ASRG'" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 11:53 AM Subject: RE: [Asrg] 0. General - idea to reduce problems with message content. > I was just on a weblog talking about HTML in email. > As I wrote a post I felt it should get read here also: > > > for the interested folks.... > > the real problems with HTML email are as follows: > > 1) scripts in the email (JavaScript and such) > 2) image links in the email that may tell the server you have read the > email. > 3) image links that look like > SRC="http://www.domain.com/CGI-BIN/image.pl=dgfd36546" > that windup logging your action and may also be a way for spyware and such. > > > I'd like to see an open standard for a ML based on html but it would ban the > above items, no external links to any image, program, style sheet, script > file etc... > no client side script tags. > no "Malformed" HTML tags as used in spam to hide the message from filters!! > > if we could have a standard like that, it could help make HTML format safe > for users and less of a problem for the folks who currently don't want it. > infact I bet 90% of the "No HTML email" policy's would go away given the > rules I just sugjested. > Basicaly a minimal-html subset that would allow css inline's and attached > in-the-email images but no outside links. > So the content would "stand alone" and would not have any script. > > This could be a new mime-type standard that would allow current html > rendering logic to work. > > A minimal set of software changes in email clients to verify the the > decalred mime-type was compling with the rules. > > No breakage of SMTP,POP3 etc.... > > Just an idea. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 19:05:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13235 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:05:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIEZ-0005V8-9E for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:04:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0504dNk021143 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:04:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIEZ-0005Uw-3W for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:04:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13222 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:04:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIEQ-0000eU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:04:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdICe-0000aC-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:02:40 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdI9P-0000Xk-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:59:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdI97-0005JA-MP; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:59:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdI96-0005In-Lg for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:59:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA13163 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:58:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdI93-0000Wf-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:58:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdI7A-0000Ui-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:57:00 -0500 Received: from [209.216.76.58] (helo=mail.figuerres.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdI5l-0000SR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:55:33 -0500 Message-Id: <200401041855.AA85000332@mail.figuerres.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: "denny " Reply-To: X-Sender: To: Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - idea to reduce problems with message content. X-Mailer: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:55:03 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR autolearn=no version=2.60 ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Vinny" Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 14:35:45 -0600 >Yeah, I was thinking much the same thing recently. The real problem though, >is not the fact that we have HTML mail, but that images embedded in HTML >mail are sourced from a web site, and that the web site catalogs what images >are accessed, therefore showing which email addresses are active. And your >suggestion that we have no images in email... well, can you imagine what the >public outcry would be against that? Joe Sixpack wants his images, and so do >various e-tailors like barnes and noble, amazon, etc. > >A better idea would probably be to include the images inside the email as an >attachment, as you suggested. > > >I was thinking though, what about a whole new page description language? >HTML has always seemed a bit wasteful to me, since you have to go explicitly >set values like SRC, HREF, etc. What about something like NARF, >where the first character in the opening tag represents the color (bLUE), >the next two the text size (14), the next character the font weight >(iTALIC)? > why html: we already have the tools to edit,format,compress, transalet,print and so on with html. why re-invent the wheel....? and using the html basis and the ready-made tools menas that lots of apps can support the changes I mention with very small effort. this means that nothing is broken. any app can support it. so time to adopt and bariers to adopting are almost none. and if done right, and widely adopted it would be a way to deal with the spammers, yank the financial and other stuff.... any user could choose to toss html as trash and only read "new format name" email that passes validation tests. that means that sure you can send me junk messages in a fancy format. but you cant verify my email address, and you cant trojan me and you cant trick me .... so the spamer who gets paid today for folks opening the email and not buying anything just lost that income... :-) >Interesting line of thinking. I'd love to see this thread end up to becoming >a project..... > >-Vinny > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Denny Figuerres" >To: "'ASRG'" >Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 11:53 AM >Subject: RE: [Asrg] 0. General - idea to reduce problems with message >content. > > >> I was just on a weblog talking about HTML in email. >> As I wrote a post I felt it should get read here also: >> >> >> for the interested folks.... >> >> the real problems with HTML email are as follows: >> >> 1) scripts in the email (JavaScript and such) >> 2) image links in the email that may tell the server you have read the >> email. >> 3) image links that look like >> SRC="http://www.domain.com/CGI-BIN/image.pl=dgfd36546" >> that windup logging your action and may also be a way for spyware and >such. >> >> >> I'd like to see an open standard for a ML based on html but it would ban >the >> above items, no external links to any image, program, style sheet, script >> file etc... >> no client side script tags. >> no "Malformed" HTML tags as used in spam to hide the message from >filters!! >> >> if we could have a standard like that, it could help make HTML format safe >> for users and less of a problem for the folks who currently don't want it. >> infact I bet 90% of the "No HTML email" policy's would go away given the >> rules I just sugjested. >> Basicaly a minimal-html subset that would allow css inline's and attached >> in-the-email images but no outside links. >> So the content would "stand alone" and would not have any script. >> >> This could be a new mime-type standard that would allow current html >> rendering logic to work. >> >> A minimal set of software changes in email clients to verify the the >> decalred mime-type was compling with the rules. >> >> No breakage of SMTP,POP3 etc.... >> >> Just an idea. > > -- ============================================= Denny Figuerres Denny@Figuerres.com --------------------------------------------- Twenty billion junk e-mail messages sent per day may potentially take 20 billion seconds to delete. A human life is a mere two billion seconds long. In effect, spammers kill ten people each day. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 19:37:59 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13917 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:37:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIkO-00070h-Ah for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:37:33 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i050bWdN026925 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:37:32 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIkN-00070A-56 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:37:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13894 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:37:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIkL-0001nI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:37:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIiQ-0001gC-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:35:31 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIh6-0001Yk-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:34:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIh0-0006Wq-I6; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:34:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIgK-0006Qs-B1 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:33:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13752 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:33:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIgI-0001W6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:33:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIf4-0001OI-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:32:03 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.198.39]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIcL-0001EL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:29:13 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP id <2004010500281701500s9cdie>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 00:28:17 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E01186A2; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 09:36:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FF8AFCB.7060509@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alok Menghrajani Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:28:59 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alok Menghrajani wrote: > Before I begin, I would like to thank Marty Lamb (www.martiansoftware.com) > for all the emails we exchanged together. He has developed a very > interesting anti-spam method (called tarproxy), which inspired me a lot. > (You should checkout his website if you have never heard of tarproxy). Was that one of the systems discussed on the SpamIdeas conference discussion list? I didn't follow it too closely, although I may now give it a second glance. > For several reasons, I think it would be good to define a new email > protocol (this way we can fix a lot of things that weren't quite right > with email, but that's a whole different discussion). The protocol would > work like this: sender connects directly to receiver's server, does a > processor intensive calculation, if sucessful the server will accept the > email. All this is similar to penny black, and presents one major problem: > what about mobile devices, pda's, mailing-lists, etc... > > So here is my solution: when the sender connects to the receiver's server, > the server will use a baysien filter to give a score to the message. This > score can be given in a 'dynamic way', that means it can change as the > message is being received (you split the message and run each part through > the filter). Depending on the score the message (or part of message) gets, > the computation will be 'easy' (short) or 'difficult' (long to perform). > > So here is an example of what a communication would look like: > > Sender: connects to receiver's server. > starts sending "hi, how are you..." > Server: ok, this looks like 'legitimate' mail > Sender: "i would like to propose you this new > viagra..." > Server: stop, that's spam. Server sends the sender a large number This proposal doesn't require a new protocol. An ESMTP extension would do just fine. I think we should kill two birds with one stone: implement an extension in which the receiving server picks 2 primes of sufficient length, multiplies them, and asks the sending server to factor them. Multiplying big numbers takes much less computational effort than factoring them, so this moves some of the cost burden to the sender. For now, that would force spammers to slow down significantly. On the other hand, it may lead to spammers solving one of the greater mathematical problems of our day. If they can figure out a better way to factor big numbers, the face of public key cryptography may change quite a bit. > One of the questions I need to be answered is: will we need one filter per > server, or one filter per user ? If it is one filter per server, then we > must take into account that a server might have users speaking many > different languages (something which is also true in the one filter per > user case), and the users can be 'interested' in very different topics > (their day to day emails can be of completely different topics). > > I think this method presents one really good point: the filter never > creates false positive, since you will always receive the mail. > > We could also combine all this with whitelists (since most servers already > allow users to have their address book online). But whitelists presents > the problem of identifying the sender. I think this is a good proposal. It's not a major overhaul to exisitng protocols, it can be phased in slowly, it puts costs where they belong, it prevents offline precomputation before the mailing begins, and it's compatible with whitelisting techniques. There is a downside, however, that legitimate bulk senders would be heavily burdened by this, while spammers can continue to hijack machines to do the dirty work. What we really need to do is hinted at in your message: 1. Verify that the machine connecting to us is who it claims to be 2. Verify that the sender claimed is the actual sender 3. Limit the servers mail will be accepted from to systems whose owners think should be sending mail 4. Move some cost burden from receivers to senders Finally, I would add the following: 5. Try to move as much legitimate bulk messaging away from email as possible, to something else If we take the simplest steps down each of these (mutually compatible, I think) paths, we'll be well on the way to eliminating spam. Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 19:39:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA14008 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:39:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIm7-0007B0-KQ for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:39:19 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i050dJgi027580 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:39:19 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIm7-0007Al-F2 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:39:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA14005 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:39:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIm5-0001te-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:39:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIkR-0001oP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:37:36 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIiw-0001hD-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:36:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIiv-0006h7-T2; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:36:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdIi4-0006gA-5H for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:35:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA13798 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 19:35:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIi2-0001bz-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:35:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIgD-0001VR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:33:14 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.202.64]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdIf1-0001MP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:31:59 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with ESMTP id <2004010500311101600f472fe>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 00:31:11 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ACC0186A2; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 09:39:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FF8B07A.3030507@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alok Menghrajani Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - encrypted email References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:31:54 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alok Menghrajani wrote: > Would using encrypted email affect spam ? It can make whitelisting much, much easier, if seeing a message signed with a known key means that message isn't spam. However, unless you intend to get every user on the internet signing and/or encrypting their mail, you can't block anything on that basis. All you could do is throw the statistics about signed vs. unsigned messages into the Bayesian toekn bin with everything else. Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 21:53:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16737 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:53:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdKrf-0002xP-JJ for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:53:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i052rBia011361 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:53:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdKrf-0002xA-Du for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:53:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16722 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:53:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdKrc-0006Oa-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:53:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdKpr-0006Kz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:51:20 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdKol-0006GM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:50:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdKod-0002kb-Kc; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:50:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdKng-0002jI-JN for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:49:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16666 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:49:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdKnd-0006ER-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:49:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdKlm-0006Bc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:47:06 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdKkx-00068q-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:46:15 -0500 Received: (qmail 5343 invoked by uid 100); 5 Jan 2004 02:46:15 -0000 Message-ID: <20040105024615.5342.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Newsgroups: iecc.lists.asrg In-Reply-To: Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 5 Jan 2004 02:46:15 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >The new charter seems to define spam as "problematic email". Right. An exact definition spam is a political topic, not a technical one, and is not within the purview of ASRG. If you look at all the halfway plausible definitions of spam, such as UBE, UCE, or mail that users complain to their ISPs about, they all describe about 95% the same mail, so for most purposes any definition will do. For any proposed anti-spam topic or technique, it would be a good idea to describe what it deals with. For the various LMAP proposals, for example, it appears to me to be "mail sent from hosts other than ones authorized by the owner of the domain in the envelope return address." The question of a precise definition of spam has been beaten to death at such length in so many places that I'm surprised to see it coming up again. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY http://www.taugh.com _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 4 23:47:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA19204 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:47:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdMds-0006nj-OL for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:47:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i054l4DL026140 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:47:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdMds-0006nX-I5 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:47:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA19196 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:47:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdMdq-0002yt-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:47:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdMbw-0002wc-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:45:05 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdMb8-0002uS-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:44:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdMav-0006eC-0p; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:44:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdMa3-0006dm-EU for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:43:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA19095 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:43:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdMa1-0002tW-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:43:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdMY7-0002qs-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:41:08 -0500 Received: from black.infobro.com ([63.71.25.39] helo=infobro.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdMXG-0002o4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:40:14 -0500 Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:38:26 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:38:40 -0500 Message-ID: <01C3D31B.E22A3320.eric@infobro.com> From: "Eric D. Williams" To: "'John Levine'" , "'asrg@ietf.org'" Subject: RE: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Organization: Information Brokers, Inc. X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 22:09:00 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=RATWARE_EMWAC autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What IS warranted, with complete deference to your analysis of the 'political' nature of a definition of 'spam', is a definition of the 'problem.' Jon has started the ball rolling again I think in that vein, however as we know a precise definition of the term 'spam' is not feasible the term "unwanted e-mail messages" is overly broad, IMO. I think "indiscriminate e-mail messages" is more precise. in-dis-crim-i-nate (in di skrim'uh nit) adj. 1. not discriminating; lacking in care, judgment, selectivity, etc. 2. not discriminate; haphazard. 3. thrown together; jumbled. [1590-1600] Derived words --in dis-crim'i-nate-ly, adv. --in dis-crim'i-nate-ness, in dis-crim i-na'tion( -nay'shuhn), n. -e On Sunday, January 04, 2004 9:46 PM, John Levine [SMTP:asrg@johnlevine.com] wrote: > >The new charter seems to define spam as "problematic email". > > Right. > > An exact definition spam is a political topic, not a technical one, > and is not within the purview of ASRG. If you look at all the halfway > plausible definitions of spam, such as UBE, UCE, or mail that users > complain to their ISPs about, they all describe about 95% the same > mail, so for most purposes any definition will do. > > For any proposed anti-spam topic or technique, it would be a good idea > to describe what it deals with. For the various LMAP proposals, for > example, it appears to me to be "mail sent from hosts other than ones > authorized by the owner of the domain in the envelope return address." > > The question of a precise definition of spam has been beaten to death > at such length in so many places that I'm surprised to see it coming > up again. > > Regards, > John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY > http://www.taugh.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 00:43:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA20438 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 00:43:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdNW7-00009q-5U for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:43:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i055h7fQ000606 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 00:43:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdNW6-00009h-UM for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:43:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA20417 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 00:43:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdNW4-00053M-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:43:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdNUC-00050l-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:41:08 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdNTF-0004yB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:40:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdNT7-0008PC-IP; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:40:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdNSH-0008OM-Cq for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:39:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA20371 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 00:39:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdNSE-0004xD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:39:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdNQN-0004uh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:37:12 -0500 Received: from joy.songbird.com ([208.184.79.7]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdNPT-0004rW-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 00:36:15 -0500 Received: from bbprime (jay.songbird.com [208.184.79.253]) by joy.songbird.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id i055hCc09528; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:43:12 -0800 From: Dave Crocker To: , "'John Levine'" , "'asrg@ietf.org'" X-Mailer: PocoMail 3.03 (1740) - EVALUATION VERSION X-URL: http://www.pocomail.com/ Message-ID: <200414213535.371993@bbprime> In-Reply-To: <01C3D31B.E22A3320.eric@infobro.com> Subject: Re: RE: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:35:35 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Eric, > What IS warranted, with complete deference to your analysis of the= > 'political' nature of a definition of 'spam', is a definition of the > 'problem.' Or we could focus on the specification of solutions and analysis of their effects. We've all been doing the definition game for a long time. The effort has not converged. The wording on the new charter is nicely focused on getting work done, rather than on debating abstractions, such as definitions. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 07:39:57 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA16317 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 07:39:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdU11-0001qq-PO for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:39:27 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05CdRFJ007112 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 07:39:27 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdU11-0001qd-Kt for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:39:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA16305 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 07:39:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdU11-0000mO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:39:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdTza-0000hM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:37:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdTyQ-0000Yr-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:36:46 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdTxi-0001PJ-6q; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:36:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdTwy-0001MC-TD for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:35:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15990 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 07:35:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdTwy-0000Pb-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:35:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdTv5-0000J1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:33:20 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdTtO-0000F0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:31:34 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AdTtM-0008BE-A0 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:31:32 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20040105024615.5342.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:31:32 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > >An exact definition spam is a political topic, not a technical one, The reformulation of the problem as one of consent helped clarify views on this "social" (rather than "political" ?) ill. >and is not within the purview of ASRG. Well, bless you too. >If you look at all the halfway >plausible definitions of spam, such as UBE, UCE, or mail that users >complain to their ISPs about, they all describe about 95% the same >mail, so for most purposes any definition will do. > Any definition? Right. >For any proposed anti-spam topic or technique, it would be a good idea >to describe what it deals with. For the various LMAP proposals, for >example, it appears to me to be "mail sent from hosts other than ones >authorized by the owner of the domain in the envelope return address." > This might seem like a "good thing" - but of course this means that there is no way of comparing proposals meaningfully. e.g. Scheme (a) will probably be (very close to) 100% effective at stopping the set of email messages that the creator states it is targeted at. Unless the creator is a complete idiot. Scheme (b) is likewise 100% effective for the (overlapping but not identical) set it is designed for. How does this help anyone? >The question of a precise definition of spam has been beaten to death >at such length in so many places that I'm surprised to see it coming >up again. > I'm guessing you're missing the point on purpose. Or maybe you haven't been following this list. But just to clarify - the consensus seems to be that spam (as we call it) is "supported" in the MTS because of issues of access, authentication, authorisation, anonymity, accountability and lack of recipient "power". These *are* technically approachable issues (as well as being often economic and contractual). These can be well-defined. "spam" is not an entity in this technical domain (except as a "class" of messages) which is why the group shouldn't depend on it. *You* have rechartered the group to work on the poorly defined "spam" problem. Previously, the group worked on issues raised by communication characterised by (lack of) consent. Furthermore, the group is now chartered to focus on "approaches that can be defined, deployed and used in the near term". Research Groups are usually focussed and long term, though short lived "task force" like Research Groups are possible (I'm quoting). Is the group to be one of the latter? I suspect that this rechartering is a "political" issue, perhaps there's pressure to produce "appropriate" results in a predetermined timescale. Regards, JK -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 10:13:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19887 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:13:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdWPg-0006UB-JX for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:13:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05FD44L024925 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:13:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdWPg-0006Tw-CU for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:13:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19838 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:13:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdWPZ-00065C-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:12:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdWMG-0005yF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:09:33 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdWGU-0005ni-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:03:34 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdWFx-0005wv-Ek; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:03:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdWFQ-0005tC-Uj for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:02:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18857 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:02:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdWFJ-0005lg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:02:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdWCO-0005hW-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:59:21 -0500 Received: from infoseclab.com ([63.98.52.111]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdWBh-0005ef-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:58:38 -0500 Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:57:32 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:57:30 -0500 Message-ID: <01C3D372.54E93D10.eric@infobro.com> From: "Eric D. Williams" To: "'Dave Crocker'" , "'John Levine'" , "'asrg@ietf.org'" Subject: RE: RE: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Organization: Information Brokers, Inc. X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:55:33 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=RATWARE_EMWAC autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agreed, you make my point better than I did. :-) -e On Monday, January 05, 2004 12:36 AM, Dave Crocker [SMTP:dhc@dcrocker.net] wrote: > Eric, > > > > What IS warranted, with complete deference to your analysis of the= > > 'political' nature of a definition of 'spam', is a definition of the > > 'problem.' > > Or we could focus on the specification of solutions and analysis of > their effects. > > We've all been doing the definition game for a long time. The effort > has not converged. > > The wording on the new charter is nicely focused on getting work done, > rather than on debating abstractions, such as definitions. > > d/ > > > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 11:30:28 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23474 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:30:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXc6-0001gf-Co for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:30:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05GTw4u006479 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:29:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXc6-0001gQ-9Q for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:29:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23399 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:29:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXc5-0001yJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:29:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXaw-0001m7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:28:46 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXY0-0001Rd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:25:44 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXXM-000194-6u; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:25:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXWz-000186-Bg for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:24:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA22897 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:24:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXWo-0001L8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:24:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXR2-00015e-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:18:33 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXMq-0000so-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:14:12 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4754C16FDA for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:14:59 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:31:32 GMT." Message-Id: <20040105161459.4754C16FDA@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:14:59 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 "Jon Kyme" wrote: > This might seem like a "good thing" - but of course this means that there > is no way of comparing proposals meaningfully. e.g. Scheme (a) will > probably be (very close to) 100% effective at stopping the set of email > messages that the creator states it is targeted at. Unless the creator is a > complete idiot. Scheme (b) is likewise 100% effective for the (overlapping > but not identical) set it is designed for. How does this help anyone? Because the two different schemes have *clearly* defined what part of the spam problem they are trying to solve. They can therefore be compared on the level of "which part of the problem they solve", and not just on "how they solve the problem". If we had one "perfect" definition of spam, then we would have two ways of comparing anti-spam schemes: 1) solely on their technical merits This is difficult, as the methods will be doing wildly different things. 2) On the part of the spam problem they address, AND on #1 For this, we will still need a separate definition of the part of the problem the scheme addresses, independent of any "perfect" definition of spam. > *You* have rechartered the group to work on the poorly defined "spam" > problem. Previously, the group worked on issues raised by communication > characterised by (lack of) consent. I must admit that my preference would be to have the charter discuss consent. We can then come up with a "perfect" definition of spam which fits within the consent model: SPAM: For a particular system, any message locally determined to be spam. Nice, circular, and nearly useless. But it does focus the solution where it should belong: *I* determine what is spam on my system, and any system which is set up to permit *other* people to make that decision on my behalf should be explicitly outside of the group. > Furthermore, the group is now chartered to focus on "approaches that can be > defined, deployed and used in the near term". Given the blatant opposition to getting anything done, I'm inclined to believe that the SMTP-based email system will collapse before people are willing to do anything. I've seen a ~10x increase in spam to my systems in the past two months. It's *ridiculous* that there's so much opposition to doing anything. Of *course* any anti-spam system will be short-term, and won't solve the problem. But it should give us the breathing room to work on a more complete solution. i.e. I'd rather not have my doctor say "You've got terminal cancer, but we're not going to treat it. It's easier for us to wait until you're dead, before we operate. We think that by then, we'll have a better treatment available." That's blatant incompetence and negligence. But on the anti-spam front, it's accepted practice. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 11:48:15 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24193 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:48:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXtL-0002we-5M for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:47:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05GllAE011314 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:47:47 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXtL-0002wP-1O for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:47:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24070 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:47:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXtK-0002sB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:47:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXrY-0002cu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:45:56 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXpX-0002Tu-01 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:43:51 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AdXeF-0005mv-T1 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:32:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXe4-000206-NF; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:32:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdXdS-0001y8-HA for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:31:22 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23560 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:31:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXdR-00023N-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:31:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXbb-0001tp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:29:28 -0500 Received: from joy.songbird.com ([208.184.79.7]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdXa5-0001aS-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:27:53 -0500 Received: from bbprime (jay.songbird.com [208.184.79.253]) by joy.songbird.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id i05GYXc08458 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:34:33 -0800 From: Dave Crocker To: ASRG X-Mailer: PocoMail 3.03 (1740) - EVALUATION VERSION X-URL: http://www.pocomail.com/ Message-ID: <20041582652.707682@bbprime> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:26:52 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jon, > The reformulation of the problem as one of consent helped clarify > views on this "social" (rather than "political" ?) ill. Indeed. Notice how productive things have been, spending lots of time debating definitions (repeatedly), lots of time making ad hominem attacks, and no success at getting supportive technical work done. > This might seem like a "good thing" - but of course this means that there > is no way of comparing proposals meaningfully. e.g. Scheme (a) will > probably be (very close to) 100% effective at stopping the set of email Careful use of the evaluation points suggested in the Technical Considerations draft will show such things as adoption difficulties and ease with which spammers can 'route around' the proposed mechanism. This does not require a comparison with other proposal; it requires conceptual and specification quality that can be evaluated on its own. Development of strong community support obviates the need for doing comparisons and artificially declaring choices among them. > the consensus seems to be 1. This list has yet to show anything that satisfies the historical use of the term "rough consensus". 2. This list has primarily succeeded at convincing active anti-spam workers to spend their time elsewhere; as such a consensus in the current group is what statisticians politely call "not representative of the larger population". > *You* have rechartered the group to work on the poorly defined "spam" > problem. They have rechartered the group to work on technical specifications, rather than endless debate about definitions. > Research Groups are usually > focussed and long term, 1. "research" is a term used with variable meaning, in terms of practicality and timeframe. 2. "long term" is a term used with variable meaning. 2. There is a difference between "long term" and "forever". The rate of progress in this group encourages the latter. > I suspect that this rechartering is a "political" issue, perhaps there's > pressure to produce "appropriate" results in a predetermined timescale. Absolutely correct. We need effective mechanisms, defined, deployed and used, before spam destroys email. We are already under crisis pressure. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 12:16:25 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25063 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:16:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYKc-0004Pm-CT for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:15:58 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05HFwQK016964 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:15:58 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYKc-0004PX-8L for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:15:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25053 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:15:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYKV-0003xr-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:15:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYGx-0003pT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:12:12 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYDT-0003iV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:08:35 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYCv-0003r6-4Q; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:08:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYCj-0003oL-Ee for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:07:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24862 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:07:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYCY-0003hK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:07:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdY99-0003a1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:04:07 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdY4d-0003Qa-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:59:27 -0500 Received: from art.lextek.com (c-67-161-220-214.client.comcast.net[67.161.220.214]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2004010516585601200fo7m4e>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:58:56 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040105094816.03e76c20@mail.1s.com> X-Sender: PollardA@mail.1s.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 To: "Alan DeKok" , Asrg@ietf.org From: Art Pollard Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam In-Reply-To: <20040105161459.4754C16FDA@mail.nitros9.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:58:47 -0700 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 At the risk of seeing this whole discussion brought up yet again .... (Though I guess it already has.) Rather than trying to come up with the "perfect" definition of spam, we simply need to define it / use it in such a way that it will provide the most immediate benefit. Of course, the definition: "Spam is whatever the end-user defines it to be" is probably the most accurate in many people's minds and in particular our own. However, it is not useful as was mentioned in an earlier post. The immediate problem we are all facing is the sending of "unwanted automated bulk e-mail." (Or should I say the receipt of it.) And that is the definition we should use for the time being. Once this problem has been solved or nearly so, then perhaps we can think of ways to deal with "unwanted e-mail", "unwanted bulk e-mail" (that is sent out by hand by somebody in a third world country hired for their cheap labor rates), or other definition. In the meantime, the bulk (pun) of the problem will have been addressed and hopefully taken care of. The mail volume will be significantly less and at that point, it makes sense to find ways to reassess our position and the problem. -Art -- Art Pollard http://www.lextek.com/ Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 12:21:52 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25228 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:21:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYPs-0004en-Su for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:21:24 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05HLOEj017895 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:21:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYPs-0004eY-PO for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:21:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25224 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:21:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYPm-00048M-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:21:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYLE-0003yp-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:16:36 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYH6-0003ot-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:12:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYGn-0004AM-81; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:12:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdYGR-00049v-MW for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:11:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24964 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:11:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYGL-0003nv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:11:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdYB7-0003fm-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:06:10 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdY8X-0003Y7-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 12:03:29 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AdY87-0002H9-Sl for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:03:03 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20040105161459.4754C16FDA@mail.nitros9.org> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:03:03 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 AD> > > I've seen a ~10x increase in spam to my systems in the past two > months. It's *ridiculous* that there's so much opposition to doing > anything. Of *course* any anti-spam system will be short-term, and > won't solve the problem. But it should give us the breathing room to > work on a more complete solution. > On the free webmail system that I'm familiar with, the "spam" problem has been largely solved from the *user* perpective by simply using a couple "low-power" and fairly conservative BLs (currently stopping 31% of incoming mail) followed up by SA based filtering (37% to to a SPAM folder with automatic ageing out). a simple whitelisting facility is also provided. Clearly, the provider is paying for this with CPU and bandwidth, but both users and management seem quite happy My employers use a broadly similar system on the corporate email system. Again, usrs and mgmt seem happy. Incidentally, on the webmail there's also a certain amount of egress control. So it's thought that the potential for abuse is fairly well controlled. Now IS the breathing space. A complete solution (if such a thing is possible) needs a problem definition. You know that I like the consent idea - NOT because it gives us a "a 'perfect' definition of spam ... For a particular system, any message locally determined to be spam.", but because it enables us to work *without* a spam definition. Instead we have a thing called consent which can be represented, transported, queried etc. We can evaluate systems in terms of how well they support consent. We can worry about edge/middle issues, anonymity and so on. How to do all this - that's suitable matter for research - this may be the long term way forward. This is not to say that all the work being done on sender verification / content based filtering etc isn't worthy, of course it is - that's what has given (is giving) us this breathing space. Quick fixes have their place - I'm not convinced that place is a RG. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 13:49:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27938 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:49:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdZmw-0007jx-IZ for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:49:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05InIgV029747 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:49:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdZmw-0007je-AZ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:49:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27933 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:49:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdZmu-0007ju-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:49:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdZl4-0007i8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:47:22 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdZjz-0007fo-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:46:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdZjn-0007Yh-2k; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:46:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdZj6-0007Xh-2y for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:45:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27875 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:45:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdZj3-0007eM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:45:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdZhC-0007cW-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:43:22 -0500 Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdZgd-0007a5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:42:47 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: WD/KlYqT+wOlf8DMegbM7g 1073328124 Received: from elvey.com (adsl-63-195-86-147.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.195.86.147]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF5049ED4E; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:42:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FF9AFFB.6010905@elvey.com> From: Matthew Elvey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ASRG X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Asrg] LMAP - positive press for our work. Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:42:03 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=HABEAS_SWE autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hope we can make some progress on LMAP, and get to a point where we would contact some of the major MTA developers, joe-job and other forgery victims to see if we can rally/tally up on-the-record support for the proposal. (E.g. the phishing victims, such as ebay, paypal, major banks and brokerages, who I think would be eager early adopters). Here's an article by Pamela Parker that mentions LMAP and the IETF and ASRG: http://www.clickz.com/feedback/buzz/article.php/3291141 . It's a new version of an article that didn't mention them. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 15:39:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02726 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:39:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbVO-0003gy-Sj for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:39:19 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05KdI7f014186 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:39:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbVO-0003gj-Ng for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:39:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02660 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:39:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbVN-0004NI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:39:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbTQ-0004F6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:37:16 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbRT-00046G-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:35:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbRH-000344-EE; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbNr-0002dN-8M for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:31:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02110 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:31:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbNp-0003qX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:31:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbMT-0003il-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:30:07 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbHy-0003UD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:25:26 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-375-573.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.181.97]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR100L0F9WAWV@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:21:54 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam In-reply-to: To: Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Message-id: <3FF9C758.8080003@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:21:44 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Jon Kyme wrote: > AD> > >> I've seen a ~10x increase in spam to my systems in the past two >>months. It's *ridiculous* that there's so much opposition to doing >>anything. Of *course* any anti-spam system will be short-term, and >>won't solve the problem. But it should give us the breathing room to >>work on a more complete solution. >> ... > Now IS the breathing space. A complete solution (if such a thing is > possible) needs a problem definition. You know that I like the consent idea > - NOT because it gives us a "a 'perfect' definition of spam ... For a > particular system, any message locally determined to be spam.", but because > it enables us to work *without* a spam definition. Instead we have a thing > called consent which can be represented, transported, queried etc. We can > evaluate systems in terms of how well they support consent. We can worry > about edge/middle issues, anonymity and so on. > > How to do all this - that's suitable matter for research - this may be the > long term way forward. This is not to say that all the work being done on > sender verification / content based filtering etc isn't worthy, of course > it is - that's what has given (is giving) us this breathing space. > We have no problems with researching consent as long as there is enough people willing to do so. However, we want to refocus the RG away from that, in order to be able to consider short and medium term solutions as well. So far research into consent has not gathered enough interest in the RG or outside of it, to move it forward in any way. Therefore, we would like to refocus and also look at more immediate solutions which have enough interest in them to be researched and implemented. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 15:40:05 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02770 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:40:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbVh-0003hQ-2O for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:39:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05KdbP4014214 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:39:37 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbVg-0003hB-V6 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:39:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02688 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:39:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbVf-0004P1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:39:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbTh-0004IC-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:37:34 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbSD-0004DL-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:36:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbSD-0003Dd-Db; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:36:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbRZ-00036T-6k for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:35:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02401 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:35:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbRX-00047p-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:35:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbPo-00040U-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:33:32 -0500 Received: from mta-ms-be-04.sunrise.ch ([194.158.229.113] helo=mail-ms.sunrise.ch) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbO1-0003sO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:31:42 -0500 Received: from [192.168.2.100] (62.167.60.215) by mail-ms.sunrise.ch (7.0.020.2) id 3FC756B100200F0B for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:31:41 +0100 From: Alok Menghrajani X-X-Sender: menghraj@alok To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - yet another idea In-Reply-To: <3FF8B07A.3030507@zemos.net> Message-ID: References: <3FF8B07A.3030507@zemos.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 21:31:23 +0100 (MET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Hi All, has anyone already thought of this: for every pair of email addresses, a unique id is generated. Once people have setup (exchanged) these unique ids, they can send emails to each other be being "pretty sure" that the emails are not spam. This way if I pretend to be yourfriend@hotmail.com, until and unless I don't know what the unique id is, you will know I'm pretending to be yourfriend@hotmail.com (and this probably spam). It's kind of the idea behind public key cryptography, that create a symetric key, except that the goal here is not to encrypt mail, and that the unique id can be kept for a long period of time. (the unique id is of course sent in each email, actually the unique id would be the seed of a random number generator, and each email will have the next random number in one of it's header). I don't know what would be the best way to exchange these unique id's, perhaps something like what I talked in my previous emails (each person performs a calculation), or it could just be based on plain text (until and unless we don't exchange the id's, our mails won't be automatically marked 'clean'). I know this list is about improving the current mail protocols, sorry if any of my questions/suggestions are completly off topic. Btw, can someone explain me why the email protocol uses relays (and why the sender doesn't connect directly to the receiver's server) ? Is there an advantage of having such an architecture today ? Alok. PS: I really like this list's archive, I think it's really rich in content. I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to this list. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 16:22:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA04692 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:22:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdcAS-00058q-A9 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:21:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05LLiqq019758 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:21:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdcAS-00058b-2y for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:21:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA04662 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:21:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdcAL-0006bU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:21:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Adc32-0006K0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:14:04 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbyX-00061C-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:09:25 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Adbg6-0006bo-7P for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:50:22 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adbfn-0003yX-CW; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:50:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdbfQ-0003xS-0P for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:49:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA03374 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:49:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdbfO-00059W-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:49:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Adbdf-0004xR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:47:52 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adbba-0004nF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:45:43 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Adbba-0001ox-SU for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:45:42 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FF9C758.8080003@solidmatrix.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:45:42 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > So far research into consent has not gathered enough interest in the RG > or outside of it, to move it forward in any way. Therefore, we would > like to refocus and also look at more immediate solutions which have > enough interest in them to be researched and implemented. > OK, I'll be quiet now. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 16:34:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05380 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:34:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdcMW-0005OS-II for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:34:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05LYCgg020726 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:34:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdcMW-0005OA-EQ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:34:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05328 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:34:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdcMT-0007Qb-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:34:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdcKI-0007DI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:31:54 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdcIG-0006xz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:29:48 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AdcAE-0001bo-7U for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:21:31 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adc9m-00050f-W8; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:21:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adbt4-0004Le-JG for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:03:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA04187 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:03:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adbsu-0005wD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:03:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Adbqe-0005tw-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:01:17 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adboj-0005qO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:59:17 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-375-573.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.181.97]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR1002EMBJ4NN@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:57:08 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: aRe: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam In-reply-to: To: Jon Kyme , ASRG Message-id: <3FF9CF9F.9020707@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 15:57:03 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Jon Kyme wrote: >>So far research into consent has not gathered enough interest in the RG >>or outside of it, to move it forward in any way. Therefore, we would >>like to refocus and also look at more immediate solutions which have >>enough interest in them to be researched and implemented. >> > > > OK, I'll be quiet now. > As I stated before if enough interest is gathered in researching consent long-term, we can form a subgroup for that. So far, there has not been enough interested and motivated people for that. So keep your ears open... Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Why are both drug addicts and computer aficionados both called users?" (Clifford Stoll) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 17:35:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07934 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:35:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddJQ-00080w-7q for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:35:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05MZ45C030793 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:35:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddJP-00080N-De for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:35:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07840 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:34:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddJM-00035Y-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:35:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AddGb-0002dZ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:32:12 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Add6I-00021Q-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:21:30 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Add5p-0007O0-PK; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:21:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Add4y-0007J1-9z for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:20:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07147 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:20:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Add4q-000208-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:20:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Add0x-0001fd-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:15:59 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdcsO-0001L1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:07:09 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <20040105220613011006gqene>; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:06:13 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5552186A2; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:06:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FF9E002.3090308@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alok Menghrajani Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - yet another idea References: <3FF8B07A.3030507@zemos.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:06:58 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alok Menghrajani wrote: > Hi All, > > has anyone already thought of this: for every pair of email addresses, a > unique id is generated. There have been similar proposals in the past, yes, although most of them have brought cryptography in basically because there's little reason not to. > Once people have setup (exchanged) these unique ids, they can send emails > to each other be being "pretty sure" that the emails are not spam. This > way if I pretend to be yourfriend@hotmail.com, until and unless I don't > know what the unique id is, you will know I'm pretending to be > yourfriend@hotmail.com (and this probably spam). It's kind of the idea > behind public key cryptography, that create a symetric key, except that > the goal here is not to encrypt mail, and that the unique id can be kept > for a long period of time. (the unique id is of course sent in each email, > actually the unique id would be the seed of a random number generator, and > each email will have the next random number in one of it's header). Little nit: that's *NOT* public key cryptography. Public key cryptography is where one can encrypt without having a shared secret, like this unique ID. The major problem with this is that a great many emails are not 1 to 1 messages. This one, for example, it addressed to you, and thus would have a unique ID between us embedded in its headers, but it's being copied to the list, where anyone could get it and forge messages between us. That's why public key cryptography is so powerful: even with access to massive numbers of signed messages, it's still theoretically 'hard' to compute the signing key. > I don't know what would be the best way to exchange these unique id's, > perhaps something like what I talked in my previous emails (each person > performs a calculation), or it could just be based on plain text (until > and unless we don't exchange the id's, our mails won't be automatically > marked 'clean'). If you want to use a system like that, it's already been implemented in stronger cryptographic form with pgp and its free software reimplementation, gpg. That includes the infrastructure to distribute signature and encryption keys. > I know this list is about improving the current mail protocols, sorry > if any of my questions/suggestions are completly off topic. It's all seemed pretty much on topic so far, although some of this has been discussed in the past. My one suggestion is to follow the posting guidlines of prepending a subject area to the subject line, like "0. General" or "6. Proposals" > Btw, can someone explain me why the email protocol uses relays (and why > the sender doesn't connect directly to the receiver's server) ? Is there > an advantage of having such an architecture today ? For various structural reasons, it's necessary, and I wouldn't say it's particularly evil. There is really nothing that can be done with end-to-end that can't be done with relays, it just may require a little more thought at times. Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 17:40:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA08887 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:40:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddOG-0000X0-8A for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:40:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05Me4ZI002034 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:40:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddOE-0000Wb-Ee for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:40:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA08830 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:39:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddOB-00040e-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:40:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AddMp-0003kR-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:38:36 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddKf-0003MU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:36:21 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AddKc-0001uI-HG for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:36:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddKN-0008D4-Jm; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:36:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddJd-00082q-LM for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:35:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07879 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:35:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddJb-000382-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:35:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AddHB-0002hM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:32:46 -0500 Received: from fe05.axelero.hu ([195.228.240.93]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Add8J-000250-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:23:35 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1]) by fe05.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i05MN9Rh050807; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:23:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from fe05.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway by fe05 [195.228.240.93]; id A0C66C3B523 at Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:23:09 +0100 Received: from axelero.hu (108.13-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.13.108]) (authenticated bits=0) by fe05.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i05MN8c8050714; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 23:23:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3FF9E3CB.4050902@axelero.hu> From: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; hu-HU; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031210 X-Accept-Language: hu, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org CC: Alok Menghrajani Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - yet another idea References: <3FF8B07A.3030507@zemos.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 23:23:07 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alok Menghrajani wrote: > has anyone already thought of this: for every pair of email addresses, a > unique id is generated. Similar to TMDA. ( http://www.tmda.net/config-client.html ) "jason-sender-a751af@mastaler.com This particular sender address will only accept messages from president@whitehouse.gov ." > Btw, can someone explain me why the email protocol uses relays (and why > the sender doesn't connect directly to the receiver's server) ? Is there > an advantage of having such an architecture today ? IMHO email is designed to be an asynchron network. Relays must storing messages immediately and forwarding later when resources (bandwidth and/or connection) are available. For example over a dial-up telephone line after working hours. The advantage is that network (infra)structure can be enforced (again). Enforced routing/relaying path means that the "cable" can be cut and the bad guys will be disconnected from the net. z2 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 18:30:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA11600 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 18:30:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdeAJ-0002U8-L6 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:29:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i05NThSP009553 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 18:29:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdeAJ-0002Tu-Fl for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:29:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA11399 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 18:29:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdeAG-0007hI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:29:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Addtb-0006Ht-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:12:29 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddnD-0005Nv-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:05:52 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AddUB-00036A-96 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:46:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddU3-0000sY-2G; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:46:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AddTw-0000qT-Ao for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:45:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA09123 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:45:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddTt-0004Wg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:45:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AddSJ-0004Nc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:44:15 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AddRL-0004D7-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:43:15 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0873170A7 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:44:35 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - yet another idea In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:06:58 EST." <3FF9E002.3090308@zemos.net> Message-Id: <20040105224435.F0873170A7@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 17:44:35 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Philip Miller wrote: > The major problem with this is that a great many emails are not 1 to 1 > messages. This one, for example, it addressed to you, and thus would have a > unique ID between us embedded in its headers, but it's being copied to the > list, where anyone could get it and forge messages between us. That's easily solved, so long as there's a web of trust between originator and final recipient. e.g. Something like Yahoo's DK, but signed on a sender/recipient pair: originator: X-Magic-Header = nonce + sign(nonce, originator, list) list: X-Magic-Header = nonce2 + sign(nonce2, list, list-sender) list-sender: X-Magic-Header = nonce3 + sign(nonce3, list-sender, recipient) This does mean that every message suddenly becomes unique, which has issues for multiple RCPT TO's. The alternative is to supply the signing information in the SMTP envelope, along with the RCTP TO (somehow). Provided the signing keys are per-MTA, and the chain of signatures is maintained, every message would then be traceable and thus accountable. Whether this method would do anything to stop spam is another question. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 5 22:24:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA19930 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:24:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adhop-0004GG-EC for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:23:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i063NlIa016374 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:23:47 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adhop-0004G1-9V for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:23:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA19875 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:23:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adhom-00043t-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:23:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Adhkz-0003w6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:19:49 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adhhh-0003oR-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:16:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdhhJ-0003vJ-Fc; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:16:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adhgb-0003up-Pe for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:15:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA19665 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:15:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdhgT-0003kv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:15:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Adhbf-0003eK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:10:11 -0500 Received: from black.infobro.com ([63.71.25.39] helo=infobro.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdhWi-0003VU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:05:04 -0500 Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:03:55 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:03:53 -0500 Message-ID: <01C3D3D7.CED63500.eric@infobro.com> From: "Eric D. Williams" To: "'Alan DeKok'" , "asrg@ietf.org" , "asrg-rmx@ntp.org" Subject: RE: [Asrg] Latest version of the LMAP discussion paper Organization: Information Brokers, Inc. X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:03:43 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RATWARE_EMWAC, SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You may also want to check it against the latest (last known whereabouts the I-D Editor's queue) Requirements Draft at the following URL: http://www.infobro.com/anon-FTP/infoSource/IRTF/ASRG/draft-irtf-asrg-require ments-00.txt I think it jibes better with this one. -e BTW, Happy New Year! On Tuesday, December 09, 2003 4:02 PM, Alan DeKok [SMTP:aland@ox.org] wrote: > I've updated the LMAP discussion paper, and put the latest copy on > my web site at: > > http://www.striker.ottawa.on.ca/~aland/draft-irtf-asrg-lmap-discussion-00.txt > > It's also called -00 (like the previous one), because I've asked > Yakov to submit it as an Internet-Draft, and I expect that they will > number it -00. > > I've corrected a number of typos, and added suggested text. I've > also removed some of the rants. > > Comments and suggestions are welcome. I have a little more time > than I had a month ago, so I'm better able to discuss the document. > > Alan DeKok. > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 04:23:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA11796 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 04:23:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdnQI-0001d7-Q2 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:22:50 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i069Motc006255 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 04:22:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdnQI-0001co-Ef for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:22:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA11774 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 04:22:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdnQF-0002SH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:22:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdnOA-0002Mx-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:20:38 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdnKK-0002FY-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:16:40 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdnJh-0001Kq-MS; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:16:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdnJf-0001KW-Uh for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:15:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA11628 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 04:15:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdnJY-0002FF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:15:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdnHD-0002A9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:13:28 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdnEO-000251-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 04:10:32 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AdnE0-0007f5-1x for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:10:08 +0000 To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Subject: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:10:08 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format (see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) This is probably the kind of thing that should be invited to come under the ASRG BCP sub-group - if we still have one. Should we (and by 'we' I mean the chairs) be making more of an effort to recruit this kind of community initiative to come and work under aegis of ASRG? Personally, I don't think it's quite there yet - a RFC1894 message strikes me as an obvious kind of thing - but it looks like a good start. There's scope for interaction with LMAP I should think. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 15:17:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02250 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:17:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adxdd-0007kk-Vr for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:17:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i06KHHNs029801 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:17:17 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adxdd-0007ka-Qb for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:17:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA02198 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:17:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdxdX-0006TA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:17:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdxYa-0006Lb-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:12:05 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdxUR-0006C1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:07:47 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdxTh-0007CG-2b; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:07:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdxRG-000787-MC for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:04:32 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA01022 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:04:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdxR6-00064p-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:04:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdxMm-000602-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 14:59:52 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdxLz-0005wi-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 14:59:03 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-376-543.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.185.39]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR3004KV3FBYH@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 19:57:15 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-reply-to: To: Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Message-id: <3FFB1318.4070303@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 14:57:12 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Jon Kyme wrote: > On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format > (see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) > > This is probably the kind of thing that should be invited to come under the > ASRG BCP sub-group - if we still have one. Should we (and by 'we' I mean > the chairs) be making more of an effort to recruit this kind of community > initiative to come and work under aegis of ASRG? > > Personally, I don't think it's quite there yet - a RFC1894 message strikes > me as an obvious kind of thing - but it looks like a good start. There's > scope for interaction with LMAP I should think. We actually have been discussing this. I have also been thinking about using something like DSNs for this, with one part for human readable data, another part for machine-readable and a copy of the original message. However, the problem seems to me that there is much more than simple email abuse here. This format can be used for reporting spam messages. What about open relays, hijacked computers, spam websites, false domain registrations, etc.? All of these play a large part in the spam world and SpamCop for example, reports URLs regularly. Some of this overlaps with the workd of INCH and IDWG at the IETF. So the question to me is more of scope - what scope should this subgroup have? Something that focuses solely on reporting spam messages themselves can be easily done with some kind of DSN-like format. BUT, if you want to report IPs, URLs, domains, and even perhaps include trace information on the spammer's companies, that is something much bigger, and requires different players. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "But in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes" (Benjamin Franklin) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 17:30:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07311 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:30:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adzhq-0005N6-LX for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:29:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i06MTkgj020645 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:29:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adzhq-0005Mu-Dv for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:29:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07296 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:29:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adzho-00044A-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:29:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Adzfx-00041S-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:27:50 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdzeR-0003yu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:26:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AdzeD-0005CV-Kj; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:26:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Adze6-0005Bq-Gq for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:25:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07214 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:25:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Adze4-0003y2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:25:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AdzcJ-0003uY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:24:03 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AdzbS-0003pg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:23:10 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 002F616DA3 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:24:29 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 06 Jan 2004 14:57:12 EST." <3FFB1318.4070303@solidmatrix.com> Message-Id: <20040106222430.002F616DA3@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:24:29 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > However, the problem seems to me that there is much more than simple > email abuse here. This format can be used for reporting spam messages. > What about open relays, hijacked computers, spam websites, false domain > registrations, etc.? All of these play a large part in the spam world > and SpamCop for example, reports URLs regularly. Some of this overlaps > with the workd of INCH and IDWG at the IETF. If it's useful, I'm willing to either supply data, or forward parts of the spam arriving at my domain. Be warned, though, last time I checked, it was ~2 million messages a day. > So the question to me is more of scope - what scope should this subgroup > have? Something that focuses solely on reporting spam messages > themselves can be easily done with some kind of DSN-like format. BUT, if > you want to report IPs, URLs, domains, and even perhaps include trace > information on the spammer's companies, that is something much bigger, > and requires different players. For open proxies/relays/abused machines, a combination of src IP, HELO/EHLO, and time is a reasonable start (i.e. basically information used in greylisting). Content doesn't matter as much if you *know* the network connection is being abused, as you'll always get the same content in a message you didn't block. :) For low-volume spam from non-abused machines, content filters are a reasonable approach. The problem I have with any kind of coordinated reporting mechanism is that it's probably more expensive than coordinating a switch to a different port, with additional restrictions. Even ephemeral ports would be useful. A signed UDP packet could be sent by an originator, saying "I've got X amount of data, with Y charactestics for you, and whitelist W says I'm a good guy". The recipient then responds with a port number specific to (originator, time, etc.) It would be a while to set up, but no less work than the ongoing slog of content filtering email, and coordinating the reporting of abuse. But because content filtering is the "status quo", people are unwilling to change to another system, until the current one collapses. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 18:02:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07971 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:02:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae0Ct-0006Ep-FG for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:01:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i06N1pM3023976 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:01:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae0Ct-0006Ed-Ak for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:01:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07957 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:01:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0Cq-00056X-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:01:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0B3-00053A-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:59:58 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae09H-0004zQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:58:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae09A-00062T-Qw; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:58:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae093-00061k-Ie for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:57:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA07838 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:57:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae090-0004xX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:57:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae07B-0004u2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:55:58 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae05l-0004qG-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:54:29 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Ae05g-0001Bi-AK for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:54:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FFB1318.4070303@solidmatrix.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:54:24 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format > > (see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) > > > YS > We actually have been discussing this. I have also been thinking about > using something like DSNs for this, with one part for human readable > data, another part for machine-readable and a copy of the original > message. > > However, the problem seems to me that there is much more than simple > email abuse here. This format can be used for reporting spam messages. > What about open relays, hijacked computers, spam websites, false domain > registrations, etc.? All of these play a large part in the spam world > and SpamCop for example, reports URLs regularly. Some of this overlaps > with the workd of INCH and IDWG at the IETF. > > So the question to me is more of scope - what scope should this subgroup > have? Well it's right with the charter - "to facilitate management responses to spam activity" and "to help network managers identify and deal with sources of spam on their networks" >Something that focuses solely on reporting spam messages > themselves can be easily done with some kind of DSN-like format. BUT, if > you want to report IPs, URLs, domains, and even perhaps include trace > information on the spammer's companies, that is something much bigger, > and requires different players. > I don't see a massive problem with coming up with sub-types (or sub-sections?) of a spam-response DSN-like message which would cover the types of report you identify. The cited document suggests that reports may be sent to the "designated reporting address" for: 1. The point of origin (determined from the headers) 2. Email drop boxes (if implicated) 3. Web sites (if implicated) 4. Regulatory authorities (if available) 5. Spam tracking services / block lists (if desired) 6. Online repositories 7. Other implicated parties (trademark protection) All these kinds of reports are aimed at spam-reduction. If done right, could be useful. If they're done wrong, they can be pretty spammy themselves. I'm interested - I wrote an "abusebot" which handles rather a lot of (mainly) spurious abuse reports for a bunch of domains I'm responsible for. A standard format would make automated responses easier to do and simplify the consequent human workload. My attention was drawn to this by an abuse reporter who sent us some stuff (with some tool I guess) - It took a while to figure out why we got the report, even the reporter didn't know why at first. I was able to tell him that he'd sent us the report because a spamvertised website had an address in one of our domains as the technical contact (in the whois). -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 18:10:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08683 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:10:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae0KZ-0006ro-KV for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:09:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i06N9lSH026390 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:09:47 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae0KZ-0006rZ-FU for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:09:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08655 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:09:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0KW-0005J4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:09:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0Id-0005H6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:07:48 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0Gx-0005Et-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:06:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae0Gx-0006PT-9T; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:06:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae0Gl-0006Ol-0g for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:05:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08232 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:05:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0Gi-0005Dc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:05:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0Ep-0005Al-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:03:51 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae0Dg-000580-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:02:40 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Ae0Dh-00026H-1b; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:02:41 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FFB1318.4070303@solidmatrix.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "Yakov Shafranovich" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:02:41 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 YS> Some of this overlaps > with the workd of INCH and IDWG at the IETF. > Sorry, missed that. "Intrusion", "Computer security incidents" hmm, maybe - at a stretch. Do we know if those groups would consider this their patch? Or is this just a "feeling"? -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 20:50:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA15915 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:50:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2pW-00051h-MX for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:49:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i071nsoq019318 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:49:54 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2pW-00051V-8Z for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:49:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA15900 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:49:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2pT-0005wT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:49:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2ne-0005t0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:47:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2lt-0005oq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:46:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2ll-0004oV-N6; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:46:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2jl-0004lo-0i for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:43:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA15732 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:43:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2jh-0005hC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:43:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2hs-0005d8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:42:01 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2gd-0005XE-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:40:43 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-390-516.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.239.134]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR300CMWJ6EMW@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 01:37:35 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-reply-to: To: Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Message-id: <3FFB62D6.2020003@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:37:26 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Jon Kyme wrote: > YS> Some of this overlaps > >>with the workd of INCH and IDWG at the IETF. >> > > > Sorry, missed that. "Intrusion", "Computer security incidents" > hmm, maybe - at a stretch. Do we know if those groups would consider this > their patch? Or is this just a "feeling"? > We will coordinate with them, however their goals are different. There is some small overlap - hijacking a computer or using an open relay is an intrusion. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Among all our enemies / The ones to be most feared are often the smallest" (Jean de la Fontaine) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 20:58:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16070 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:58:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2xF-0005Hd-V0 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:57:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i071vrv4020303 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:57:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2xF-0005HO-PB for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:57:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16066 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:57:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2xD-0006BB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:57:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2vO-00068Z-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:55:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2uU-00065E-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:55:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2uU-00056u-0i; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:55:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2tM-000558-Jj for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:53:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA15994 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:53:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2tK-00063k-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:53:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2rT-00061W-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:51:55 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2rF-0005yR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:51:41 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-390-516.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.239.134]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR300ETQJORZN@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 01:48:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-reply-to: <20040106222430.002F616DA3@mail.nitros9.org> To: Alan DeKok Cc: asrg@ietf.org Message-id: <3FFB656C.2050400@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <20040106222430.002F616DA3@mail.nitros9.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:48:28 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Alan DeKok wrote: ... > The problem I have with any kind of coordinated reporting mechanism > is that it's probably more expensive than coordinating a switch to a > different port, with additional restrictions. > This is not a coordinated mechanism - its just a standard for abuse reports. Such abuse reporting standard is intended mainly to make the ISPs' jobs easier and spam reporting more automated. For example, if such standard was implemented, abuse reports coming to an ISP can be automatically parsed into their helpdesk systems, saving time required to read and transcribe them. This can definatly free up time for the ISPs to go after the spammers themselves. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "One who watches the wind will never sow, and one who keeps his eyes on the clouds will never reap" (Ecclesiastes 11:4) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 21:06:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16296 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:06:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae34w-0005Y0-7p for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:05:50 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0725o3O021318 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:05:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae34w-0005Xl-2v for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:05:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16275 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:05:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae34t-0006NL-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:05:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae32z-0006Kp-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:03:49 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae31K-0006IV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:02:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae31G-0005Mt-Or; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:02:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae2z7-0005Ix-AK for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:59:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16103 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:59:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2z4-0006Dv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:59:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2xE-0006BO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:57:52 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae2vR-00065J-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:56:01 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-390-516.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.239.134]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR300E22JXSZN@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 01:53:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-reply-to: To: Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Message-id: <3FFB66B1.3020306@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:53:53 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Jon Kyme wrote: >>>On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format >>>(see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) >>> > Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > >>Something that focuses solely on reporting spam messages >>themselves can be easily done with some kind of DSN-like format. BUT, if >>you want to report IPs, URLs, domains, and even perhaps include trace >>information on the spammer's companies, that is something much bigger, >>and requires different players. >> > > I don't see a massive problem with coming up with sub-types (or > sub-sections?) of a spam-response DSN-like message which would cover the > types of report you identify. > We need to draw a balance between the time required to define and implement such standard, and what it would cover. The larger the standard, the more time it will take to do it. Therefore, I would rather see something with a more narrow focus, and possibly extensible, rather than something broad that will take forever to implement. > The cited document suggests that reports may be sent to the "designated > reporting address" for: > 1. The point of origin (determined from the headers) > 2. Email drop boxes (if implicated) > 3. Web sites (if implicated) > 4. Regulatory authorities (if available) > 5. Spam tracking services / block lists (if desired) > 6. Online repositories > 7. Other implicated parties (trademark protection) For example, regulatory authorities such as the FTC might be interested in information that a regular ISP will not care for. The problem that I see is determining what the standard should cover, and the parties involved, making sure that its narrow enough to be implemented quickly and broad enough to make a difference while keeping all of the involved parties happy and benefiting from it. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 6 23:52:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20832 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:52:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae5fk-0002yY-CO for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:52:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i074q0Po011432 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:52:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae5fk-0002yJ-6l for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:52:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20827 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:51:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5fi-0005cW-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:51:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5e0-0005Y1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:50:13 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5d6-0005SN-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:49:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae5cr-0002f0-2G; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:49:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae5bv-0002dQ-FF for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:48:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20713 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:48:00 -0500 (EST) From: tjacobs@redsword.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5bt-0005NK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:48:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5a4-0005Io-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:46:08 -0500 Received: from redsword.com ([65.65.78.99] helo=ares.redsword.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5Z8-0005Di-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:45:10 -0500 Received: from tymdahl (adsl-65-65-78-123.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net [65.65.78.123]) by ares.redsword.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 3.4.7) with ESMTP id ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:45:33 -0600 Organization: Red Sword Corporation To: Philip Miller Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation CC: asrg@ietf.org Message-ID: <3FFB3AEA.22598.DC8AF6E@localhost> Priority: normal In-reply-to: <3FF8AFCB.7060509@zemos.net> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.02) Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:47:06 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 > This proposal doesn't require a new protocol. An ESMTP extension would > do just fine. I think we should kill two birds with one stone: > implement an extension in which the receiving server picks 2 primes of > sufficient length, multiplies them, and asks the sending server to > factor them. I proposed something like this ("...it could be as simply as passing the sender a product of primes, etc. and demanding that he factor them before accepting the message. ") not quite a year ago in message https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working- groups/asrg/current/msg00989.html There apparently is some reason why this solution won't work, however (I'm not sure what the issue was, but I received private replies that insisted that the solution was unworkable, and the proposal itself was generally ignored). _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 00:30:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA22890 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:30:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae6H1-0004Eb-Cn for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:30:31 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i075UVRV016271 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:30:31 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae6H1-0004EM-7k for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:30:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA22822 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:30:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6Gy-0007ML-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:30:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6F3-00074p-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:28:30 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6Cg-0006oF-01 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:26:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae5xD-0003ZI-0C; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:10:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae5x1-0003YW-UP for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:09:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA21269 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:09:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5wz-0006H3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:09:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5v3-0006Bz-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:07:49 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae5tA-00066N-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:05:52 -0500 Received: (qmail 10362 invoked by uid 100); 7 Jan 2004 05:05:46 -0000 Message-ID: <20040107050546.10361.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: jrk@merseymail.com Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 7 Jan 2004 05:05:46 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format >(see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) I'd certainly like to come up with a standard abuse report, although I have to say the proposal on that web page leaves a lot to be desired. The most likely container format would be XML, since it's a reasonable format for tagged values, there's plenty of existing software to create and parse it, and it's widely used in other RFCs already. The researchy bits are partly to figure out what items a report needs to contain, whether it works better to do one report per spam or to collect multiple similar spams, and how best to deal with the desire of some reporters to provide less than full information in their reports. It might also make sense to standardize some responses, e.g., accepted/problem solved, accepted/problem identified but not yet solved, accepted/problem not identified, rejected/not from us, rejected/insufficient information, rejected/queue full so try later. We'd also need to be sure to avoid needless incompatibility with the intrusion and incident WGs. Although the most likely way to pass these things around would be as MIME parts in e-mail messages to abuse desks, I wouldn't want to rule out other transmission methods. I could easily imagine that large ISPs might want fast dedicated channels so the could do real-time problem analysis and resolution and maybe even detect and stop a spam run in progress. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 00:36:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA23242 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:36:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae6Mf-0004Yi-VD for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:36:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i075aLSw017518 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:36:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae6Mf-0004YT-RO for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:36:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA23235 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:36:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6Md-00008J-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:36:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6Kz-000005-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:34:38 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6JT-0007eU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:33:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae6JR-0004Lc-7e; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae6Ia-0004JV-Fh for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:32:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA22951 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:32:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6IX-0007Xv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:32:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6Gx-0007MB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:30:28 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae6F3-0006yu-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:28:29 -0500 Received: from art.lextek.com (c-67-161-220-214.client.comcast.net[67.161.220.214]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id <2004010705275901100llklge>; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 05:27:59 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> X-Sender: PollardA@mail.1s.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 To: John Levine , Asrg@ietf.org From: Art Pollard Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: <20040107050546.10361.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 22:27:58 -0700 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 I agree with John. Furthermore, I think it is a great idea and should be pursued. I use Eudora for my Windows mail client (so I don't suffer from all the trojans that are so prolific with Outlook). When I try to forward spam to the various abuse departments, Eudora almost always if it is HTML mail succeeds in munging the original message sometimes making me wonder how useful it is to the abuse department. (This is caused by the HTML being loaded into Eudora and then being saved back out again -- as if it were composed in Eudora and not in its original format.) I wouldn't be surprised if this were not an isolated case as far as mail readers go. The standard should ensure that the original spam is sent back to the abuse department in its entirety including full headers obviously and not some reconstruction by the mail client. I think that Mime parts would be the way to go. Furthermore, I think a standard reporting address should be specified. Most have settled on abuse@domainname.com but not all and it is only an informal standard at best. If an ISP were able to in real time analyze the complaints, they could compare the messages that were forwarded in the complaints against outgoing mail streams and quickly isolate which user is sending the offending messages. This could be done by any number of means the most obvious would be some sort of Bayesian or vector space model filtering. In either case, it would not be too difficult to automate to some degree relieving the abuse department from much of the load. -Art -- Art Pollard http://www.lextek.com/ Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 02:39:00 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA25619 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:39:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae8Gt-0003Q0-86 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:38:32 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i077cUkI013122 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:38:30 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae8Gq-0003PJ-QG for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:38:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA25476 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:38:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae8Gn-0007Lj-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:38:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae8ER-00077k-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:36:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae8Cw-00073r-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:34:26 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae8Ca-00032F-3r; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:34:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ae8CU-00031e-6E for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:33:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA25313 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:33:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae8CQ-00072b-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:33:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae8Ag-000706-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:32:06 -0500 Received: from mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.64]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ae8A4-0006wr-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 02:31:28 -0500 Received: from zen.fernhaven (c211-30-105-76.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.105.76]) by mail009.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i077Uu024259 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 18:30:56 +1100 Received: from [172.16.0.129] (helo=fred.fernhaven) by zen.fernhaven with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ae89W-0000Ya-00 for ; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:30:54 +1100 From: Brett Watson Organization: PhD Student, Macquarie University To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200401071830.52852.famous-asrg@nutters.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 18:30:52 +1100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Another item of research in an abuse reporting standard ought to be making that mechanism itself abuse-resistant. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been simultaneously joe-jobbed and been the subject of fraudulent abuse complaints based on the joe job. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 07:10:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06418 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:10:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCVn-0000Hv-TS for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:10:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i07CABeV001100 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:10:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCVm-0000Hc-SZ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:10:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06413 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:10:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCVi-00065o-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:10:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCTp-00060e-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:08:10 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCTI-0005wO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:07:36 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCSj-0007wk-Rk; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:07:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCRo-0007vv-7r for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:06:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06343 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:05:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCRj-0005uo-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:05:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCQ3-0005rx-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:04:16 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCOg-0005oN-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:02:50 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeCOh-0002aP-P4 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:02:51 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:02:51 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Art Pollard> > standard reporting address should be specified. Most have settled on > abuse@domainname.com but not all and it is only an informal standard at > best. > I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, adopting anything else would take some justifying. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 07:24:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06869 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:24:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCjS-0000on-Vo for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:24:19 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i07COIMN003139 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:24:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCjS-0000oY-S0 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:24:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06853 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:24:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCjS-0006u8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:24:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeChW-0006mu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:22:19 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCgV-0006h5-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:21:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCgI-0000Zs-FG; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:21:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeCfL-0000Y7-EU for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:20:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06757 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:20:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCfK-0006d4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:20:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCdd-0006Zn-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:18:18 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeCcw-0006UZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 07:17:34 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeCcv-00056c-En; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:17:33 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FFB3AEA.22598.DC8AF6E@localhost> Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation To: From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:17:33 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >> This proposal doesn't require a new protocol. An ESMTP extension would >> do just fine. I think we should kill two birds with one stone: >> implement an extension in which the receiving server picks 2 primes of >> sufficient length, multiplies them, and asks the sending server to >> factor them. > > >I proposed something like this ("...it could be as simply as passing >the sender a product of primes, etc. and demanding that he factor >them before accepting the message. ") not quite a year ago in message > >https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working- >groups/asrg/current/msg00989.html > >There apparently is some reason why this solution won't work, however >(I'm not sure what the issue was, but I received private replies that >insisted that the solution was unworkable, and the proposal itself >was generally ignored). > > "SMTP clients and servers MUST support the original HELO mechanisms as a fallback." - rfc2821 So you can expect objections to proposals based on extensions. And besides, the penny black stuff aims (I've I've read it right) to set a problem which isn't purely CPU (or math co-processor) bound. However, all proof-of-work schemes have the drawback that they assume "work" is expensive for the spammer. This assumption is invalidated if the spammer commands a large numder of slave machines. Or buys a crypto card. I think that's a fair summary, I'm sure anything I've missed can be found in the archive. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 12:39:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20980 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:39:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeHeA-0007IB-8D for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:39:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i07HdADa028025 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:39:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeHeA-0007Hw-4W for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:39:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20955 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:39:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeHe8-0001GI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:39:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeHbE-0000h7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:36:11 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeHZ1-0000Ar-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:33:51 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AeHZ1-0005La-CA for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:33:51 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeHYF-0006DF-CM; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:33:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeHXm-0006BM-BI for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:32:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20354 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:32:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeHXk-0007kT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:32:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeHTW-0007Bv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:28:11 -0500 Received: from mail19b.dulles19-verio.com ([198.170.241.3]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeHN8-0006hc-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:21:34 -0500 Received: from www1911.dulles19-verio.com (161.58.134.165) by mail19b.dulles19-verio.com (RS ver 1.0.88vs) with SMTP id 0-0149116065 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:21:05 -0500 (EST) From: "Tom Bartel" To: Subject: RE: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard Message-ID: <005701c3d542$5a5fa000$6d02000a@MULDER> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> X-Loop-Detect: 1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:19:05 -0700 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Should the abuse reporting standard also cover inquiries regarding email that should be getting through but is not? I understand that the intent is to facilitate abuse complaints for spam received, but the other side of the coin - regardless of what becomes standard for regulating email delivery (encrypted email, sender authentication, consent system, etc...), is that much contact may need to be made for email that is failing to be appropriately delivered. Should the Abuse Reporting Standard also coordinate inquiries about mail failing delivery, whether by systematic failure, intentional blocking, or whatever by that ISP? The intent of an abuse reporting standard would be to allow ISP's to efficiently handle complaints. Regarding email delivery failure, would a uniform and well-formed inquiry into the ISP at the appropriate place so their abuse staff can manage it appropriately be useful as well? ISP's have generally been happy to provide such information. Yahoo! for example has a specific address, bulkmailinquiry@yahoo.com where they accept these inquiries as well as some web forms. http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/bulk/bulk-01.html http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/us/mail/cgi_bulkmail http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-01.html http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/us/mail/cgi_defer Having a common standard seems like a good thing. Thx! Tom Tom Bartel 303.642.4104 > -----Original Message----- > From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Art Pollard > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:28 PM > To: John Levine; Asrg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard > > > > I agree with John. Furthermore, I think it is a great idea > and should be > pursued. > > I use Eudora for my Windows mail client (so I don't suffer > from all the > trojans that are so prolific with Outlook). When I try to > forward spam to > the various abuse departments, Eudora almost always if it is > HTML mail > succeeds in munging the original message sometimes making me > wonder how > useful it is to the abuse department. (This is caused by the > HTML being > loaded into Eudora and then being saved back out again -- as > if it were > composed in Eudora and not in its original format.) I wouldn't be > surprised if this were not an isolated case as far as mail > readers go. The > standard should ensure that the original spam is sent back to > the abuse > department in its entirety including full headers obviously > and not some > reconstruction by the mail client. > > I think that Mime parts would be the way to go. Furthermore, > I think a > standard reporting address should be specified. Most have settled on > abuse@domainname.com but not all and it is only an informal > standard at best. > > If an ISP were able to in real time analyze the complaints, > they could > compare the messages that were forwarded in the complaints > against outgoing > mail streams and quickly isolate which user is sending the offending > messages. This could be done by any number of means the most > obvious would > be some sort of Bayesian or vector space model filtering. In > either case, > it would not be too difficult to automate to some degree > relieving the > abuse department from much of the load. > > -Art > -- > Art Pollard > http://www.lextek.com/ > Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines. > > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 1/2/2004 > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 1/2/2004 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 13:44:52 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24211 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:44:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeIfI-0003Hl-7Q for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:44:24 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i07IiOq4012623 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:44:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeIfH-0003HW-VV for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:44:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24180 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:44:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeIfF-0004ty-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:44:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeIdb-0004nZ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:42:39 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeIcF-0004fm-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:41:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeIc1-0002rE-QK; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:41:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeIb3-0002kY-8j for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:40:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA23898 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:39:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeIb1-0004W5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:39:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeIX5-0004Lx-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:35:55 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeIUO-0004EP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 13:33:08 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeITz-0002C1-0s; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:32:43 +0000 In-Reply-To: <005701c3d542$5a5fa000$6d02000a@MULDER> Subject: Re: RE: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "Tom Bartel" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:32:43 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > Should the abuse reporting standard also cover inquiries regarding email > that should be getting through but is not? No, of course not. > I understand that the intent > is to facilitate abuse complaints for spam received, but the other side > of the coin - regardless of what becomes standard for regulating email > delivery (encrypted email, sender authentication, consent system, > etc...), is that much contact may need to be made for email that is > failing to be appropriately delivered. > That's what the postmaster role is for. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 14:42:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26354 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:42:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeJZG-0005xc-SX for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:42:15 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i07JgE3k022909 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:42:14 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeJZG-0005xQ-LU for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:42:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26327 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:42:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeJZE-0007ON-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:42:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeJXa-0007IP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:40:30 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeJWJ-0007Ba-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:39:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeJWA-0005eg-0C; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:39:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeJW4-0005cx-1i for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:38:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26115 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:38:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeJW1-00076d-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:38:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeJRZ-0006yt-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:34:18 -0500 Received: from [131.107.8.12] (helo=exchange.microsoft.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeJNa-0006pS-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:30:10 -0500 Received: from DF-VRS-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.4.14]) by exchange.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1069); Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:29:24 -0800 Received: from 10.197.0.83 by DF-VRS-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Wed, 07 Jan 2004 11:29:04 -0800 Received: from DF-CHOPPER.platinum.corp.microsoft.com ([10.197.0.82]) by DF-BEG.platinum.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:29:24 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7150.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - Computational - MSFT's "Penny Black" Message-ID: <27C4E14288DB344FBA10705D57A9BB040142A379@DF-CHOPPER.platinum.corp.microsoft.com> Thread-Topic: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - Computational - MSFT's "Penny Black" Thread-Index: AcPL5z1u9q4UPgUCSASK7QFjL/HwxAJbIOLw From: "Bob Atkinson" To: "Yakov Shafranovich" , "Art Pollard" Cc: "Steve Schear" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2004 19:29:24.0599 (UTC) FILETIME=[8EC8A870:01C3D554] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:29:09 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 > What is also strange to me, is that they are releasing this by > themselves, not as part of their "big gorilla" alliance with AOL and > Yahoo. Taking into account that Yahoo released their proposal by > themselves as well, it raises questions about their alliance. In fact the Penny Black project in Microsoft Research has been listed on the MSR web site (http://research.microsoft.com/research/sv/PennyBlack/) for some time now, at least a year. =09 Bob _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 16:40:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA03746 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:40:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeLPa-0003XA-O2 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:40:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i07LeMmV013578 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:40:22 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeLPZ-0003Wu-3s for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:40:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA03700 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:40:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeLPX-0006L8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:40:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeLFm-0005LP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:30:15 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeL7e-0004fI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:21:50 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeL4u-0002N1-NA; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:19:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeKsd-0001Zp-JR for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:06:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA02044 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:06:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeKsc-0003u3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:06:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeKqy-0003kl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:04:37 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeKpN-0003bb-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:02:57 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-385-864.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.221.108]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR5006P40ZZ2K@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:00:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <3FFC7352.20704@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - ASRG Research Agenda Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 16:00:02 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT The following is the new research agenda for the ASRG, in line with the new charter. > ASRG Research Agenda > > The research agenda outlines specific areas that > the ASRG is currently researching, while the charter outlines broader > areas. If you want to want to suggest changes to the agenda, please > contact the chairs. > > 1. PROBLEM ANALYSIS. > > a. Inventory of Problems - analysis of > spam-related problems. > > b. Analysis of Current Solutions - inventory > and analysis of current anti-spam solutions, their weaknesses and > effectiveness. > > c. Analysis of Spam - analysis of persistent patterns > in spam and spammer behavior that can be used to improve existing and > propose new solutions. > > 2. IMPROVING EXISTING SOLUTIONS. > > a. Best Current Practices for Spam > Control - including email admins, end users, MTA developers, > blacklist operators, etc.. > > b. Filtering Standards - dynamic updates, > standard headers for MTAs, etc. > > c. Abuse Reporting Standards - > research into common standards for exchanging information about > network and email abuse. > > 3. PROPOSING NEW SOLUTIONS. > > a. Requirements and Evaluation Model - to > be used for evaluation of proposed solutions. > > b. SMTP Session Verification - verification of the SMTP transaction (e.g. LMAP, > etc.). > > c. Message Verification - verification of both the message > headers and content (e.g. DK, Lumos, TEOS, etc.) Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 19:42:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16055 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:42:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOFg-0004n5-4D for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:42:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i080gKE6018409 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:42:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOFf-0004mq-W0 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:42:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16040 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:42:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOFe-0003Xh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:42:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeODr-0003QK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:40:28 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOCi-0003LU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:39:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOCT-0004Yv-FA; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:39:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeO9n-00044u-LI for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:36:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA15684 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:36:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeO9l-000380-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:36:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeO89-0002zq-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:34:34 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeO4u-0002oU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:31:13 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-434.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.75]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR500AEMAMPLG@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:28:10 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <3FFCA412.1090505@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - Legal - "No Soliciting" ESMTP Extension - New Draft Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:28:02 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT A new draft has been published here: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-malamud-no-soliciting-03.txt ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 19:52:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16370 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:52:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOPK-00054n-Ez for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:52:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i080qIE3019507 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:52:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOPK-00054Y-B4 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:52:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16361 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:52:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOPH-0003wh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:52:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeONN-0003tF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:50:18 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOMA-0003qB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:49:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOM9-0004uf-AT; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:49:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOLK-0004uD-Vo for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:48:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16297 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:48:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOLJ-0003ny-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:48:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOJM-0003iT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:46:09 -0500 Received: from hyde.uw.no ([195.159.29.204] helo=mail.db.org) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOHR-0003aZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:44:09 -0500 Received: (qmail 14897 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2004 00:43:38 -0000 Received: from ti122110a080-3970.bb.online.no (bob@80.213.207.130) by mail.db.org with SMTP; 8 Jan 2004 00:43:38 -0000 Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - ASRG Research Agenda From: "B. Johannessen" To: ASRG In-Reply-To: <3FFC7352.20704@solidmatrix.com> References: <3FFC7352.20704@solidmatrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: http://db.org/ Message-Id: <1073522618.4215.108.camel@babe.h.db.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:43:38 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 21:00, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > > 1. PROBLEM ANALYSIS. > > b. Analysis of Current Solutions - inventory and analysis of current > > anti-spam solutions, their weaknesses and effectiveness. > > c. Analysis of Spam - analysis of persistent patterns in spam and > > spammer behavior that can be used to improve existing and propose > > new solutions. I've been working on some spam analysis (along with testing of current solutions) lately. I'll be releasing my findings as weekly and monthly reports. New reports will be announced at: http://db.org/spam/ So far I have data for 4 weeks, available at: http://db.org/spam/weekly/2004/01/ http://db.org/spam/weekly/2003/52/ http://db.org/spam/weekly/2003/51/ http://db.org/spam/weekly/2003/50/ This is still work in progress, so any feedback will be appreciated. Please direct comments not relevant to the ASRG to me personally or even better, join the /Origin of Spam/ mailing list. Bob -- -=[ B. Johannessen | bob@db.org -=- http://db.org/ | +4797152009 ]=- -=[ Mail & Spam - News, Drafts & Standards - http://db.org/blog/ ]=- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 20:08:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16730 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:08:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOeu-0005pZ-Kf for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:08:25 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0818OHj022407 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:08:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOeu-0005pK-FN for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:08:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16714 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:08:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOes-0004cv-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:08:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOcy-0004XW-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:06:25 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeObi-0004TA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:05:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeObe-0005JA-JR; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:05:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOaw-0005Hn-3a for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:04:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16667 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:04:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOau-0004PC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:04:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOZ1-0004MI-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:02:20 -0500 Received: from moebius2.space.net ([195.30.1.100]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOYQ-0004J5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:01:42 -0500 Received: (qmail 53795 invoked by uid 1013); 8 Jan 2004 01:01:41 -0000 From: Markus Stumpf To: Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard Message-ID: <20040108010141.GP1914@Space.Net> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: SpaceNet AG, Muenchen, Germany X-PGP-Fingerprint: 66 F3 75 79 01 D0 B8 5F 1A C7 77 88 4A B6 70 DF Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 02:01:41 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: > I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, > adopting anything else would take some justifying. Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam was injected into my system. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ h68-146-73-40.cg.shawcable.net:68.146.73.40 rbl-allowed: to Looking up 68.146.73.40 with whois.arin.net is fine: OrgAbuseEmail: internet.abuse@sjrb.ca ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let's try another one: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ customer-hmo-61-203.megared.net.mx:200.77.61.203 rejected: to badrcptto Comment: This IP address range is under LACNIC responsibility for further Comment: allocations to users in LACNIC region. Comment: Please see http://www.lacnic.net/ for further details, or check the Comment: WHOIS server located at whois.lacnic.net At least there is ReferralServer: whois://whois.lacnic.net $ whois -h whois.lacnic.net 200.77.61.203 and now? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The LACNIC example also holds for e.g. RIPE and leads to things like: remarks: --------------------------------------------------------- remarks: Please send abuse and spam notifications to abuse@inet.fi remarks: --------------------------------------------------------- trouble: SPAM/COMPLAINTS to: de-fp-btignite-abuse@bt.com trouble: SPAM/COMPLAINTS to other addresses will probably be ignored. remarks: ************************************************************ remarks: * ABUSE CONTACT: abuse@t-ipnet.de IN CASE OF HACK ATTACKS, * remarks: * ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, VIOLATION, SCANS, PROBES, SPAM, ETC. * remarks: ************************************************************ remarks: Please send abuse notification to abuse@telecomitalia.it (I think you get the idea) while other have no abuse contact at all. \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 "The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 20:19:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA17002 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:19:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOpU-0006Fl-UM for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:19:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i081JKoW024031 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:19:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOpS-0006FR-3M for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:19:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16993 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:19:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOpL-0004yd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:19:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOke-0004tU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:14:21 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOkL-0004qL-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:14:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOkK-00062j-QT; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:14:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeOib-00061F-GP for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:12:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16865 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:12:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOiZ-0004oR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:12:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOgi-0004jC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:10:16 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOes-0004Zf-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:08:22 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-434.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.75]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR5003EDCEJ3K@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:06:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - ASRG Research Agenda In-reply-to: <1073522618.4215.108.camel@babe.h.db.org> To: "B. Johannessen" , ASRG Message-id: <3FFCAD0C.4080604@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <3FFC7352.20704@solidmatrix.com> <1073522618.4215.108.camel@babe.h.db.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:06:20 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT B. Johannessen wrote: > On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 21:00, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > >>>1. PROBLEM ANALYSIS. >>>b. Analysis of Current Solutions - inventory and analysis of current >>>anti-spam solutions, their weaknesses and effectiveness. >>>c. Analysis of Spam - analysis of persistent patterns in spam and >>>spammer behavior that can be used to improve existing and propose >>>new solutions. > > > I've been working on some spam analysis (along with testing of current > solutions) lately. I'll be releasing my findings as weekly and monthly > reports. New reports will be announced at: > > http://db.org/spam/ > Bob, I wanted to let you that majority of the analysis work takes place in the analysis subgroup (http://asrg.kavi.com/apps/group_public/workgroup.php?wg_abbrev=analysis), which is headed by Terry Sullivan. I forwarded your message to their mailing list and I hope that this data will prove to be useful. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I ate your Web page. / Forgive me. It was juicy / And tart on my tongue." (MIT's 404 Message) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 20:38:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA17563 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:38:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeP7s-00078B-0f for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:38:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i081cJrA027410 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:38:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeP7r-00077t-IN for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:38:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA17551 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:38:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeP7p-0005o2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:38:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeP6A-0005kQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:36:35 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeP4p-0005e9-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:35:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeP4h-0006a5-4u; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeP46-0006YJ-Dg for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:34:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA17325 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:34:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeP43-0005Y8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:34:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeP0s-0005PL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:31:07 -0500 Received: from moebius2.space.net ([195.30.1.100]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeOxb-0005HK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:27:44 -0500 Received: (qmail 54692 invoked by uid 1013); 8 Jan 2004 01:27:33 -0000 From: Markus Stumpf To: John Levine Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - Define Spam Message-ID: <20040108012733.GQ1914@Space.Net> References: <20040105024615.5342.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040105024615.5342.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: SpaceNet AG, Muenchen, Germany X-PGP-Fingerprint: 66 F3 75 79 01 D0 B8 5F 1A C7 77 88 4A B6 70 DF Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 02:27:33 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 02:46:15AM -0000, John Levine wrote: > An exact definition spam is a political topic, not a technical one, > and is not within the purview of ASRG. I have read a article in a message board (german) and the author made the argument that spam is also a problem of context: http://www.heise.de/security/news/foren/go.shtml?read=1&msg_id=4831635&forum_id=51300 (I'll try do do a rough translation/interpretion of the examples). If I write a sentence even in this forum (e.g. in the sig) "it is cold out there so you should buy and wear warm clothes" it is neither advertising nor spam. It's simply a statement related to the current weather situation for most of the subscribers in the "winter" zone of this planet. Some may even interpret it as a well meaning hint. If the sender is the context changes caused by the sender of the message and a lot of people will make a relation to "sender is producing winter jackets" and the statement will be seen in a completely different light and some will interpret it as advertising. It also depends on the contents of the message. Sending this statement to a user in Alaska will probably produce a different reaction (even in terms of nuissance) than sending it to someone living near the equator (who by chance doesn't even know what "cold" means ;-)))) \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 "The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 20:52:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA18191 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:52:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePLa-0007j4-7p for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:52:30 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i081qUkD029692 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:52:30 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePLa-0007ip-3H for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:52:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA18169 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:52:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePLW-0006d7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:52:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AePJm-0006Xy-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:50:39 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePIS-0006Ra-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:49:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePII-0007UO-Tx; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:49:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePI2-0007SW-Gy for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:48:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA18012 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 20:48:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePHo-0006QU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:48:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AePG7-0006K1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:46:52 -0500 Received: from moebius2.space.net ([195.30.1.100]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePFN-0006BU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:46:05 -0500 Received: (qmail 55344 invoked by uid 1013); 8 Jan 2004 01:46:05 -0000 From: Markus Stumpf To: "John R. Levine" Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: [1] Why SPAM is worse in SMTP than in other protocols Message-ID: <20040108014605.GR1914@Space.Net> References: <20031222184415.F0B44170AC@mail.nitros9.org> <20031223045139.20440.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031223045139.20440.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: SpaceNet AG, Muenchen, Germany X-PGP-Fingerprint: 66 F3 75 79 01 D0 B8 5F 1A C7 77 88 4A B6 70 DF Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 02:46:05 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 04:51:39AM -0000, John R. Levine wrote: > problem. Why not? I'd think that it wouldn't be hard to write > spamware that sprinkled messages all over IRC? Why don't we see much > instant message spam (at least relative to e-mail spam)? Is it that > the popular IM systems are all closed with a central control point? *g* the vast majority of IRC users are bots so spmming them is not very productive ;-) In the 90s the were a lot of attempts to spam via IRC messages. However with UMODE +i (user is hidden) it's hard to get a list of users and UMODE +i became standard in most IRC clients very fast. Also with the penalty system you cannot send much messages and these are short and don't carry much information so it's hard to attract the "simple minded". As IRC was aimed to interactive communication it was easy to add the penalities as no one types with 10 KB/s. People that argued that they are transmitting data where pointed to FTP/HTTP. Also you only have one class of users so you don't need different ressource limits. You can't do this with SMTP any more, however. Think what would happen if you would restrict message sizes to 10 KB and tell ppl to send their DOC/XLS/MPG/... files via FTP/HTTP. And you can't treat all MTAs the same way with respect to connection limits: AOL outgoing MTAs have another message rate than the MTA of some.very.small.company. So you can't (and probably don't want to) treat them equally. \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 "The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 21:35:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19684 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:35:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQ0T-0001Cj-Av for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:34:45 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i082YjDu004623 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:34:45 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQ0T-0001CU-5G for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:34:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19553 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:34:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQ0Q-0001GK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:34:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AePya-0000rL-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:32:51 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePrp-0000VK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:25:49 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AePhx-0000rQ-0w for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:15:37 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePhO-0000Pb-HA; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:15:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePge-0000OE-Eu for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:14:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19140 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:14:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePgb-0000Ch-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:14:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AePej-00007d-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:12:17 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePcx-00000t-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:10:27 -0500 Received: (qmail 15507 invoked by uid 100); 8 Jan 2004 02:10:27 -0000 Message-ID: <20040108021027.15506.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: <005701c3d542$5a5fa000$6d02000a@MULDER> Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: tbartel@returnpath.net Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 8 Jan 2004 02:10:27 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >Should the abuse reporting standard also cover inquiries regarding email >that should be getting through but is not? It's a reasonable topic but I think we should drain one swamp at a time. The kind of stuff you'd put in a spam report is rather different from what you'd put in a non-delivery report. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY http://www.taugh.com _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 21:35:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19744 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:35:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQ0l-0001FB-Pi for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:35:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i082Z3R0004769 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQ0k-0001ES-Kl for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:35:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19609 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:34:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQ0h-0001JD-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:35:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AePyr-0000vQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:33:07 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePsV-0000Xq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:26:31 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AePbq-0000Gh-2L for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:09:18 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePbf-00007O-QU; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:09:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AePbS-0008Uy-PB for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:08:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA18881 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:08:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePbQ-0007iJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:08:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AePZn-0007Yz-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:07:11 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AePYe-0007Me-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 21:06:00 -0500 Received: (qmail 14800 invoked by uid 100); 8 Jan 2004 02:05:59 -0000 Message-ID: <20040108020559.14799.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: <3FFC6E34.9000307@solidmatrix.com> Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: research@solidmatrix.com Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 8 Jan 2004 02:05:59 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >How do you want to proceed with? Should we get a draft agenda or >description for the subgroup, and likely players, and start getting >people to join? Or do you want to wait until the AOL meeting? No reason to wait, let me look at my notes and see who the volunteers are. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 22:32:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21801 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:32:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQuJ-0003gH-7T for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:32:27 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i083WR5H014143 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:32:27 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQuJ-0003g2-3n for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:32:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21796 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:32:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQuF-0004rX-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:32:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQti-0004nr-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:31:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQrZ-0004kd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:29:37 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQqz-0003Nr-T7; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:29:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQqX-0003NK-AF for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:28:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21737 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:28:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQqP-0004i6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:28:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQnL-0004fF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:25:15 -0500 Received: from cpu2335.adsl.bellglobal.com ([207.236.16.58] helo=alph.hagenaars.com ident=mail) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQlX-0004cP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:23:23 -0500 Received: fromuser gj by alph.hagenaars.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AeQkv-0008Cl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:22:45 -0500 From: GertJan Hagenaars Cc: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard Message-ID: <20040108032245.GB31396@hagenaars.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> <20040108010141.GP1914@Space.Net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040108010141.GP1914@Space.Net> X-Files: The Truth is out there. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:22:45 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Apparently, Markus Stumpf wrote: % On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: % > I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, % > adopting anything else would take some justifying. % % Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? % The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam % was injected into my system. % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ % h68-146-73-40.cg.shawcable.net:68.146.73.40 rbl-allowed: % to % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In this case, how about abuse@68.146.73.40 as a first try? CHeers, GertJan. -- +++++++++++++ -------- +++++ --- ++ - +0+ + ++ +++ +++++ ++++++++ +++++++++++++ sed '/^[when][coders]/!d G.J.W. Hagenaars -- gj at hagenaars dot com /^...[discover].$/d Remembering Mike Carty 1968-1994 /^..[real].[code]$/!d UltrixIrixAIXHPUXSunOSLinuxBSD, nothing but nix ' /usr/dict/words I'm Dutch, what's _your_ excuse? _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 22:34:52 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21863 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:34:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQwD-0003ho-FJ for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:34:25 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i083YPoN014238 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:34:25 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQwD-0003hZ-AS for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:34:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21856 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:34:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQwA-0004wJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:34:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQuN-0004sb-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:32:31 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQtr-0004oB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:31:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQts-0003Xc-Vr; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:32:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeQtk-0003XR-4U for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:31:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21769 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:31:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQtb-0004mj-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:31:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQqT-0004k0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:28:29 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeQp6-0004fi-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:27:04 -0500 Received: from art.lextek.com (c-67-161-220-214.client.comcast.net[67.161.220.214]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <20040108032558013005mgp3e>; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 03:25:59 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040107202312.03ab7368@mail.1s.com> X-Sender: PollardA@mail.1s.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 To: "Jon Kyme" , Asrg@ietf.org From: Art Pollard Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:25:57 -0700 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 >I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, >adopting anything else would take some justifying. Perhaps. However, when I am in the "reporting mood", I often find places which do not use "abuse@somedomain.com" and instead use anything from postmaster@, support@, spam@, or a whole host of other addresses. They often have this information buried on some support web page making it all the more difficult to find. On the other hand, perhaps that is the point. In either case, while most use abuse@somedomain.com, there still are surprisingly many who do not. -Art -- Art Pollard http://www.lextek.com/ Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 7 22:56:52 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA22534 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:56:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeRHW-0004bY-27 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:56:26 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i083uQNB017694 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:56:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeRHV-0004bJ-Qv for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:56:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA22512 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:56:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeRHS-00060Q-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:56:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeRFk-0005vh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:54:36 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeREG-0005q4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:53:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeRED-0004PW-0q; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:53:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeRDe-0004Om-5m for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:52:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA22386 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:52:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeRDa-0005mg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:52:22 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeRBo-0005iD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:50:32 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeRB5-0005dB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:49:47 -0500 Received: (qmail 4927 invoked by uid 100); 8 Jan 2004 03:49:47 -0000 Message-ID: <20040108034947.4926.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040107202312.03ab7368@mail.1s.com> Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: pollarda@lextek.com Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 8 Jan 2004 03:49:47 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >>I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, >>adopting anything else would take some justifying. > >Perhaps. However, when I am in the "reporting mood", I often find places >which do not use "abuse@somedomain.com" and instead use anything from >postmaster@, support@, spam@, or a whole host of other addresses. You know, that's exactly why I run abuse.net. In any event, if we have a standard format, the networks that want it will surely tell us where to send it. Maybe it'll be abuse, maybe it'll make sense to invent a new address like autoabuse, but that's a detail. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY http://www.taugh.com _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 01:12:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26209 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:12:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTP2-0001zZ-Ht for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:12:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i086CKlC007654 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:12:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTP2-0001zN-C3 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:12:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26186 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:12:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTOz-0004Dx-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:12:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTNB-0004Am-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:10:26 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTM1-000479-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:09:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTLp-0001ed-4G; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:09:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTL8-0001e8-8j for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:08:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26123 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:08:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTL5-00044h-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:08:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTJB-000429-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:06:18 -0500 Received: from sense-sea-megasub-1-311.oz.net ([216.39.145.57] helo=angel.commercialventvac.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTIb-0003zo-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:05:41 -0500 Received: from [192.168.2.9] (jyw [192.168.2.9]) by angel.commercialventvac.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0864uIH007175 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:04:56 -0800 From: Jeff_Silverman To: Asrg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1073541895.7490.29.camel@jyw> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Asrg] Has anybody thought about using Kerberos to authenticate E-mail senders Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:04:56 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit People, I came to this discussion late, so if this topic has been brought up and dismissed already, please inform me. It occurs to me that one way to deal with the SPAM issue is to force senders to authenticate themselves. The sender's MTA would have to query a kerberos server and get a ticket. The ticket has to be sent with the message somehow. The receiver's MTA then checks with the kerberos server to verify the ticket. Then, the receiver's MTA would handle the message according to policy set by the receiver. There are several possibilities: 1) The sender is unknown (this covers backwards compatibility and also failures in the authenticator) 2) The sender authenticated as a known spammer 3) The sender authenticated as a known trusted party 4) The sender sent a fraudulent message 5) The sender authenticated but is not known to be trustworthy or untrustworthy. I haven't a clue what the details of this scheme might entail. Is there some fatal objection I don't see? Many thanks, Jeff -- Jeff_Silverman _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 01:35:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26677 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:35:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTkf-0002lO-EB for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:34:41 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i086YfVO010616 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:34:41 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTkf-0002l9-9Y for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:34:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26667 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:34:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTkc-000558-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:34:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTj1-000502-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:33:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeThK-0004rF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:31:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTh8-0002Tt-4P; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:31:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeTgy-0002T5-1w for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:30:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26485 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:30:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTgp-0004qh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:30:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTb2-0004ej-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:24:44 -0500 Received: from cpu2335.adsl.bellglobal.com ([207.236.16.58] helo=alph.hagenaars.com ident=mail) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeTWZ-0004Sa-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:20:07 -0500 Received: fromuser gj by alph.hagenaars.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AeTW1-0000gS-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:19:33 -0500 From: GertJan Hagenaars To: Asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] Has anybody thought about using Kerberos to authenticate E-mail senders Message-ID: <20040108061933.GA466@hagenaars.com> References: <1073541895.7490.29.camel@jyw> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1073541895.7490.29.camel@jyw> X-Files: The Truth is out there. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:19:33 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Apparently, Jeff_Silverman wrote: % People, % % I came to this discussion late, so if this topic has been brought up % and dismissed already, please inform me. % % It occurs to me that one way to deal with the SPAM issue is to force % senders to authenticate themselves. The sender's MTA would have to % query a kerberos server and get a ticket. The ticket has to be sent % with the message somehow. The receiver's MTA then checks with the % kerberos server to verify the ticket. % % Then, the receiver's MTA would handle the message according to policy % set by the receiver. There are several possibilities: % % 1) The sender is unknown (this covers backwards compatibility and also % failures in the authenticator) % 2) The sender authenticated as a known spammer % 3) The sender authenticated as a known trusted party % 4) The sender sent a fraudulent message % 5) The sender authenticated but is not known to be trustworthy or % untrustworthy. ad 1. Necessary, yes. ad 2. I don't think you'll every authenticate a sender as a known spammer by themselves. ad 3. The "known trusted party" sounds like the peering agreement that Microsoft / yahoo / AOL are pursuing. ad 4. Someone masquerading as someone else (or trying to get into systems that do not implement the scheme properly). Potential spammer, depending on what they're trying to do. ad 5. Lots and lots of smaller companies / ISPs etc. I think the interesting question becomes: who decides if someone is a spammer and who decides if someone is trustworthy? Is this different from community updated RBLs? CHeers, GertJan. -- +++++++++++++ -------- +++++ --- ++ - +0+ + ++ +++ +++++ ++++++++ +++++++++++++ sed '/^[when][coders]/!d G.J.W. Hagenaars -- gj at hagenaars dot com /^...[discover].$/d Remembering Mike Carty 1968-1994 /^..[real].[code]$/!d UltrixIrixAIXHPUXSunOSLinuxBSD, nothing but nix ' /usr/dict/words I'm Dutch, what's _your_ excuse? _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 04:34:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14380 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:34:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWYY-0004OY-36 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:34:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i089YLET016888 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:34:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWYX-0004OJ-OZ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:34:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14351 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:34:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWYU-0004ir-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:34:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWWa-0004d2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:32:21 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWSt-0004Qh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:28:31 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWSP-0003wj-2A; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWRW-0003vs-Uq for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:27:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14155 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:27:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWRP-0004OM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:26:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWNB-0004Fs-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:22:37 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWKz-00049R-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:20:21 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeWKY-0005uK-Gt for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:19:54 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20040108010141.GP1914@Space.Net> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:19:54 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: > > I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by > rfc2142, > > adopting anything else would take some justifying. > > > Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? > The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam > was injected into my system. > > I believe the question of inadequate whois data is being addressed elsewhere. Or is your proplem that operators solicit reports pertaining to spam at one particular address (not 'abuse') yet support the 'abuse' address for other network abuse? -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 04:42:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14609 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:42:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWgK-0005Fd-Kt for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:42:24 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i089gOvq020179 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:42:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWgK-0005FO-5T for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:42:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14600 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:42:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWgH-000536-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:42:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWeR-0004zo-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:40:28 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWdA-0004wA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:39:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWd4-0004rq-0l; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:39:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWcP-0004i2-1t for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:38:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14489 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:38:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWcM-0004tE-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:38:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWaQ-0004of-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:36:19 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWYX-0004jJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:34:21 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeWYY-0008Mp-Hm; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:34:22 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040107202312.03ab7368@mail.1s.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "Art Pollard" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:34:22 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > >I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by > rfc2142, > >adopting anything else would take some justifying. > > > Perhaps. However, when I am in the "reporting mood", I often find places > which do not use "abuse@somedomain.com" and instead use anything from > postmaster@, support@, spam@, or a whole host of other addresses. No, but they should. > > In either case, while most use abuse@somedomain.com, there still are > surprisingly many who do not. > Well, there's a topic for research - what proportion of operators don't support 'abuse' for this purpose? What proportion don't support 'abuse' at all? How many have got themselves on rfc-ignorant :-) A reporting standard would help operators route reports to whatever internal units they wish. Provision of the abuse address is a community requirement. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 04:44:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14667 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:44:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWiM-0005Lj-Hf for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:44:30 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i089iTSK020551 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:44:29 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWiK-0005LO-Ns for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:44:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14658 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:44:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWiH-00058M-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:44:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWgP-00054a-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:42:30 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWf3-00050l-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:41:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWf3-00056M-A7; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:41:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeWeN-00054A-HG for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:40:23 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA14534 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:40:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWeK-0004yN-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:40:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWcS-0004ua-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:38:25 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeWb6-0004rK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 04:37:01 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeWb8-0000Ql-5w for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:37:02 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20040108034947.4926.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:37:02 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 John Levine: >You know, that's exactly why I run abuse.net. > And very useful it is - which reminds me - I may have a few more domains to register - I'll just check :-) -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 07:12:59 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA19398 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:12:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeZ1b-0003YJ-Tj for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:12:32 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08CCVFn013649 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:12:31 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeZ1b-0003Y4-Q7 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:12:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA19379 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:12:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZ1b-0005Cu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:12:31 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeYzl-00058B-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:10:38 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeYyM-00053I-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:09:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeYyD-0003Mg-4Z; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:09:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeYxe-0003KD-Jd for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:08:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA19216 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:08:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeYxY-0004zD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:08:21 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeYvd-0004sd-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:06:21 -0500 Received: from pv117.warszawa.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl ([217.99.5.117]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeYti-0004oa-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:04:22 -0500 Received: from priv.onet.pl (local1 [192.168.0.1]) by anfi.org (8.13.0.PreAlpha4/8.13.0.PreAlpha4) with ESMTP id i08B7ERi003064 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:07:14 +0100 Message-ID: <3FFD39DF.2080506@priv.onet.pl> From: Andrzej Filip Organization: It is for me to know and for you to find out User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en, pl MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse reporting email [Was: Abuse Reporting standard] References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040106221430.02b17ea0@mail.1s.com> <20040108010141.GP1914@Space.Net> In-Reply-To: <20040108010141.GP1914@Space.Net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:07:11 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Markus Stumpf wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: > >>I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, >>adopting anything else would take some justifying. > > > Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? > The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam > was injected into my system. > [...] One possible solution would be to require RP (responsible person) DNS records in reverse DNS zones of */24 and */16 nets. Two contact addresses make sense: * abuse * netmaster e.g. abuse IN RP ip-abuse.some.domain. abuse-txt-record.some.domain. netmaster IN RP ip-netmaster.some.domain. nm-txt-record.some.domain. @ IN RP mailbox.some.domain. txt-record.some.domain. The last record (with name the same as domain name) would be used as fall back for both abuse and netmaster. It would allow using wildcard RP records with exceptions for some addresses (or some */24 nets in case of wildcard */16 RP records). Implementation path/enforcement: Some MTAs may refuse to accept messages from nets with no RP records and bad record in spamcop (or similar). -- Andrzej [pl>en: Andrew] Adam Filip http://anfi.freeshell.org/ anfi@priv.onet.pl anfi@xl.wp.pl [former: anfi@Box43.pl] _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 07:53:08 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA21491 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:53:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeZeR-0005ZQ-4X for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:52:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08Cqd5G021406 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:52:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeZeQ-0005Z8-W8 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:52:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA21463 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:52:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZeL-0000O8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:52:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZcd-0000J4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:50:48 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZbA-0000Bl-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:49:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeZau-0005Lr-NP; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:49:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeZaL-0005Kl-MK for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:48:25 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA21203 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:48:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZaK-00005R-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:48:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZYS-0007ft-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:46:28 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeZWc-0007Oh-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:44:34 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i08CiUM7029851; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:44:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:44:30 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011132CE@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'GertJan Hagenaars'" , Asrg@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Asrg] Has anybody thought about using Kerberos to authentica te E-mail senders MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 04:44:30 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Operating Kerberos across trust domains is not very practical - unless you want to create a master kerberos domain operator role. I am sure VeriSign would be very happy running a root kerberos server for the Internet if we could persuade people to let us... There is a tendency for people to suggest Kerberos as an alternative for PKI, completely ignoring the fact that the complexity of PKI is the result of having to bridge trust domains. There is certainly no intrinsic difficulty to managing two keys instead of one. Symmetric key operations do offer a performance advantage and there may well be a role for a symmetric authentication scheme to run in parallel with a public key based scheme - we do not require non-repudiation after all. In practice however it appears that SSL accelerators are cheap enough to make the processing costs of PKI acceptable in this application. > -----Original Message----- > From: GertJan Hagenaars [mailto:asrg@hagenaars.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:20 AM > To: Asrg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Asrg] Has anybody thought about using Kerberos to > authenticate E-mail senders > > > Apparently, Jeff_Silverman wrote: > % People, > % > % I came to this discussion late, so if this topic has > been brought up > % and dismissed already, please inform me. > % > % It occurs to me that one way to deal with the SPAM > issue is to force > % senders to authenticate themselves. The sender's MTA would have to > % query a kerberos server and get a ticket. The ticket has to be sent > % with the message somehow. The receiver's MTA then checks with the > % kerberos server to verify the ticket. > % > % Then, the receiver's MTA would handle the message > according to policy > % set by the receiver. There are several possibilities: > % > % 1) The sender is unknown (this covers backwards > compatibility and also > % failures in the authenticator) > % 2) The sender authenticated as a known spammer > % 3) The sender authenticated as a known trusted party > % 4) The sender sent a fraudulent message > % 5) The sender authenticated but is not known to be trustworthy or > % untrustworthy. > > ad 1. Necessary, yes. > ad 2. I don't think you'll every authenticate a sender as a known > spammer by themselves. > ad 3. The "known trusted party" sounds like the peering > agreement that > Microsoft / yahoo / AOL are pursuing. > ad 4. Someone masquerading as someone else (or trying to get into > systems that do not implement the scheme properly). > Potential spammer, > depending on what they're trying to do. > ad 5. Lots and lots of smaller companies / ISPs etc. > > I think the interesting question becomes: who decides if someone is a > spammer and who decides if someone is trustworthy? Is this different > from community updated RBLs? > > CHeers, > GertJan. > > -- > +++++++++++++ -------- +++++ --- ++ - +0+ + ++ +++ +++++ > ++++++++ +++++++++++++ > sed '/^[when][coders]/!d G.J.W. Hagenaars -- gj at > hagenaars dot com > /^...[discover].$/d Remembering Mike Carty 1968-1994 > /^..[real].[code]$/!d > UltrixIrixAIXHPUXSunOSLinuxBSD, nothing but nix > ' /usr/dict/words I'm Dutch, what's _your_ excuse? > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg > _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 09:33:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA24187 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:33:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AebDb-00022R-9d for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:33:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08EX3vB007829 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:33:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AebDb-00022C-4R for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:33:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA24174 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:33:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AebDI-0005Us-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:32:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AebAB-0005K4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:29:31 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeb5Q-00054D-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:24:36 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeb4r-0001eB-LX; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:24:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeb4S-0001Tx-WA for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:23:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA24037 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:23:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeb4M-00052Z-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:23:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeazT-0004rH-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:18:28 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeaxo-0004id-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:16:44 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AeaxP-0007kQ-92; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:16:19 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FFD39DF.2080506@priv.onet.pl> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse reporting email [Was: Abuse Reporting standard] To: "Andrzej Filip" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:16:19 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Andrzej Filip: > Markus Stumpf wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: > > > >>I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by > rfc2142, > >>adopting anything else would take some justifying. > > > > > > Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? > > The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam > > was injected into my system. > > [...] > > > One possible solution would be to require RP (responsible person) DNS > records in reverse DNS zones of */24 and */16 nets. > > Two contact addresses make sense: > * abuse > * netmaster > This is an interesting idea - but somewhat orthogonal to a standard for the *matter* of an abuse report. Which is, I guess, why you forked the thread. This is the kind of data traditionally held in the whois - standardisation in this area has been (is) difficult - I hear. Some of the registries and registrars have "difficulties". As I understand it, RP gives us someone to contact in response to a host malfunction - I'm not sure that your proposed usage stretches this a bit? I'd like to sidestep all this by assuming that the reporter has obtained (by an unspecified mechanism) a suitable address as the target for the report. If a reliable and foolproof mechanism can be put in place for the address discovery - so much the better. But it's a separate issue. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 12:49:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03891 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:49:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeeGs-00058h-Qs for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:48:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08HmcC3019749 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:48:38 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeeGs-00058R-Lq for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:48:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03860 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:48:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeGr-0002wm-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:48:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeF5-0002qV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:46:48 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeDl-0002ju-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:45:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeeDQ-0004ui-QI; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:45:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeeDK-0004tJ-W2 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:44:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03735 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:44:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeDJ-0002iT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:44:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeBc-0002aN-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:43:13 -0500 Received: from rx168.warszawa.cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl ([213.77.234.168]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeAY-0002Q3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:42:07 -0500 Received: from priv.onet.pl (local1 [192.168.0.1]) by anfi.org (8.13.0.PreAlpha4/8.13.0.PreAlpha4) with ESMTP id i08GjYRi007788 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:45:34 +0100 Message-ID: <3FFD892C.3040801@priv.onet.pl> From: Andrzej Filip Organization: It is for me to know and for you to find out User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en, pl MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse reporting email [Was: Abuse Reporting standard] References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:45:32 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jon Kyme wrote: > Andrzej Filip: > >>Markus Stumpf wrote: >> >>>On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by >> >>rfc2142, >> >>>>adopting anything else would take some justifying. >>> >>> >>>Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? >>>The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam >>>was injected into my system. >>>[...] >> >> >>One possible solution would be to require RP (responsible person) DNS >>records in reverse DNS zones of */24 and */16 nets. >> >>Two contact addresses make sense: >>* abuse >>* netmaster > > This is an interesting idea - but somewhat orthogonal to a standard for the > *matter* of an abuse report. Which is, I guess, why you forked the thread. I would not call it orthogonal, "where should the report go" is a separate but closely related issue worth starting a sub-thread. > This is the kind of data traditionally held in the whois - standardisation > in this area has been (is) difficult - I hear. Some of the registries and > registrars have "difficulties". IMHO problems with single simple worldwide whois set of standards and keeping all the whois data "up to date" justify creation of simpler "email contact" standard. Whois data are managed by "a third party", reverse DNS is managed almost always by ISP or direct IP zone user. Abuse reporting standard makes sense if it would allow automatic submission/processing including fully automatic finding of right destination of the report. > As I understand it, RP gives us someone to contact in response to a host > malfunction - I'm not sure that your proposed usage stretches this a bit? May be a little bit. The idea is to put email contact info into reverse DNS zones [*.in-addr.arpa] - IMHO RP record is the best choice for such task. > I'd like to sidestep all this by assuming that the reporter has obtained > (by an unspecified mechanism) a suitable address as the target for the > report. If a reliable and foolproof mechanism can be put in place for the > address discovery - so much the better. > But it's a separate issue. So treat this sub-thread as a separate thread :) -- Andrzej [pl>en: Andrew] Adam Filip http://anfi.freeshell.org/ anfi@priv.onet.pl anfi@xl.wp.pl [former: anfi@Box43.pl] _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 13:33:03 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05468 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:33:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeexO-0006yi-IS for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:32:34 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08IWYqY026818 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:32:34 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeexO-0006yT-Ep for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:32:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05445 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:32:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeexM-0005K3-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:32:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeeva-0005Dr-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:30:43 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeeu4-000588-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:29:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeetw-0006gs-Nb; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:29:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeetX-0006gB-7q for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:28:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05274 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:28:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeetU-00055Y-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:28:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeere-00050S-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:26:39 -0500 Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeeqF-0004v2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:25:11 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: AhCj+ldWQo4ZLAuzw7NyZg 1073586259 Received: from elvey.com (adsl-63-195-86-147.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.195.86.147]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A11A4A144D; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:24:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FFDA051.7050302@elvey.com> From: Matthew Elvey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard References: <20040107050546.10361.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> In-Reply-To: <20040107050546.10361.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 10:24:17 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=HABEAS_SWE autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/6/2004 9:05 PM, John Levine sent forth electrons to convey: >>On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format >>(see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) >> >> I'm BCCing George, the author in case he's not aware; bet he's interested. > >I'd certainly like to come up with a standard abuse report, although I >have to say the proposal on that web page leaves a lot to be desired. > This is probably why it ran out of steam. There's been no further discussion for ages, so I think there would be no objection to ASRG taking over. A MIME or XML format seems problematic, as most reports come from end users. How are end users going to file reports in a format that their MUAs don't readily support? (Readily. Yes, they can type XML directly, or manually add various MIME attachments to each report, but that's unreasonable.) Let's KISS. There should be one format, and it should be simple enough that an abuse desk's claim that it was too complex would strike most anyone as unreasonable too. There'd be a bunch of predefined types, but others would be allowed (could be IANA managed, e.g. like the Sieve mail filter extension namespace, but that's probably overkill). Format: AR 2.0 (A new suggestion I'm making: Include a string that would identify an automatically parsable report.) Attn: abuse@Yahoo.dom Type: dropbox Re: nofoolin@yahoo.dom etc. -------------------------------- Ideally we should work with the developers of *Abuse-queue management tools*, e.g. * Abacus commercial ticketing/tracking system designed specifically for abuse desks * Kana commercial Customer Relations Management tool * Remedy commercial Customer Relations Management tool * Request Tracker (RT and RT2) open-source ticketing tool * AbusePipe automated abuse handling software. source: http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/352.html ----------------------------------- How spamcop chooses where to route reports is discussed at http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/94.html in some detail. Read how it uses netblock size, whois records, and abuse.net entries. Given the volume of reports SpamCop sends, it's probably as good as it gets, and builds on rfc 2142. (Please, no SpamCop criticism based on hearsay or *outdated* info on how it used to work; on-topic comments on how you know it works currently only, Please!) Excerpt: *...[For Large Networks,] *SpamCop now bases its routing of reports mainly on "whois records" - ... Normally, when SpamCop encounters a NOC role account such as "hostmaster@ or noc@" in the whois records, it will check with abuse.net for a valid abuse contact instead of sending reports to your NOC role account. If... *Abuse.net* All abuse desks should register an email address for the domains they manage with abuse.net. SpamCop will use this information to try to route reports correctly. We... -------------------------------- As an appendix, here's Spamcop's format. It's well defined enough to be readily parsable. Starts off: -- [ SpamCop V1.3.4 ] This message is brief for your comfort. Please use links below for details. -- Then content depends on the type of abuse, e.g. : -- Email from 0.0.0.0 / Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:06:50 -0800 (PST) http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?i=z5554050munged4c99f7z [ Offending message ] -- and/or -- Spamvertised website: http://ama.sent.dom http://ama.sent.dom is 0.0.0.0; Fri, 26 Dec 2003 06:17:47 GMT http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?i=z56477868munged53cf9bd88517fez [ Additional comments from recipient ] [ Offending message ] -- and/or -- User-targeted report, see notes, if any. http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?i=z4944731munged36df8b9z -- Here's a format that SpamCop formerly sent; last I checked, it doesn't report Spamvertised email addresses any more. -- http://spamcop.net/w3m?i=z254904157zb4amunged1c30c3e9cz Spamvertised email address: immediatecash@mail.dom >> immediatecash@mail.dom is 0.0.0.0; Wed, 21 May 2003 08:12:33 GMT > > -- Followed by the (often munged) SUBE header and body. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 14:17:02 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06623 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:17:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aefdy-0000ON-V9 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:16:35 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08JGYnj001501 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:16:34 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aefdy-0000O8-Qw for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:16:34 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06545 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:16:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aefdk-00006x-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:16:20 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aefaz-0007hF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:13:30 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefXz-0007Ni-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:10:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AefXf-00008t-4B; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:10:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AefSm-00087L-W2 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:05:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06199 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:04:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefSa-0007BD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:04:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AefQK-0006z4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:02:28 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefJV-0006an-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:55:25 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-376-098.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.183.108]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR6004BCPRQ4W@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 18:52:43 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard In-reply-to: <3FFDA051.7050302@elvey.com> To: Matthew Elvey Cc: ASRG Message-id: <3FFDA6F6.1060402@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <20040107050546.10361.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> <3FFDA051.7050302@elvey.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:52:38 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Matthew Elvey wrote: > On 1/6/2004 9:05 PM, John Levine sent forth electrons to convey: > >>> On NANAE, there's a group working on a "standard spam reporting" format >>> (see http://www.tmisnet.com/~strads/spam/bcp.html ) >>> > > I'm BCCing George, the author in case he's not aware; bet he's interested. > >> >> I'd certainly like to come up with a standard abuse report, although I >> have to say the proposal on that web page leaves a lot to be desired. >> > This is probably why it ran out of steam. There's been no further > discussion for ages, so I think there would be no objection to ASRG > taking over. > ... We will be forming a subgroup on this shortly. Stay tuned for more information. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Why are both drug addicts and computer aficionados both called users?" (Clifford Stoll) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 14:41:04 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07621 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:41:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeg1E-0002CP-LC for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:40:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08JeaVt008447 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:40:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeg1E-0002CA-F8 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:40:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07592 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:40:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeg1B-0001bx-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:40:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AefzY-0001Xk-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:38:53 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aefxu-0001Rr-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:37:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aefxm-0001Wf-Fm; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:37:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AefxQ-0001Ug-S8 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:36:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07400 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:36:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefxO-0001OA-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:36:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AefvS-0001IJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:34:39 -0500 Received: from black.infobro.com ([63.71.25.39] helo=infobro.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefuY-0001EH-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:33:42 -0500 Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:33:17 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:33:12 -0500 Message-ID: <01C3D5F4.5848FA20.eric@infobro.com> From: "Eric D. Williams" To: "'Markus Stumpf'" , Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard Organization: Information Brokers, Inc. X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:24:08 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RATWARE_EMWAC autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This makes no difference toward the adoption of a proposed methodology. I.e. all vendors do not implement every RFC which is recommended for an IP host, however this does not affect interoperability. Likewise, citing or 'adoption' of RFC2142 concepts or the RFC itself, in an anti-spam architecture is not limiting to the scope or effectiveness of that architecture. Whether one or many methods are supported for determination of abuse reporting, I think, will be implementation specific and should be left as such. Adoption of such a 'standard' into the technical specifications of a working solution should appropriately reference such RFCs for the sake of a common point of reference. For example, not everyone uses abuse@somedomain.tld, however the idea of an address for reporting this class of 'incident' is a widely supported concept though not a requirement. If an implementation uses some specific methodology that method should be described and/or its assumptions enumerated, e.g. "this software...uses RFC2142 recommended e-mail addresses for determination of inappropriate use reporting." -e On Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:02 PM, Markus Stumpf [SMTP:maex-lists-spam-ietf-asrg@Space.Net] wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 12:02:51PM +0000, Jon Kyme wrote: > > I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, > > adopting anything else would take some justifying. > > Yes, but abuse @ whatdomain? > The most reliable information is the IP address from which the spam > was injected into my system. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > h68-146-73-40.cg.shawcable.net:68.146.73.40 rbl-allowed: > to > Looking up 68.146.73.40 with whois.arin.net is fine: > OrgAbuseEmail: internet.abuse@sjrb.ca > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Let's try another one: > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > customer-hmo-61-203.megared.net.mx:200.77.61.203 rejected: > to badrcptto > Comment: This IP address range is under LACNIC responsibility for further > Comment: allocations to users in LACNIC region. > Comment: Please see http://www.lacnic.net/ for further details, or check > the > Comment: WHOIS server located at whois.lacnic.net > > At least there is > ReferralServer: whois://whois.lacnic.net > > $ whois -h whois.lacnic.net 200.77.61.203 > > and now? > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > The LACNIC example also holds for e.g. RIPE and leads to things like: > > remarks: --------------------------------------------------------- > remarks: Please send abuse and spam notifications to abuse@inet.fi > remarks: --------------------------------------------------------- > > trouble: SPAM/COMPLAINTS to: de-fp-btignite-abuse@bt.com > trouble: SPAM/COMPLAINTS to other addresses will probably be ignored. > > remarks: ************************************************************ > remarks: * ABUSE CONTACT: abuse@t-ipnet.de IN CASE OF HACK ATTACKS, * > remarks: * ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, VIOLATION, SCANS, PROBES, SPAM, ETC. * > remarks: ************************************************************ > > remarks: Please send abuse notification to abuse@telecomitalia.it > > (I think you get the idea) while other have no abuse contact at all. > > \Maex > > -- > SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 > Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 > "The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally > proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin" > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 15:30:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07620 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:41:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeg1F-0002Cg-7w for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:40:37 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i08Jebm1008464 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:40:37 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeg1F-0002CR-0s for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:40:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07595 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:40:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeg1C-0001c2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:40:34 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AefzZ-0001Xs-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:38:54 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aefxu-0001Rs-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:37:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aefxn-0001Wo-CU; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:37:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AefxT-0001V8-0O for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:36:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA07397 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:36:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefxN-0001Nx-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:36:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AefvR-0001IB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:34:38 -0500 Received: from black.infobro.com ([63.71.25.39] helo=infobro.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AefuX-0001EH-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:33:41 -0500 Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:33:07 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:33:02 -0500 Message-ID: <01C3D5F4.5263BAF0.eric@infobro.com> From: "Eric D. Williams" To: ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard Organization: Information Brokers, Inc. X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:54:50 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RATWARE_EMWAC autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agreed. I would contend it is a Well Known Methodology (WKM) and thus should be definitively (IMHO) refuted prior to deprecation or replacement by a new standard or method. This is unless the proposed standard can be demonstrably proven to represent an enhancement or clarification of an existing BCP or WKM. just my $.02, -e On Wednesday, January 07, 2004 7:03 AM, Jon Kyme [SMTP:jrk@merseymail.com] wrote: > > Art Pollard> > > standard reporting address should be specified. Most have settled on > > abuse@domainname.com but not all and it is only an informal standard at > > best. > > > > I think "abuse" is pretty much the de facto standard, supported by rfc2142, > adopting anything else would take some justifying. > > > > > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 8 19:26:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19916 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:26:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AekTP-0006IB-3C for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:25:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i090PxrI024180 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:25:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AekTO-0006Ht-Tp for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:25:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19858 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:25:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AekTN-0002Yu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:25:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AekOo-0002Kf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:21:14 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AekJk-000264-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:16:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AekIo-0005fn-Iu; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:15:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AekHo-0005fG-9g for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:14:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA19548 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:13:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AekHh-0001zZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:13:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AekCo-0001mT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:08:51 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aek7x-0001Yz-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:03:50 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Aek7Z-000090-D1; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 00:03:25 +0000 In-Reply-To: <3FFDA051.7050302@elvey.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard To: "Matthew Elvey" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 00:03:25 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > A MIME or XML format seems problematic, as most reports come from end > users. How are end users going to file reports in a format that their > MUAs don't readily support? ( Well, the obvious way of supporting some format not directly supported by a standard MUA is to make some other tool available... ...as spamcop does - as you say. Make it simple for the reporter, sure, but by making good tools. The report format needs to fit the needs of the recipient - primarily. > > -------------------------------- > Ideally we should work with the developers of *Abuse-queue management > tools*, e.g. > Yes indeed. See above. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 9 02:15:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA15208 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 02:15:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeqrG-00064I-BB for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:15:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i097F2ja023312 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 02:15:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeqrD-00063j-IT for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:14:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA15153 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 02:14:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeqrA-0001w1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:14:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeqpx-0001qf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:13:42 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeqn3-0001hj-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:10:41 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AeqmP-0005K3-Rp; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:10:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aeqkh-000500-B8 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:08:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10659 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 02:08:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AeqkT-0001f5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:08:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeqin-0001Yc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:06:18 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeqe2-0001MC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 02:01:22 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-389-380.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.235.26]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR700AKRNEU4J@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 06:59:23 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <3FFE5146.1090906@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 2. Analysis - Would DNS/TLD policies affect spammers? Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 01:59:18 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DOMAIN_BODY autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT According to a post on NANOG list, Verisign will change the serial number format and "minimum" value in the .com and .net zones' SOA records on or shortly after 9 February 2004. According to the post "this serial number format change is in preparation for potentially more frequent updates to these zones." This would mean that .COM and .NET may begin to be updated more frequently than now (currently twice a day). Some have argued (http://www.icannwatch.org/articles/04/01/05/1453206.shtml) that the recently developed preference of spammers for .BIZ names is due to the real-time update ability of the .BIZ TLD. My question is whether there is any data out there that can show this to be true, and second, whether any kind of DNS policies such as longer time periods for nameserver changes, would make any impact on spam vs. impact on legit users. Relevant NANOG post is here: http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg00794.html Related InfoWorld story here: http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/01/08/HNverisigncom_1.html Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I want to know G-d's thoughts... the rest are details" (Albert Einstein) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 9 11:38:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12459 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:38:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aezdt-00068R-Ds for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:37:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i09GbnhS023571 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:37:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aezdt-000684-2R for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:37:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12373 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:37:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aezds-0004w2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:37:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aezbu-0004dH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:35:47 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AezYg-0004GV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:32:26 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AezYH-0005YG-HU; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:32:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AezPd-0005Bz-8T for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:23:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA10841 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:22:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AezPS-00038D-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:22:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AezJq-0002iD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:17:06 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AezBX-0002Hu-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:08:31 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-570.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.211]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR8005KXCQ5JI@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 16:06:09 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <3FFED16E.7010604@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - New website for the ASRG Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:06:06 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT The official ASRG website is being switched over to: http://asrg.sp.am Bear with us while we work out some of the kinks and spelling mistakes :) Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 9 12:35:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16371 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:35:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af0XN-0001QG-0k for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:35:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i09HZ60v005439 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:35:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af0XH-0001PS-Ir for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:35:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16230 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:35:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af0XF-0002H4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:35:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Af0TZ-0001Rz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:31:16 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af0PB-0000m0-01 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:26:41 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Af0Bs-0005Uk-EC for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:12:56 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af0Az-0007uM-79; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:12:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af0AH-0007tL-Sh for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:11:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14435 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:11:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af0A6-0007Ko-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:11:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Af038-0006mv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 12:03:55 -0500 Received: from gp.word-to-the-wise.com ([64.71.176.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aeztx-0006Ft-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 11:54:25 -0500 Received: by gp.word-to-the-wise.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 5689A90000D; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 08:47:56 -0800 (PST) From: Steve Atkins To: asrg@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040109164756.GA23909@gp.word-to-the-wise.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id MAA14436 Subject: [Asrg] Conference on Email and Anti-Spam Preliminary Call for Papers Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 08:47:56 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Forwarded from another list: The First Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS) Preliminary Call for Papers =20 July 30, 31 and August 1, 2004 Mountain View, CA Immediately Follows AAAI 2004 =20 http://www.ceas.cc=20 In Cooperation with AAAI and=20 IEEE Technical Committee on Security and Privacy General Conference Chair: David Heckerman (Microsoft Research)=20 Program Co-Chairs: Tom Berson (Anagram Laboratories) Joshua Goodman (Microsoft Research) Andrew Ng (Stanford University) The Conference on Email and Anti-Spam invites the submission of papers for its first meeting, held in cooperation with AAAI (the American Association for Artificial Intelligence). Papers are invited on all aspects of email and spam, including research papers, industry reports, and law and policy papers. Research: Computer science oriented academic-style research Industry: Descriptions of important or innovative products Law and Policy: Legal and policy papers Research papers include experimental or theoretical, academic-style papers on all aspects of email and spam, including but not limited to: Techniques for stopping spam, including Machine learning techniques Postage techniques (HIPs or computation,=20 possibly in response to a challenge) Disposable email addresses Protocols for sender authentication and verification Digital signatures Proof of group membership Role and significance of spam as a malware vector Spam traceback New features for email systems Automatic foldering Sorting, clustering, or searching email,=20 including both machine learning techniques=20 and user interface research. Advanced calendaring and scheduling Digital rights management research as applied to email Public Key Infrastructure in an email environment Industry papers describe products or systems (commercial or open source) and matters of commercial or practical interest. Papers claiming excellent results should include good experimental or theoretical evidence supporting the claims. Example topics include Industry cooperation for stopping spam New standards and interoperability=20 For spam For calendaring and scheduling Public key infrastructure for encryption and identity Digital rights management New products, especially those with novel features Legal and policy papers focus on topics such as What new laws or social institutions are most appropriate=20 for spam or other email topics Legal strategies for stopping spam The CAN-SPAM act and potential FTC regulations International legal approaches What can/should be done about Phisher scams=20 and other email scams The economics of spam Email and identity: who should control it? Email and privacy, email at work. In all three areas, submissions closely related to email, such as instant messaging, chat rooms, usenet groups, and mailing lists will also be given full consideration. KEY DATES: ----------- Paper Submission Deadline: April 16 Notification of acceptance: June 1 Final camera-ready version of papers: July 1 Main Conference: July 30 and 31 Workshops: August 1 REQUIREMENTS: Papers may be of one of two types: extended abstracts (two pages) or full papers (at most 8 pages, including appendices and bibliography). Work may not have been previously published in any conference or journal, and simultaneous submissions are not allowed. Papers will be reviewed by a committee from academic and industrial research centers. Papers should be 11 point in single column format. Accepted papers will be made freely available on the web, and will be published on CD-ROM. Authors will retain copyright of their work. A call for workshop proposals will follow this call for papers. Suggestions for panel discussions are also welcome, and should be sent to the Program Chairs at information@ceas.cc. PROGRAM COMMITTEE Mart=EDn Abadi (University of California, Santa Cruz) Josh Alspector (AOL) Richard Clayton (University of Cambridge) Cynthia Dwork (Microsoft Research) Tom Fawcett (HP Labs) Eric Horvitz (Microsoft Research) John Lafferty (CMU)=20 David D. Lewis (Ornarose, Inc. and David D. Lewis Consulting) Miles Libbey (Yahoo! Inc.) Andrew McCallum (U. Mass. Amherst) Kevin McCurley (IBM Almaden) Ralph Merkle (Georgia Tech) John Platt (Microsoft Research) Jon Praed (Internet Law Group) Mehran Sahami (Google and Stanford) Neil Schwartzman (PeteMoss SpamNews) Diana Smetters (PARC) Ian Smith (Intel Research Seattle)=20 William S. Yerazunis (MERL) CONTACT: information@ceas.cc _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 9 14:58:07 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29958 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:58:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af2lH-0003QF-Pv for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:57:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i09JvdST013149 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:57:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af2lH-0003Q0-Kc for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:57:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29603 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:57:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2jH-0004CT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:55:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2ME-0004Bz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:31:49 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af1YC-0003mh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:40:04 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Af0y1-0007TP-OR for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:02:41 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af0xn-0004jE-Ue for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:02:27 -0500 Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:02:27 -0500 Message-ID: <20040109180227.9164.86686.Mailman@www1.ietf.org> Subject: ietf.org mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@www1.ietf.org To: asrg-web-archive@ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes X-Ack: no Sender: mailman-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mailman-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mailman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your ietf.org mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, asrg-request@ietf.org) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. *************************************************************************** Note Well All statements related to the activities of the IETF and addressed to the IETF are subject to all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026, which grants to the IETF and its participants certain licenses and rights in such statements. Such statements include verbal statements in IETF meetings, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to * the IETF plenary session, * any IETF working group or portion thereof, * the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG, * the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB, * any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices, * the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function Statements made outside of an IETF meeting, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not subject to these provisions. *************************************************************************** If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@www1.ietf.org. Thanks! Passwords for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org: List Password // URL ---- -------- asrg@ietf.org kgrfgf https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/options/asrg/asrg-web-archive%40ietf.org From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 9 15:26:59 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09786 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:26:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af3DC-0004kW-Bw for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:26:30 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i09KQUEj018250 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:26:30 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af3DC-0004kF-55 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:26:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09720 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:26:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af3DA-0000c6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:26:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2gO-0003pn-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:52:38 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2KF-0003e0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:29:43 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af2JY-0002d2-PQ; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:29:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af2Fk-0002Z2-Pd for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:25:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26890 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:25:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2Fg-0002Ii-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:25:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Af1Rj-0002Ug-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:33:25 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af1FC-0007Lh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:20:26 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Af1FD-000898-2Q for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:20:27 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-570.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.211]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR80055HIU9UR@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 18:18:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <3FFEF062.7030808@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Changes to Posting Guidelines Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:18:10 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Since we have a new research agenda, please follow it from now on when posting to the list. Research agenda can be found at: http://asrg.sp.am/about/research_agenda.shtml Posting cuidelines can be found at: http://asrg.sp.am/about/lists.shtml Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "But in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes" (Benjamin Franklin) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 10 18:51:43 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24453 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:51:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfSsw-0000P8-0t for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:51:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0ANpH1W001548 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:51:17 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfSsv-0000Ot-TL for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:51:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA24432 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:51:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfSss-0005rp-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:51:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfSlE-0005E7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:43:20 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfSfp-0004qv-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:37:45 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfSf7-0007rA-4A; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:37:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Af2lx-0003RZ-LM for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:58:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA00149 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:58:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2gS-0003rF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:52:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Af2KM-0003fL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:29:53 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Af1Xo-0003mh-01 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:39:41 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Af1IM-0001Zd-0W for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:23:42 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-570.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.211]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HR8005U8J1IJI@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Jan 2004 18:22:35 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <3FFEF167.6020904@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - New Subgroups being formed Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:22:31 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT We are beginning to form new subgroups in line with the new charter and research agenda. Subgroup information can be found at (http://asrg.sp.am/about/subgroups.shtml) as follows: Active Subgroups o Analysis & Characterization (A&C) - applies empirical and quantitative methods to problems and issues surrounding spam. o Envelope Verification (ENV-VERIFY) - researches solutions dealing with authetication and verification of the SMTP envelope Subgroups in Formation o Abuse Reporting Standards - researches standard formats and protocols for reporting email and network abuse o Best Current Practices (BCP) - researches best practices for email administrators, end-users and software developers o Filtering Standards (FILTERING) - researches filtering standards for dynamic updating and interaction with MTAs o Inventory of Problems - research problems with the current email architechture o Message Verification (MSG-VERIFY) - researches solutions dealing with verification and authetication in the email messages and headers Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I want to know G-d's thoughts... the rest are details" (Albert Einstein) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 10 19:59:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27313 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:59:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfTwC-0003mI-L5 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:58:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0B0wich014521 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:58:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfTwC-0003m8-HY for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:58:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27295 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:58:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTwA-0001n4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:58:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTum-0001fr-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:57:17 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTs4-0001RA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:54:28 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfTrd-0003Wj-IY; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:54:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfTih-0003LD-Ga for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:44:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA26890 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:44:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTia-00014C-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:44:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfThE-0000yu-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:43:17 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTaa-0000ke-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:36:24 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-394-596.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.255.102]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRA00I4IUWEQJ@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 00:33:54 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 0. General - New Subgroups being formed In-reply-to: <3FFEF167.6020904@solidmatrix.com> To: ASRG Cc: Dave Crocker Message-id: <400099F0.8080102@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <3FFEF167.6020904@solidmatrix.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:33:52 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Yakov Shafranovich wrote: .... > Active Subgroups .... > o Envelope Verification (ENV-VERIFY) - researches solutions dealing with > authetication and verification of the SMTP envelope Two corrections - first, this subgroup is being formed (LMAP and CRI are folding into it), and second its called "SMTP Session Verification (SMTP-VERIFY)". The website has been updated: http://asrg.sp.am/about/subgroups.shtml Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I want to know G-d's thoughts... the rest are details" (Albert Einstein) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 10 20:11:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA28058 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:11:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfU7i-0004Wu-Qs for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:10:38 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0B1Ac0B017405 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:10:38 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfU7i-0004We-M5 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:10:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA28004 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:10:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfU7g-0002a8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:10:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfU60-0002TG-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:08:53 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfU4E-0002KF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:07:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfU4C-000446-SK; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:07:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfTxs-0003on-77 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:00:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA27396 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:00:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTxq-0001rv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:00:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTvy-0001l2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:58:30 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfTuW-0001VY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:57:00 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-394-596.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.255.102]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRA0041HVUQY0@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 00:54:31 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40009EC4.4020608@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Old ASRG site has been taken down Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:54:28 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT All of the information on the old site has been removed, please update your links. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I want to know G-d's thoughts... the rest are details" (Albert Einstein) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 11 15:29:51 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA15977 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:29:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfmD4-0000ea-5M for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:29:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0BKTMf9002513 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:29:22 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfmD3-0000eS-VL for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:29:22 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA15973 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:29:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfmCx-0003ol-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:29:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfmBA-0003lx-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:27:25 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Afm7V-0003iD-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:23:37 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Afm6u-0000Sa-T3; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:23:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Afm6X-0000SA-RZ for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:22:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA15825 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:22:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Afm6W-0003fZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:22:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Afm4b-0003bh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:20:37 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.202.64]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Afm2r-0003Vw-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:18:49 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with ESMTP id <2004011120181901600njgooe>; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 20:18:19 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D14186A2; Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:18:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4001AF8A.5050308@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Watson Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard References: <200401071830.52852.famous-asrg@nutters.org> In-Reply-To: <200401071830.52852.famous-asrg@nutters.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:18:18 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brett Watson wrote: > Another item of research in an abuse reporting standard ought to be making > that mechanism itself abuse-resistant. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has > been simultaneously joe-jobbed and been the subject of fraudulent abuse > complaints based on the joe job. This is the problem LMAP addresses. If you implement LMAP, and mail claiming to be from your domain that originates from a non-listed host is accepted, the recipient cannot reasonably hold you responsible, as you've done what you can to prevent abuse of your domain name. If you mean that someone sent spam that advertised some site of yours illegitimately, that's something else altogether. I don't think we have any sort of proposal dealing with that. Phil _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 13 01:30:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15633 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:30:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgI4C-0006Vy-RP for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:30:21 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0D6UKM5025036 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:30:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgI4C-0006Vi-NU for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:30:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15621 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:30:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgI49-0005He-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:30:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgI2N-0005E2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:28:28 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgI1L-00059E-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:27:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgI0y-0006Is-Ix; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:27:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgI05-0006H8-RJ for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:26:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15425 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:26:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgI02-000556-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:26:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgHy6-00051D-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:24:03 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com ([24.94.166.122]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgHwB-0004xY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:22:03 -0500 Received: from CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com (CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com [65.28.14.235]) by ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id i0D6M0H6019028 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 00:22:00 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - DNS + PKI - Yahoo's "Domain Keys" From: david nicol To: anti-spam research group In-Reply-To: <3FD545DD.7010401@solidmatrix.com> References: <20031208183344.1857A16CD1@mail.nitros9.org> <3FD4E090.8000808@solidmatrix.com> <000701c3bdf9$d856cf20$6401a8c0@FAMILY> <6.0.0.22.2.20031208194023.03bd6958@mira-sjc5-6.cisco.com> <3FD545DD.7010401@solidmatrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1073974919.1086.73.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 13 Jan 2004 00:21:59 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 21:47, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > Mark Baugher wrote: > [..] > > It is also not clear how this plays with the Microsoft/AOL signing > > proposal that was also in the news. > > > [..] > > Yahoo is part of the MSFT/AOL consortium, and it looks like it is the > exact same proposal. The question is why Yahoo is marketing it all by > itself... > > Yakov Because they can. Currently all yahoo web-mail originates from MTAs named *.mail.yahoo.com (which is most excellent) but a signature in the headers to declare that the mail really is coming from someone who is using the yahoo web mail interface would be entirely welcome. Have they started including them yet? I just sent myself a message from yahoo web-mail and it had nothing in the headers that looked like a signed hash. Did they run out of processor power (SHA1-ing all that traffic is going to take a little bit of CPU) or what? -- david nicol "Take your time." -- Allan Quaterman _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 13 20:29:09 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA26122 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:29:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgZpo-0006gx-QN for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:28:41 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0E1Sek6025717 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:28:40 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgZpo-0006gi-Lr for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:28:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA26103 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:28:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgZpm-0002GB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:28:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgZo3-0002Cf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:26:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgZn7-000284-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:25:53 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgZmI-0006V7-Qz; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:25:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgZKb-0005Gi-Qg for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:56:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA25209 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:56:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgZKZ-0001Eg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:56:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgZIh-0001B9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:54:28 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgZGu-00015A-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:52:36 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-363-398.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.134.1]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRG0008ZFQKRG@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 00:52:01 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG , asrg-rmx@ntp.org Message-id: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:51:57 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT This just got published by the IETF drafts admin, another LMAP variant: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-laforet-deasey-imxrecords-00.txt Abstract: "Unwanted Email ("SPAM") is a constantly growing scourge of the Internet. SPAM takes full advantage of the open system that was created in the spirit of cooperation that represents the original underpinnings of the Internet. Understanding that making airtight mail systems without completely destroying old software, the authors of this proposal considered the continued operation of these legacy systems while tightening up the current standards. This new proposal calls for a new DNS resource record type and a new standard of operation for organization mail- exchangers. Using this new resource record along with other standard DNS resources provides system operators to minimize exploitable inbound SPAM pathways into their systems." Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 13 22:18:27 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA00092 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:18:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgbXb-0003T9-Vf for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:18:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0E3Hxnk013329 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:17:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgbXb-0003Su-Qk for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:17:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA00085 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:17:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgbXT-0006qz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:17:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgbVl-0006lD-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:06 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgbPS-0006gE-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:09:34 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgbOv-0002vm-KB; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:09:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgbOM-0002v2-Ty for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:08:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA29871 for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:08:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgbOJ-0006bP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:08:23 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgbMM-0006Rt-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:06:23 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgbKQ-0006FJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:04:22 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2004011403035201100lia9ee>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 03:03:52 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74E47186A2; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:03:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4004B198.8060701@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yakov Shafranovich Cc: ASRG , asrg-rmx@ntp.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" References: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> In-Reply-To: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:03:52 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > This just got published by the IETF drafts admin, another LMAP variant: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-laforet-deasey-imxrecords-00.txt OK, I just read it. My specific thoughts: 1. It does not contain a strong rationale for what it proposes. 2. It does not contain a specific technical specification for what it proposes. 3. It's quite clearly within the purview of this research group (cf. abstract). 4. It's never been previously mentioned in this group. 5. There's nothing to see here. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along. Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 04:43:35 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA08138 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:43:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AghYJ-0004jU-Gk for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:43:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0E9h73L018186 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:43:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AghYI-0004jD-A9 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:43:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA08133 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:43:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AghYF-0005qW-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:43:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AghWr-0005kq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:41:38 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AghVf-0005a2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:40:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AghVP-0004Ry-VF; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:40:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AghUq-0004Mb-Pt for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:39:32 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA07682 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:39:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AghUn-0005Tf-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:39:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AghSF-00052L-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:36:53 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AghIF-0004Sg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 04:26:31 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AghHr-0000UT-Ee for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:26:07 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4004B198.8060701@zemos.net> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:26:07 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > Yakov Shafranovich wrote: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-laforet-deasey-imxrecords-00. > txt It seems rather "derivative"... and it's missing a required section. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 11:09:29 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25269 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:09:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgnZn-0008EB-3b for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:09:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0EG93au031621 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:09:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgnZm-0008Dw-VD for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:09:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25264 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:08:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgnZh-00024k-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:08:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgnYm-00022J-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:08:01 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgnY4-0001zM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:07:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgnXp-0007jR-Ej; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:07:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgnXf-0007iP-WD for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:06:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25130 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:06:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgnXd-0001x5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:06:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgnWn-0001uc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:05:58 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgnVr-0001sA-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:04:59 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD682170D6 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:06:36 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:26:07 GMT." Message-Id: <20040114160636.CD682170D6@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:06:36 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 "Jon Kyme" wrote: > > Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-laforet-deasey-imxrecords-00. > > txt > > It seems rather "derivative"... and it's missing a required section. It's pretty much content-free, and doesn't reference any of the pre-existing RMX-style proposals. So they've made it clear that they're not going to read or reference other peoples proposals, but they're publishing this one for other people to read. Nice. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 16:23:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14469 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgsTn-00018e-PS for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0ELNBWQ004372 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgsTn-00018R-Ll for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14354 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgsTl-0003JL-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgsS9-00032P-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:21:30 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgsRG-0002va-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:20:34 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AgsMz-0004ue-QR for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:16:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgsLu-0000dX-RD; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:15:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgsLo-0000cy-M5 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:14:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA13449 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:14:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgsLm-00028x-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:14:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgsKo-00022y-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:13:54 -0500 Received: from moebius2.space.net ([195.30.1.100]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgsJu-0001v6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:12:59 -0500 Received: (qmail 94293 invoked by uid 1013); 14 Jan 2004 21:12:51 -0000 From: Markus Stumpf To: ASRG Message-ID: <20040114211251.GR44583@Space.Net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: SpaceNet AG, Muenchen, Germany X-PGP-Fingerprint: 66 F3 75 79 01 D0 B8 5F 1A C7 77 88 4A B6 70 DF Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:12:51 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 I just stumbled over it, don't know if you have seen this. Press release: http://www.openwave.com/us/news_room/press_releases/2004/20040114_opwv_maagw_0114.htm Looks like there is a (new?) group The Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group (MAAWG) [ ... ] Openwave has taken a leadership role along with Abranet, Bell Canada, Bell South, Cox, Internet Initiative Japan Inc. (IIJ), IIJ America Inc., NII Holdings, Inc, NTL, TELUS Communications, plus ten other communication services providers and ISPs to bring together a group of global operators committed to developing a plan for collaborating on the growing issues of carrier-class Spam protection and anti-abuse. [ ... ] See http://www.openwave.com/us/openwave_iq/standard_forums/maagw/ \Maex -- SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 "The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 21:27:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26826 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxDx-0008IK-I9 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0F2R9F1031876 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxDx-0008Hz-C5 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26794 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxDu-0007hC-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxD0-0007f8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:26:10 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxCO-0007dF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:25:32 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxBv-0007iO-Vr; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:25:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxB4-0007hN-Hf for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:24:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26698 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:24:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxB1-0007aS-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:24:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxA5-0007Z1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:23:09 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-01.rdc-kc.rr.com ([24.94.166.115]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Agx9T-0007XN-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:22:31 -0500 Received: from CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com (CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com [65.28.14.235]) by ms-smtp-01.rdc-kc.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id i0F2MLbQ021643; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:22:22 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" From: david nicol To: Yakov Shafranovich Cc: ASRG , asrg-rmx@ntp.org In-Reply-To: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> References: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1074133340.4855.337.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 14 Jan 2004 20:22:21 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am mystified as to why that is in and the OMX proposal was not, in fact the rfc editor did not even write back about it. Do they like it when you propose new amd unnecessary resource records? On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 18:51, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > This just got published by the IETF drafts admin, another LMAP variant: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-laforet-deasey-imxrecords-00.txt -- david nicol "Rabbit troop sucks!" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 21:27:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26862 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxE2-0008Jd-0C for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0F2RDMr031959 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxE1-0008JO-Qz for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26809 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxDz-0007hu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:27:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxD6-0007gA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:26:16 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxCp-0007dc-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:25:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxCr-0007wQ-Cg; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:26:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxC2-0007is-8n for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:25:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26739 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:25:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxBz-0007cU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:25:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxB4-0007av-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:24:10 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com ([24.94.166.122]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxAM-0007ZJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:23:26 -0500 Received: from CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com (CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com [65.28.14.235]) by ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id i0F2NOH6010237; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:23:26 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" From: david nicol To: Alan DeKok Cc: anti-spam research group In-Reply-To: <20040114160636.CD682170D6@mail.nitros9.org> References: <20040114160636.CD682170D6@mail.nitros9.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1074133403.4829.339.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 14 Jan 2004 20:23:23 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 10:06, Alan DeKok wrote: > It's pretty much content-free, and doesn't reference any of the > pre-existing RMX-style proposals. So they've made it clear that > they're not going to read or reference other peoples proposals, but > they're publishing this one for other people to read. Nice. > > Alan DeKok. It is concise and cute, it does that have that going for it. -- david nicol "Rabbit troop sucks!" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 21:35:38 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27243 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:35:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxLi-0000re-Ks for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:35:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0F2ZAgd003316 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:35:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxLi-0000rP-Gz for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:35:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27220 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:35:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxLf-0000Is-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:35:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxKp-0000HZ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:34:16 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxKb-0000FT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:34:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxKb-0000e8-OS; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:34:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxHm-0000Pi-2l for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:31:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA26990 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:31:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxHj-00003t-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:31:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxGk-000019-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:30:03 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxGC-0007m4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:29:30 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-367-519.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.150.10]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRI007CJEVS3R@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 02:28:51 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" In-reply-to: <1074133340.4855.337.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> To: david nicol Cc: ASRG Message-id: <4005FAD3.3070201@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> <1074133340.4855.337.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:28:35 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT This is an Internet draft which is not checked at all except for having required sections. In the words of one IETFer "you can send you laundry list as an Internet Draft and it will get published". It is different from the RFC Editor, Internet drafts are working documents and are not expected to be checked. When someone wants one published, they take an existing Internet Draft and send it over to the RFC Editor. Yakov david nicol wrote: > I am mystified as to why that is in and the OMX proposal was not, in > fact the rfc editor did not even write back about it. > > Do they like it when you propose new amd unnecessary resource records? > > > On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 18:51, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > >>This just got published by the IETF drafts admin, another LMAP variant: >> >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-laforet-deasey-imxrecords-00.txt > > ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I ate your Web page. / Forgive me. It was juicy / And tart on my tongue." (MIT's 404 Message) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 21:49:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27552 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxZC-0001kJ-7t for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0F2n64Q006705 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxZC-0001k4-2K for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27549 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxZ9-0000dl-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxYB-0000dC-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:48:04 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxXG-0000ck-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:47:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxXB-0001aq-FR; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:47:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxWI-0001Yg-25 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:46:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27536 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:46:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxWF-0000bY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:46:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxVH-0000b8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:45:03 -0500 Received: from cpu2335.adsl.bellglobal.com ([207.236.16.58] helo=alph.hagenaars.com ident=mail) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxVG-0000ao-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:45:02 -0500 Received: fromuser gj by alph.hagenaars.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AgxV9-0001k6-00 ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:44:55 -0500 From: GertJan Hagenaars To: david nicol Cc: ASRG , asrg-rmx@ntp.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" Message-ID: <20040115024455.GA6658@hagenaars.com> References: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> <1074133340.4855.337.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1074133340.4855.337.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> X-Files: The Truth is out there. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:44:55 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Apparently, david nicol wrote: % % I am mystified as to why that is in and the OMX proposal was not, in % fact the rfc editor did not even write back about it. Maybe that proposal got filtered out by his SPAM filters? CHeers, GertJan. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 14 21:52:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27635 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:52:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Agxc9-0001zk-3a for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:52:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0F2q9sM007662 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:52:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Agxc8-0001zV-TJ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:52:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27627 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:52:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Agxc6-0000iP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:52:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxbA-0000hX-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:51:08 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Agxb4-0000gV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:51:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Agxb5-0001ox-Lq; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgxaD-0001nt-8V for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:50:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27591 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:50:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxaA-0000fd-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:50:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxZC-0000eU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:49:07 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com ([24.94.166.122]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgxYz-0000dT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:48:53 -0500 Received: from CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com (CPE-65-28-14-235.kc.rr.com [65.28.14.235]) by ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id i0F2mrH6024705; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:48:53 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" From: david nicol To: Yakov Shafranovich Cc: anti-spam research group In-Reply-To: <4005FAD3.3070201@solidmatrix.com> References: <400492AD.3050101@solidmatrix.com> <1074133340.4855.337.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> <4005FAD3.3070201@solidmatrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1074134932.8101.342.camel@plaza.davidnicol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 14 Jan 2004 20:48:52 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I sent them one and it did not get published. Maybe I should send it again. On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 20:28, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > This is an Internet draft which is not checked at all except for having > required sections. In the words of one IETFer "you can send you laundry > list as an Internet Draft and it will get published". -- david nicol "Rabbit troop sucks!" _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 15 04:09:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA20447 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:09:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah3Uw-00068C-St for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:09:07 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0F995fU023552 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:09:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah3Uv-00067n-9D for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:09:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA20344 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:09:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah3Us-0005hv-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:09:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah3To-0005X9-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:07:56 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah3ST-0005O4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 04:06:33 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Ah3Id-000586-BD for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:56:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah3IJ-0004j6-B4; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:56:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ah3Hj-0004hn-2t for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:55:27 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA19931 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:55:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah3Hg-00058O-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:55:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah3Go-00056M-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:54:31 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ah3GI-00053f-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:53:58 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Ah3GI-0006wD-TB for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 08:53:58 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4005FAD3.3070201@solidmatrix.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 08:53:58 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > This is an Internet draft which is not checked at all except for having > required sections. In the words of one IETFer "you can send you laundry > list as an Internet Draft and it will get published". > So where's the security section - or did I miss it? -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 15 19:10:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA09668 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:10:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhHYe-0004vf-O3 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:09:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0G09qcG018943 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:09:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhHYe-0004vS-KN for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:09:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA09653 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:09:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhHYb-0006cO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:09:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhHXh-0006aU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:08:54 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhHWo-0006YE-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:07:58 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhHVs-0004Qz-JV; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:07:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhHHF-0003bf-Ev for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:51:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09054 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:51:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhHHC-0005tD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:51:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhHGL-0005r4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:50:58 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhHFx-0005ns-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:50:33 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-387-692.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.228.137]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRK001CM27792@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 23:50:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" In-reply-to: To: Jon Kyme Cc: ASRG Message-id: <40072725.8060707@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:49:57 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Jon Kyme wrote: >>This is an Internet draft which is not checked at all except for having >>required sections. In the words of one IETFer "you can send you laundry >>list as an Internet Draft and it will get published". >> > > > So where's the security section - or did I miss it? > Security is not required for Internet Drafts, see: http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 16 01:56:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA20140 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:56:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhNti-0006B5-FS for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:56:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0G6u20Q023744 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:56:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhNti-0006At-A1 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:56:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA20134 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:55:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhNtf-0007VM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:55:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhNsl-0007Tw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:55:04 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhNs9-0007Ry-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:54:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhNrl-00060G-Bv; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:54:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhNp8-0005uR-Cj for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:51:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA20030 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:51:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhNp5-0007H6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:51:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhNnu-0007FN-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:50:03 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhNnn-0007DQ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:49:55 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-198.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.207.40]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRK002T5LKX8Q@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 06:48:38 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40078945.6020103@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Soliciting Volunteers for Subgroups Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:48:37 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ASRG Members, We are forming subgroups in line with the new charter, and are seeking volunteers. Each subgroup has specific goals and targeted participants, which are described on the homepage of each subgroup. All subgroups currently being formed and active have a closed membership policy. To join, please contact the ASRG chairs, contact information can be found on the ASRG homepage: http://asrg.sp.am. We expect all of these to start next month depending on the feedback we receive and interest of the community. Feel free to forward this message along to interested parties. The list of the subgroups is as follows (http://asrg.sp.am/about/subgroups.shtml): --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o Abuse Reporting Standards - researches standard formats and protocols for reporting email and network abuse Homepage: http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/abuse_reports.shtml) o Analysis & Characterization (A&C) - applies empirical and quantitative methods to problems and issues surrounding spam Homepage: http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/analysis.shtml o Best Current Practices (BCP) - researches and documents best practices for spam management Homepage: http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/bcp.shtml o Filtering Standards (FILTERING) - researches filtering standards for dynamic updating and interaction with MTAs Homepage: http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/filtering.shtml o Inventory of Problems - research problems with the current email architechture that facilitate spam http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/problems.shtml o Message Verification (MSG-VERIFY) - researches solutions dealing with verification and authetication in the email messages and headers http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/msg_verify.shtml o SMTP Session Verification (SMTP-VERIFY) - researches solutions dealing with authetication and verification of the SMTP session (will encompass the old LMAP and CRI subgroups) http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/smtp_verify.shtml --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, Anti-Spam Research Group (ASRG) of the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) ASRG Homepage: http://asrg.sp.am ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send" (Jon Postel) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 16 02:23:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03605 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOJt-0001GL-B5 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:05 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0G7N5sw004847 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOJt-0001G6-3w for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03517 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOJp-0000nW-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOIr-0000ka-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:22:01 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOI3-0000iq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:21:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOHx-0000sf-RK; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:21:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOF2-00008y-35 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:18:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03066 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:18:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOEy-0000Yk-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:18:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOE0-0000Wq-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:17:00 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhODB-0000UB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:16:09 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-198.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.207.40]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRK00DD7MR3KW@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 07:13:56 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40078F31.8040605@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 3c. Message Verification - Description of New Subgroup Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:13:53 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT This information can also be found at: http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/msg_verify.shtml --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description: This subgroup will research solutions for verifying and authenticating email messages and header information Goals: 1. Research different approaches to doing message verification (Project Lumos, TEOS, DK, PKI, etc.). 2. Research into how to make sure that a message verification system does not divide the Internet into first and second class citizens (i.e. people who paid for certificates and people who did not). 3. Provide one or more draft charters for an IETF WG and associated documents. 4. Research pros and cons of message verification vs. SMTP session verification. Status: Currently in formation, will be starting in February of 2004. Membership: This subgroup has a closed membership policy, to join contact the ASRG chairs. Participants: o IETF and Internet experts knowledgeable in SMTP, DNS and other relevant protocols o People knowledgeable in architechtural issues surrounding email and the Internet, and with experience in deploying, managing and changing large scale systems o Security experts, especially knowledgable in securing large scale systems and PKI o ISPs and MTA administrators o Developers of MTAs and MUAs o Developers of filters --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send" (Jon Postel) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 16 02:23:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03604 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOJs-0001Fv-3t for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0G7N4rn004821 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOJr-0001Fg-Sa for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03512 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOJo-0000nI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:23:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOIq-0000kS-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:22:01 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOI2-0000io-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:21:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOHw-0000sM-C1; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:21:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhOF2-000093-ON for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:18:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03069 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:18:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOEz-0000Yp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:18:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhOE0-0000Wy-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:17:01 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhODB-0000UB-01 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:16:10 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-198.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.207.40]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRK00DOQMRXKW@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 07:14:26 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40078F4D.1010808@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - Description of New Subgroup Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 02:14:21 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Existing CRI and LMAP subgroup will be folded into this subgroup. This information can also be found at: http://asrg.sp.am/subgroups/smtp_verify.shtml --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description: This subgroup will research approaches for authenticating and verifying the SMTP session Goals: 1. Research pros and cons of different approaches to SMTP Session Verification (LMAP, DRIP, MTAMARK, DK, C/R, PKI, etc.). This will include dealing with issues of forwarders, roaming clients, making sure that PKI-based approaches do not discriminate against smaller entities, etc. 2. Research the issue of how verification of the SMTP session information still allows forgery of the "From" address, and different approaches to deal with it (this will overlap with Message Verification). 3. Provide one or more draft charters for an IETF WG and associated documents. 4. Research pros and cons of doing verification at different steps of the SMTP transaction (connect time, HELO, MAIL FROM, DATA, etc.). Status: Two previous subgroups, CRI and LMAP are being folded into this subgroup. Both have been active since Fall of 2003 until January of 2003. This subgroup is currently in formation, and will restart in February of 2004. Chairs: LMAP subgroup was headed by Alan Dekok, CRI subgroup was headed by Eric Dean. Currently, this subgroup has no leadership and it is in formation. Membership: CRI and LMAP subgroups had a closed membership policy. This subgroup has a closed membership policy as well, to join contact the ASRG chairs. Participants: o IETF and Internet experts knowledgeable in SMTP, DNS and other relevant protocols o People knowledgeable in architechtural issues surrounding email and the Internet, and with experience in deploying, managing and changing large scale systems o Security experts, especially knowledgable in securing large scale systems and PKI o ISPs and MTA administrators o Developers of MTAs and MUAs o Developers of filters --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 16 04:54:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA07097 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:54:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhQg4-0000Jg-MR for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:54:08 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0G9s8ng001212 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:54:08 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhQg4-0000JT-4t for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:54:08 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA07077 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:54:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhQg1-0006i3-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:54:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhQf5-0006fu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:53:07 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhQeB-0006e7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:52:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhQe2-00007b-Ie; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:52:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhQdI-00006s-Pi for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:51:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA07034 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:51:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhQdF-0006bC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:51:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhQcG-0006ZX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:50:12 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhQbw-0006X2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:49:52 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AhQbx-0002DS-2p for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:49:53 +0000 In-Reply-To: <40072725.8060707@solidmatrix.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:49:53 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > >>This is an Internet draft which is not checked at all except for having > >>required sections. In the words of one IETFer "you can send you laundry > >>list as an Internet Draft and it will get published". > >> > > > > > > So where's the security section - or did I miss it? > > > > YS> Security is not required for Internet Drafts, see: > Point taken - thank you. > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt > Yes, I've read that - it requires only the mandatory statement(s), an abstract, contact info, filename and date. A draft that supplied only these items would be pretty silly wouldn't it? I can't believe that the community wants to waste time looking at things like that. However, in these *guidelines* reference is made to to RFC2223 which does, of course, require a security section. I don't see why anyone needs to submit a draft (presumably with the intent benefiting from community review and comment so that they can work it up for a RFC) which doesn't have at least RFC *form*. I think most people would expect that an ID is a "draft" for an RFC. I realise that this is a matter for the RFC editor function (and the IAB) and not strictly relevant here. On a more relevant point: Nowadays, everyone has got a "solution for the spam problem", many of them even get written down as IDs. Some of these are clearly half-baked. Producing a ID roughly in RFC form is so trivially easy that I can't see any point of asking us to read things that aren't in that form. Of course, our (Eric Williams' rather) requirements ID holds that security must be considered. I'd say that any proposal that doesn't even mention security can be "knocked-back" right away. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 16 20:04:53 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA08294 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:04:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ahesy-0000oe-Bl for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:04:24 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0H14OUm003132 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:04:24 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhesW-0000o4-Cj for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:04:24 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA08254 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:03:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhesP-0001Zt-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:03:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aheq3-0001Qk-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:01:24 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aheo0-0001KK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:59:16 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ahemm-0000Fc-Ot; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:58:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhemV-0000FJ-2j for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:57:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08151 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:57:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhemL-0001Gr-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:57:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhekO-0001Cp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:55:33 -0500 Received: from mail1.nber.org ([207.113.108.7]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aheid-00016L-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:53:43 -0500 Received: from mail1 (root@localhost) by mail1.nber.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id i0H0rF1m018237 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:53:16 -0500 Received: from nber5.nber.org (nber5.nber.org [207.113.108.99]) by mail1.nber.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0H0rCfg018212; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:53:12 -0500 From: Daniel Feenberg To: Markus Stumpf cc: "Marc A. Pelletier" , Brett Watson , asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? In-Reply-To: <20031216230048.GH51606@Space.Net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:45:22 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Markus Stumpf wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:13:03AM -0500, Daniel Feenberg wrote: > > Perhaps you are confused by lax terminology. When anti-spammers speak of > > filtering port 25, they mean packets destined to port 25 on the remote > > system. That is the only port that accepts mail from strangers on most > > systems. > > If you start to block port 25 outgoing people will start to make wide > use of SRV records, because a lot of receiving MTAs will /want/ to > talk to users behind port 25 blocked networks. > With SRV records you don't need well-known ports any longer, but you > specify the port your SMTP speaking MTA is listening on in the SRV > record itself. > Port 25 blocking rendered useless. > Useless is perhaps too strong a word. If some MTA operators wish to receive mail from blocked systems, that is of course within their ability, and I don't think anyone wants to restrict that. Most systems accepting mail on ports other than 25 use some form of authentication. The problem solved by blocking outbound port 25 is that is for ISPs that wish to reduce compliants about spam emmisions. Any system receiving unauthenticated mail on another port, is unlikely to complain to the source ISP. Daniel Feenberg _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 16 21:50:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA10739 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:50:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhgWp-0005rx-NO for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:49:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0H2ndTI022555 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:49:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhgWp-0005ri-JW for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:49:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA10687 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:49:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhgWm-0005th-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:49:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhgVo-0005pw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:48:37 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhgUt-0005nO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:47:39 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhgUF-0005hF-St; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:46:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhgTx-0005f6-EF for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:46:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA10640 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:46:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhgTu-0005jo-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:46:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhgSz-0005h8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:45:42 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhgS9-0005e2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:44:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 13921 invoked by uid 100); 17 Jan 2004 02:44:46 -0000 Message-ID: <20040117024446.13920.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? In-Reply-To: Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: feenberg@nber.org Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 17 Jan 2004 02:44:46 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >> If you start to block port 25 outgoing people will start to make wide >> use of SRV records, because a lot of receiving MTAs will /want/ to >> talk to users behind port 25 blocked networks. >> With SRV records you don't need well-known ports any longer, but you >> specify the port your SMTP speaking MTA is listening on in the SRV >> record itself. I don't know of anyone who has much interest in getting SMTP connections from random PPP and DHCP users. I know that to a very close approximation, that mail is 100% spam and viruses. On the other hand, I am quite happy for my users, all of whom use other ISPs to connect to the net, to use SMTP AUTH to prove who they are, and then send mail to anyone they want. That's known as SUBMIT, and the standard port is 587. I should publish a few SRV records in case anyone goes looking for them. >> Port 25 blocking rendered useless. Not at all, it does exactly what it's supposed to. It forces mail to strangers to be passed through the ISP's MTA where there's some chance of detecting spam on the way out. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY http://www.taugh.com -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 17 10:03:16 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA08783 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:03:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhryK-0007Vx-TN for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:02:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0HF2mLI028885 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:02:48 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhryK-0007Vo-Ov for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:02:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA08775 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:02:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhryD-0004fi-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:02:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ahrw0-0004bm-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:00:24 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ahrur-0004Yg-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:59:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ahrtg-0006FF-Vy; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:58:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhrtZ-0006F4-RD for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:57:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA08710 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:57:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhrtO-0004Vp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:57:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhrrS-0004Sl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:55:43 -0500 Received: from fe05.axelero.hu ([195.228.240.93]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhrqI-0004Pl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:54:30 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1]) by fe05.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i0HEs4Rh016793 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 15:54:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from fe05.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway by fe05 [195.228.240.93]; id A0419605FE0 at Sat, 17 Jan 2004 15:54:04 +0100 Received: from axelero.hu (119.12-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.12.119]) (authenticated bits=0) by fe05.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0HEs2rK016784 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 15:54:03 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <40094C8A.40302@axelero.hu> From: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: hu, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 15:54:02 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit RFC2821, 3.7 Relaying: "In general, the availability of Mail eXchanger records in the domain name system [22, 27] makes the use of explicit source routes in the Internet mail system unnecessary" (in the RCPT command). Is it true that because of "the availability of designated sender records in the domain name system makes the use of explicit source routes in the Internet mail system necessary" (in the MAIL command)? z2 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 17 12:01:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA12211 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:01:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhtoZ-0001G6-D4 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:00:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0HH0pPG004835 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:00:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhtoY-0001Fu-UE for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:00:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA12196 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:00:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhtoN-000174-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:00:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhtmX-00012G-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:58:46 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ahtkz-0000yX-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:57:09 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ahtjt-0000uR-9R; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:56:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ahtjh-0000uD-KI for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:55:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12136 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:55:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhtjZ-0000vl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:55:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ahth5-0000sB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:53:08 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ahtgf-0000pl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:52:41 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AhtgF-00028f-L4 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:52:15 +0000 In-Reply-To: <40094C8A.40302@axelero.hu> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:52:15 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Za'mbori, Zolta'n wrote: > RFC2821, 3.7 Relaying: > > > "In general, the availability of Mail eXchanger records in the domain > name system [22, 27] makes the use of explicit source routes in the > Internet mail system unnecessary" (in the RCPT command). > > > Is it true that because of "the availability of designated sender > records in the domain name system makes the use of explicit source > routes in the Internet mail system necessary" (in the MAIL command)? > If you want forwarding / 3rd party relaying to work. I believe you're right. Pretty much. See: http://spf.pobox.com/objections.html As you suggest - RMX type systems look a lot like the mirror-image of MX. But of course, these source routes MUST NOT be truly *explicit* - or a new channel for abuse is opened up - the "bounce path". Without a complementary, and secure, Sender Rewriting Scheme (or something), I can't see that a system like SPF is much use in the real world. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 17 18:19:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA19738 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:19:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhziG-0003ng-Cw for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:18:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0HNIiB3014602 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:18:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhziG-0003nO-9P for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:18:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA19580 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:18:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhzaA-0001MS-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:10:23 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhzUF-0000gm-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:04:15 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhzQS-0007a8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:00:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhzPD-0004X6-HG; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:59:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AhzOP-0004OG-GH for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:58:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15509 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:58:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhyTW-0000KM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:59:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AhyR4-0000FO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:56:55 -0500 Received: from fe07.axelero.hu ([195.228.240.95]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AhyPH-0000Ab-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 16:55:03 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1]) by fe07.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i0HLsYi3031758 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:54:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from fe07.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway by fe07 [195.228.240.95]; id A07C0BA060C at Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:54:34 +0100 Received: from axelero.hu (119.12-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.12.119]) by fe07.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0HLsYfR031741 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:54:34 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4009AF1A.4070309@axelero.hu> From: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: hu, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030217) (fe07.axelero.hu) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:54:34 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jon Kyme wrote: > But of course, these source routes MUST NOT be truly *explicit* - or a new > channel for abuse is opened up - the "bounce path". I found an example about these source routes in RFC2821, Page 75: Step 2 -- Relay Host to Destination Host S: 220 xyz.com Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready C: EHLO foo.com S: 250 xyz.com is on the air C: MAIL FROM: S: 250 OK C: RCPT TO: S: 250 OK C: DATA If the SMTP client IP is designated by 'foo.com' than the session is verified, mail is acceptable by 'xyz.com'. (And of course it can be spam but 'foo.com' is accountable for it.) Can You explain where is the new "bounce path"? > Without a > complementary, and secure, Sender Rewriting Scheme (or something), I can't > see that a system like SPF is much use in the real world. For me SRS is too complicated. But i am not an expert so it means nothing. z2 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 05:11:48 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA15783 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:11:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ai9to-00089E-MV for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:11:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IABKJ5031321 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:11:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ai9to-000896-GZ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:11:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA15720 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:11:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ai9tk-0003Qg-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:11:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ai9rr-00038w-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:09:19 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ai9qa-0002zV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:08:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ai9pe-0007bl-MF; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:07:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ai9pO-0007au-8I for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:06:47 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA15597 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:06:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ai9pL-0002uu-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:06:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Ai9oP-0002su-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:05:46 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ai9o2-0002qc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 05:05:22 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1Ai9o3-0004Wb-Ph; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:05:23 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4009AF1A.4070309@axelero.hu> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes] To: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:05:23 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > Jon Kyme wrote: > > But of course, these source routes MUST NOT be truly *explicit* - or a > new > > channel for abuse is opened up - the "bounce path". > > > I found an example about these source routes in RFC2821, Page 75: > OK, we're required not to use source routes nowadays - in "contemporary clients" - so some equivalent is called for. But we can use the source routing notation if you like. > Step 2 -- Relay Host to Destination Host > > S: 220 xyz.com Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready > C: EHLO foo.com > S: 250 xyz.com is on the air > C: MAIL FROM: > S: 250 OK > C: RCPT TO: > S: 250 OK > C: DATA > The question is what happens if this message is undeliverable at xyz.com? xyx.com generates a DSN to , foo.com relays it to bar.com. > > Can You explain where is the new "bounce path"? > In the above example foo.com is an open relay when handling the DSN (bounce). > > Without a > > complementary, and secure, Sender Rewriting Scheme (or something), I > can't > > see that a system like SPF is much use in the real world. > > For me SRS is too complicated. But i am not an expert Me neither. But I gather it's just a way of representing the source route in the envelope sender address. To go back to the example - to make sure that xyz.com sees a match between sending IP and (envelope) sender, foo.com has to rewrite the sender (previously JQP_AT_bar.com) to something like JQP**bar.com_AT_foo.com. foo.com has to be capable of relaying bounces by decoding this "path" when it sees it in a RCPT. But of course, this is trivially abused (as above) to get foo.com to relay anything to JQP_AT_bar.com (or to anywhere else). This return path encoding needs to be secured. A simple method might be for foo.com to assign an unique identifier to every message forwarded and to record the sender associated. i.e. C: MAIL FROM: then when a bounce for fwd-123456_AT_foo.com is seen we can look it up in our database and get JQP_AT_bar.com - or nothing (in case of forgery). Obviously - a real system needs to be more secure that this... -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 06:23:10 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA17337 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:23:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiB0t-0002VG-Jj for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:22:43 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IBMhIp009616 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:22:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiB0t-0002V1-Bm for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:22:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA17316 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:22:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiB0p-0006TA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:22:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiAzt-0006RP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:21:42 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiAz4-0006Q4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:20:50 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiAyJ-0002Kp-Ln; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:20:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiAxx-0002Ju-PD for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:19:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA17260 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:19:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiAxt-0006Mj-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:19:38 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiAwv-0006LM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:18:37 -0500 Received: from fe06.axelero.hu ([195.228.240.94]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiAw2-0006Jc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:17:43 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1]) by fe06.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i0IBHhl5062652; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:17:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from fe06.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway by fe06 [195.228.240.94]; id A0F4B42DFFF at Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:17:43 +0100 Received: from axelero.hu (23.14-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.14.23]) by fe06.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0IBHgbm062621; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:17:42 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <400A6B55.1010004@axelero.hu> From: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: hu, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Kyme CC: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030217) (fe06.axelero.hu) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:17:41 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jon Kyme wrote: > In the above example foo.com is an open relay when handling the DSN > (bounce). Thank You! Now I start to understand the forwarding and session verification problem and the requirements behind SRS. z2 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 06:55:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA17990 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:55:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiBWe-0003hn-6r for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:55:32 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IBtWpB014237 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:55:32 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiBWe-0003hY-1y for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:55:32 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA17971 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:55:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiBWU-0007bH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:55:23 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiBUV-0007WR-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:53:20 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiBSK-0007Qf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:51:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiBRL-0003VI-1b; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:50:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiBR1-0003Uj-B6 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:49:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA17786 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:49:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiBQn-0007O1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:49:29 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiBPL-0007JJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:47:59 -0500 Received: from ns.dcn.ru ([212.220.30.10] helo=www.dcn.ru) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiBMi-0007Ck-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:45:16 -0500 Received: from edo.dcn.ru (Edo.dcn.ru [10.10.10.212]) by www.dcn.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE40E2AB7 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 16:44:46 +0500 (YEKT) From: "Viktor S. Grishchenko" Organization: DCN To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] alok - penny black variation User-Agent: KMail/1.5.94 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200401181644.15002.gritzko@post.dcn.ru> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 16:44:14 +0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alok Menghrajani wrote: > Hi, > > I have been thinking about designing something like penny black for a long > time, but I never really had the time to do anything serious. http://www.nd.edu/~parasite/ Try to explore possibilities of parasitic computing in pennyblack email networks. It is an interesting objective. -- Viktor S. Grishchenko _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 07:45:47 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA18891 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:45:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiCIo-0005lc-HW for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:45:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0ICjIW6022162 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:45:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiCIe-0005lD-8t for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:45:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA18878 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:45:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiCIY-0001Z1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:45:02 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiCGd-0001SX-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:43:04 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiCCt-0001JG-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:39:11 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiCBk-0005Wt-Pr; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:38:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiCAz-0005JS-A5 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:37:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA18693 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:37:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiCAp-0001C0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:37:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiC7u-000177-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:34:02 -0500 Received: from mail1.nber.org ([207.113.108.7]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiC6o-00013i-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:32:54 -0500 Received: from mail1 (root@localhost) by mail1.nber.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id i0ICWQCx007070 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:32:26 -0500 Received: from nber5.nber.org (nber5.nber.org [207.113.108.99]) by mail1.nber.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0ICWPfg007049; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:32:25 -0500 From: Daniel Feenberg To: Jon Kyme cc: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" , ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:24:32 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 On Sun, 18 Jan 2004, Jon Kyme wrote: > > Jon Kyme wrote: > > > But of course, these source routes MUST NOT be truly *explicit* - or a > > new > > > channel for abuse is opened up - the "bounce path". > > > > > > I found an example about these source routes in RFC2821, Page 75: > > > Is this so significant that it has to be addressed? After all, is it so terrible that, if joe@example1.com wants his mail forwarded to joe@example2.com, he wants example2.com to have some anti-spam mechanism in place? Furthermore, if example2.com wants to base its decision on the original connection address, it has a very easy decision to make, since the message should have come from example1.com, any other would be invalid. Or am I misunderstanding the problem? Can someone make the new spam path explicit? _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 09:41:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA20988 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:41:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiE6g-0001XX-K2 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:40:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IEesgR005913 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:40:54 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiE6g-0001XI-Eb for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:40:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA20973 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:40:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiE6T-0005VA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:40:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiE3x-0005PS-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:38:06 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiE1l-0005Iw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:35:49 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AiE1O-0004Sl-LU for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:35:26 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiE01-000106-BQ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:34:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiDzJ-0000zs-1a for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:33:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA20837 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:33:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiDzC-0005E8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:33:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiDx2-0005A1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:30:57 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiDvN-00054l-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 09:29:14 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AiDuy-00065B-Ki for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 14:28:48 +0000 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes] To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 14:28:48 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Daniel Feenberg wrote: > > > > On Sun, 18 Jan 2004, Jon Kyme wrote: > > > > Jon Kyme wrote: > > > > But of course, these source routes MUST NOT be truly *explicit* - > or a > > > new > > > > channel for abuse is opened up - the "bounce path". > > > > > > > > > I found an example about these source routes in RFC2821, Page 75: > > > > > > > Is this so significant that it has to be addressed? After all, is it so > terrible that, if joe@example1.com wants his mail forwarded to > joe@example2.com, he wants example2.com to have some anti-spam mechanism > in place? Furthermore, if example2.com wants to base its decision on > the original connection address, it has a very easy decision to make, > since the message should have come from example1.com, any other would be > invalid. Or am I misunderstanding the problem? Can someone make the new > spam path explicit? > > > > I think the problem is that this requires example1.com to have that anti-spam mechanism in place also. Consider: alice@sender.example addresses mail to bob@recipient.example recipient.example MX points to intermediate.example bob and all his colleagues wish to use some SPF based system. So they deploy it on recipient.example. To make things work simply (including bounces) the nice people at intermediate.example arrange to do sender rewriting so that alice's mail comes to bob with a sender address (envelope) of alice**sender.example@intermediate.example. All is well. Now, if alice sends mail to no-such-person@recipient.example the sender is rewritten as above, recipient system can form a DSN and send it to alice**sender.example@intermediate.example, intermediate can decode this "address" and determine that the DSN needs to go to to alice@sender.example All is well. Now, sadly, I come along and send my viagra-adv to alice**sender.example@intermediate.example, carol**sender.example@intermediate.example, ... In this *simple* *dumb* example intermediate is an open relay. Or am I missing something? As far as I can tell, it seems that one has to either (a) secure the sender-rewriting /decoding or (b) to require that intermediate has some highly effective antispam protection in place or (c) throw away bounces. I'd guess (a) is going to be better. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 12:03:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25333 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGKc-0005Gq-Df for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:26 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IH3QkR020260 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGKc-0005Gh-6o for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25313 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGKb-0005A8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:25 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGJf-00055I-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:02:28 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGIw-0004yA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:01:42 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGHK-0004mV-4J; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:00:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGGR-0004l1-MG for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:59:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25121 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:59:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGGL-0004mm-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:59:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGCH-0004Uu-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:54:50 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiG8F-0004FL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:50:39 -0500 Received: from fe07.axelero.hu ([195.228.240.95]) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AiG7q-0002RG-JO for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:50:14 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1]) by fe07.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i0IGnfi3070997; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 17:49:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from fe07.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway by fe07 [195.228.240.95]; id A0155222FC6 at Sun, 18 Jan 2004 17:49:41 +0100 Received: from axelero.hu (23.14-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.14.23]) by fe07.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0IGneDj070971; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 17:49:40 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <400AB924.7060902@axelero.hu> From: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: hu, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Kyme CC: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.3(snapshot 20030217) (fe07.axelero.hu) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 17:49:40 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jon Kyme wrote: > OK, we're required not to use source routes nowadays - in "contemporary > clients" - so some equivalent is called for. But we can use the source > routing notation if you like. I like soure routing notation because using existing syntax to express new needs seems to be a good thing. I now see that session verification implies expression of forwarding between mailboxes. Maybe extending the host relay path syntax (RFC821 "@ONE,@TWO:JOE@THREE") to be a mailbox forward path syntax ("mb1@ONE,mb2@TWO:JOE@THREE") can help in some cases. A simple example: 1 - Sender to Forwarder: mail from: rcpt to: (Forwarder decide that there is a forwarding rule from 'y@b' to 'z@c') 2 - Forwarder to Receiver: mail from: rcpt to: (Receiver can verify that the SMTP client IP is authorized by 'b'.) 3 - Receiver back to Forwarder: mail from: (bounce) rcpt to: (Forwarder decide that there is a forwarding rule from 'y@b' to 'z@c'. Otherwise it is an unauthorized forward attempt.) 4 - Forwarder back to Sender: mail from: (bounce variation 1) mail from:<> (bounce variation 2) rcpt to: What do You mean? z2 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 12:04:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25374 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:04:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGLF-0005IO-IW for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:04:05 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IH45PB020350 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:04:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGLF-0005I9-Dj for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:04:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25369 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:04:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGLE-0005DH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:04:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGKd-0005AT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:03:27 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGJx-00055r-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:02:45 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGJF-00053P-Hz; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:02:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiGJA-000534-13 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:01:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA25190 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:01:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGJ8-000511-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:01:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGGo-0004o2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:59:31 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiGDN-0004Wp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:55:57 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AiGCy-0007Eo-NN for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 16:55:32 +0000 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - explicit source routes] To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 82.69.7.27 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 16:55:32 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > > new > > > > channel for abuse is opened up - the "bounce path". > > > Just to clarify - Meng Weng Wong covers this well in SRS ( http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-sender-rewrite-01.txt ) I'm not sure that it's been stressed sufficiently that this is probably *essential* for anyone doing forwarding in a SPF environment. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 20:51:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11542 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:51:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOZS-0000ma-Ok for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:51:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0J1pIZT003002 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:51:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOZS-0000mL-HI for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:51:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11539 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:51:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOZQ-00060l-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:51:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOYX-0005y1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:50:22 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOYB-0005v2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:49:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOXF-0000c2-GE; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:49:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOWZ-0000Zu-Bl for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:48:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11417 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:48:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOWX-0005p0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:48:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOVf-0005lt-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:47:24 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOUz-0005if-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:46:41 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B9116F54 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:48:26 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? In-Reply-To: Your message of "17 Jan 2004 02:44:46 GMT." <20040117024446.13920.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Message-Id: <20040119014826.F0B9116F54@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:48:26 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 John Levine wrote: > I don't know of anyone who has much interest in getting SMTP > connections from random PPP and DHCP users. I know that to a very > close approximation, that mail is 100% spam and viruses. Few people disagree with you there. See the list archives for flame wars involving people who want to *send* messages from random PPP accounts, and random addresses via DHCP. Also note that there are zero responses[1] to requests asking "what's wrong with SUBMIT, or umpteen other submission methods". Alan DeKok. [1] I don't count responses which amount to "I don't want to change my behavior", or "SMTP on port 25 is the One True Way to deliver mail, everything else is evil." _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 21:14:54 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12001 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:14:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOvq-00023d-TJ for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:14:26 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0J2EQQ3007903 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:14:26 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOvq-00023O-PS for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:14:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA11998 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:14:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOvo-0006t1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:14:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOuj-0006p8-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:13:18 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOuA-0006mK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:12:42 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOtU-0001tY-I8; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:12:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiOsl-0001sN-At for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:11:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA11969 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:11:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOsi-0006k0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:11:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOrk-0006iC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:10:14 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiOr6-0006eF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:09:32 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2004011902085901300amqgbe>; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 02:08:59 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D26C5186A2; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:08:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <400B3C39.1000806@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan DeKok Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? References: <20040119014826.F0B9116F54@mail.nitros9.org> In-Reply-To: <20040119014826.F0B9116F54@mail.nitros9.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:08:57 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alan DeKok wrote: > John Levine wrote: > >>I don't know of anyone who has much interest in getting SMTP >>connections from random PPP and DHCP users. I know that to a very >>close approximation, that mail is 100% spam and viruses. > > Few people disagree with you there. > > See the list archives for flame wars involving people who want to > *send* messages from random PPP accounts, and random addresses via > DHCP. Also note that there are zero responses[1] to requests asking > "what's wrong with SUBMIT, or umpteen other submission methods". > > Alan DeKok. > [1] I don't count responses which amount to "I don't want to change my > behavior", or "SMTP on port 25 is the One True Way to deliver mail, > everything else is evil." Currently, I deliver mail from a cable-modem hosted MTA that also hosts the backup MX for a domain I share with some friends. I relay through smtp.comcast.net, so I'm not sure if you really count that. However, I have encountered systems that check each machine in the Received: headers against dialup/DHCP lists. Hell, on one occasion, smtp.comcast.net has been blacklisted, when if I could do direct delivery, my mail would have gotten through. LMAP as an addition to the status quo would hurt me even more, because there's no possible way I could create acceptable LMAP entries for my domain unless recipients start accepting mail from dynamic addresses. SUBMIT is irrelevant here, because my server *is* the "real" one, the one that authenticates mail from my domain. So filtering mail from non-leased addresses is not just a matter of mail submission. I'm quite willing to change my behaviour, if you can tell me how. I would be delighted to declare accountability for messages from my own server, if only to remove the need for my ISP's relay. Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sun Jan 18 22:53:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14937 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:53:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiQTS-0005kc-P6 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:53:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0J3rEct022100 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:53:14 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiQTS-0005kL-J0 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:53:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14929 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:53:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiQTP-0004QZ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:53:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiQSX-0004PM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:52:17 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiQSA-0004Nd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:51:54 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiQRL-0005Zm-31; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiQQb-0005ZB-0m for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:50:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14849 for ; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:50:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiQQX-0004Gp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:50:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiQPd-0004F2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:49:17 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiQPA-0004DA-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:48:48 -0500 Received: (qmail 21234 invoked by uid 100); 19 Jan 2004 03:48:48 -0000 Message-ID: <20040119034848.21233.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? In-Reply-To: <400B3C39.1000806@zemos.net> Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: millenix@zemos.net Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 19 Jan 2004 03:48:48 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >> See the list archives for flame wars involving people who want to >> *send* messages from random PPP accounts, and random addresses via >> DHCP. BTDT, not our problem. I'm sorry if they feel they're treated like second class net citizens, but that's because they really are second class net citizens. > Currently, I deliver mail from a cable-modem hosted MTA that also > hosts the backup MX for a domain I share with some friends. I relay > through smtp.comcast.net, so I'm not sure if you really count that. That's the normal setup for consumer broadband. Comcast would mark their SMTP relay as "mail:yes" since that's where the mail's supposed to be sent to the rest of the world. > However, I have encountered systems that check each machine in the > Received: headers against dialup/DHCP lists. Me too. You can't stop people from being stupid, although I'd think that they'd notice that they're throwing away all mail from all consumer ISPs. I suppose that might be their goal. > I would be delighted to declare accountability for messages from my > own server, if only to remove the need for my ISP's relay. It depends whether you have a static or DHCP address. If it's static, you should be able to set the mark data for the range assigned to you just like you should be able to set your own rDNS. If not, you don't get what you don't pay for. I realize that many cable DHCP addresses change only every six months, but it's still DHCP and your ISP can't provide contact info by rwhois. I also realize that the practical issue of getting semi-sentient ISPs to provide a way for their static IP customers to update their own rDNS is a problem. Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY http://www.taugh.com _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 19 05:11:58 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10039 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:11:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiWNX-0008Ry-7l for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:11:31 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0JABVih032476 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:11:31 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiWNW-0008Rj-SQ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:11:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10034 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:11:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiWNT-00013b-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:11:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiWMd-00011e-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:10:35 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiWM7-0000yH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:10:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiWL8-0008Hd-2a; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:09:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AiWKc-0008EB-Nc for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:08:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09945 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:08:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiWKZ-0000u8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:08:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AiWJf-0000sP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:07:32 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiWJS-0000pu-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:07:19 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AiWJT-00005I-TV for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:07:19 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20040119034848.21233.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:07:19 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > >> I would be delighted to declare accountability for messages from my >> own server, if only to remove the need for my ISP's relay. > >It depends whether you have a static or DHCP address. If it's static, >you should be able to set the mark data for the range assigned to you >just like you should be able to set your own rDNS. If not, you don't >get what you don't pay for. I realize that many cable DHCP addresses >change only every six months, but it's still DHCP and your ISP can't >provide contact info by rwhois. I don't know, but what's to stop you doing SPF / some kind of dynamic DNS? -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 19 12:39:46 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29036 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AidMt-0007sq-Ti for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:20 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0JHdJoC030300 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:19 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AidMt-0007sd-Ps for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29015 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AidMn-0006mM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:39:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AidIK-0006Wa-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:34:37 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AidFo-0006K1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:32:00 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Aid2T-0003FK-TX for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:18:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aid0K-0006JI-Us; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:16:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aiczf-0006ID-V2 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:15:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA28267 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:15:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AiczU-0005dA-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:15:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aicw4-0005Mn-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:11:37 -0500 Received: from grou.ch ([193.201.200.130] helo=linuxufo.com ident=mail) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AictF-00059l-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:08:42 -0500 Received: from sheriff by linuxufo.com with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Aicrz-0002MM-00 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:07:23 +0000 From: Peter Sergeant To: asrg@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040119170723.GA7600@linuxufo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm) X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to . Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - Mailing list summary Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:07:23 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=HABEAS_SWE autolearn=no version=2.60 A preview of this month's (unofficial) ASRG summary. Comments/changes by tomorrow morning 10pm UK time, please, although we'll entertain minor suggestions for changes for the rest of the week. This month's ASRG posed quite a few interesting legal questions, and brought to light some interesting statistics. Hector Santos wondered if the CAN-SPAM act gave spammers legal recourse to sue or harass ISPs/anti-spam companies who were blocking spam that complied with the law. Philip Miller thought not, and said that CAN-SPAM only defined what senders can NOT legally do. Hector wasn't so sure, and said that the act does "not attempt to change any current policy or status quo", and that is was a 'long standing practice held by ECPA (Electronic Communications Privacy Act) precedence' that once you accept a message, it must be delivered. Denny Figuerres suggests that by permitting some content to be 'published', and other similar content to not be 'published', then you're effectively engaging the role of "Editor/Publisher", and that can cause you legal problems - ISPs have found this can cause problems if they decide to censor some Usenet groups. John Levine suggested that US law in fact 'provides broad immunity from liability due to good faith efforts to filter offensive material'. As always, the author points out he is NOT a lawyer, and that concerned parties should seek independant legal advice. Somebody reasearching Challenge/Response patents prior to 1997 mailed the list asking if anyone had any information. Hector Santos pointed out that this depended just how specific he was being - BBSs of yonder year used a number of programs to verify email addresses and phone numbers. 'mathew' was clearly feeling a little cynical when he said that he thought "any kind of 'ADV' flag belongs in the header defined for the purpose, so it won't collide with existing use of the subject line no matter how inevitably poorly client developers implement filtering." He provided a real-world example of a mailing-list tag that he thought might be problematic ("[sec-adv] Security advisory"). Jon Kyme pointed out that the act requires clear labelling of the email as such - either all MUAs would have to adapt to read the new headers, or the marker would have to remain in the subject line itself. Hector Santos, who himself develops SMTP server-software thinks that in the future, customers looking for an SMTP server will 'ask one basic question [even if they don't know what they're talking about]: Is your system CAN-SPAM ready?' Yakov happened to get in touch with someone selling email 'hosting' services, who claimed to be 'CAN-SPAM' friendly ... a telling transcript can be found here: Eric Dean found out that he apparently does business with 'some dumbass spam company', who sent him their entire year-to-date spam history. Interested parties can check out the data here: B. Johannessen has been working on some spam analysis, and posted a link to his excellent and informative spam statistics: . Yakov made the point that there was a subgroup specifically for analysis, and that perhaps would be a better place to discuss such things. John Levine wondered if one of the reasons spam was more prevalent over SMTP and NNTP because of the possiblity of a Usenet Death Penalty (UDP) - sort of like a listing on an all-pervasive email real-time blackhole list - or if it was simply because of the abundance of email users that spammers don't bother trying to get their email onto Usenet. Gordon Peterson had an interesting idea in reducing some of the collateral damage that comes from spam by having a size limit and content-limit (nothing but plain text) on all unsolicited email - to start sending around large files and HTML, you need to be in your recipient's whitelist. The idea behind this being that a number of spammer's tricks (large sections of unrelated text, embedded images, etc) would be rendered useless, while friends could still send themselves cute little HTML postcards, or whatever floats their boats. This was an idea to some extent reflected by Denny Figuerres, who suggested that a subset of HTML allowed in email be defined, and that MUAs should start supporting only that, dropping support for embedded images and scripting in email. John Fenley had seen some work on stylometric classification (), and suggested its use in anti-spam. Art Pollard pointed out that compared to Bayesian filtering, they take a lot longer to train, and you need to throw some serious horsepower at them. Yakov announced the formation of some new subgroups, and the reformation of another two. In brief: Abuse Reporting Standards Subgroup: This subgroup will investigate standards for email and network abuse reports. It will coordinate with similar efforts in the IETF (IDWG and INCH). Best Current Practices (BCP) Subgroup: This subgroup will research and document best practices for spam management. Filtering Standards Subgroup: This subgroup will investigate standards for filtering for automatic updates and sharing of filtering information, and better interaction between filters, MTAs and MUAs. Inventory of Problems Subgroup: This subgroup will research and list problems in the current email architechture relevant to spam. Message Verification Subgroup: This subgroup will research solutions for verifying and authenticating email messages and header information. SMTP Session Verification (SMTP-VERIFY) Subgroup: This subgroup will research approaches for authenticating and verifying the SMTP session. More information about these can be found at the new ASRG website: http://asrg.sp.am/ -- If you ever go temporarily insane, don't shoot somebody, like a lot of people do. Instead, try to get some weeding done, because you'd really be surprised. -- Jack Handey _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 19 13:24:02 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00645 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:24:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aie3k-0001zs-Dh for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:23:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0JINag1007670 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:23:36 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aie3f-0001zU-7b for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:23:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00631 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:23:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aie3Y-0001Ti-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:23:24 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aie0f-0001Jx-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:20:26 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AidxW-0001At-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:17:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AidwQ-0001Si-07; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:16:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AidvJ-0001Oy-5k for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:15:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00407 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:14:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AidvC-000110-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:14:46 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AidrN-0000ti-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:10:50 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AidoV-0000ik-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:07:51 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DEE9170F0 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:09:03 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? In-Reply-To: Your message of "19 Jan 2004 03:48:48 GMT." <20040119034848.21233.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> Message-Id: <20040119180903.5DEE9170F0@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:09:03 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 John Levine wrote: > It depends whether you have a static or DHCP address. If it's static, > you should be able to set the mark data for the range assigned to you > just like you should be able to set your own rDNS. Ideally, LMAP should be more than a simple list of IP's permitted to send spam. We can populate reverse DNS with other pieces of information, like: - reference: company "foo" says I'm not a spammer - permissions: IP bar is OK - policy: IP/mask is OK, so long as the message is signed with key "pgp" - pointer: go ask roaming.isp.example.com if it's OK. Many of the concerns about dynamic DNS and small domains can be addressed with trivial additions to the protocol. The fundamental concept remains the same, though: publishing information as to how the recipient can tell that certain messages were sent consentually. > I also realize that the practical issue of getting semi-sentient > ISPs to provide a way for their static IP customers to update their > own rDNS is a problem. Which is why unlike MTA-MARK, LMAP uses RNDS rooted from domains, and not in-addr.arpa Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Jan 19 15:20:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06677 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:20:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AifsG-0003Ku-72 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:19:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0JKJqcB012817 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:19:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AifsG-0003Ke-1b for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:19:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06635 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:19:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AifsE-0002Lp-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:19:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AifrO-0002I2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:18:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AifqW-0002EI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:18:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AifpY-0002Ap-2k; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:17:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AifpM-00026Y-LT for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:16:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06337 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:16:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AifpL-00028E-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:16:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AifoT-00023v-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:15:58 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AifnV-0001uY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:14:57 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20040119201428012002dm24e>; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 20:14:28 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D912186A2; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:14:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <400C3AA3.7030404@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031107 Debian/1.5-3 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan DeKok Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 6. Proposals: MTA MARK vs port 25 filtering? References: <20040119180903.5DEE9170F0@mail.nitros9.org> In-Reply-To: <20040119180903.5DEE9170F0@mail.nitros9.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 15:14:27 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alan DeKok wrote: > Many of the concerns about dynamic DNS and small domains can be > addressed with trivial additions to the protocol. The fundamental > concept remains the same, though: publishing information as to how the > recipient can tell that certain messages were sent consentually. OK, so there are a few parties who could/should be 'consenting': 1. HELO Domain owner 2. MAIL FROM Domain owner 3. Machine owner 4. IP Address space owner 5. Connectivity provider Although in most cases, some of these will be conflated, I can imagine cases in which each of these is an independent entity. The LMAP discussion document seems to apply it to 1 & 2 only. There are 2 questions that arise: How comprehensive do we want LMAP to be? How will a typical receiver-side implementation enforce the stated policies, especially when they conflict? Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 20 22:58:15 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA09118 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:58:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aj9Uy-0005Vv-Qy for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:57:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0L3vmoT021189 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:57:48 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aj9Uy-0005Vg-Lf for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:57:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA09095 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:57:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aj9Uv-0003XM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:57:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aj9U2-0003Vk-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:56:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aj9TO-0003TT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:56:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aj9SJ-0005II-Ix; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:55:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aj9S4-0005Gu-79 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:54:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA09023 for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:54:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aj9S0-0003QE-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:54:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aj9R5-0003Om-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:53:48 -0500 Received: from black.infobro.com ([63.71.25.39] helo=infobro.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aj9QZ-0003My-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:53:15 -0500 Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:52:01 -0500 Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:51:59 -0500 Message-ID: <01C3DFA8.032BD590.eric@infobro.com> From: "Eric D. Williams" To: "'Jon Kyme'" , "'ASRG'" Subject: RE: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" Organization: Information Brokers, Inc. X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:35:14 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RATWARE_EMWAC autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Indeed. If it were presented under the auspices of the asrg I would concur. But my draft has not been published 'officially' by the I-D editor. -e On Friday, January 16, 2004 4:50 AM, Jon Kyme [SMTP:jrk@merseymail.com] wrote: 8<...>8 > Of course, our (Eric Williams' rather) requirements ID holds that security > must be considered. I'd say that any proposal that doesn't even mention > security can be "knocked-back" right away. P.S. I think 'our' is ok ;-) _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 21 03:02:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA11225 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:02:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjDJD-0008NI-Iy for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:01:55 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0L81tIW032178 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:01:55 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjDJC-0008Mq-QU for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:01:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA11188 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:01:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjDJ8-000510-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:01:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjDIA-0004xj-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:00:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjDHI-0004vM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:59:56 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjDGP-00088A-Ix; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:59:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjDEN-000829-Jp for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:56:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA11096 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:56:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjDEJ-0004nv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:56:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjDDO-0004mQ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:55:55 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjDCZ-0004il-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:55:03 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-383-611.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.212.168]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRT00E42XUYQW@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 07:52:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <400E2FAB.7010900@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 1a. Inventory of Problems - Causes Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 02:52:11 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I put together some thoughts on the causes of the spam problem in a very raw draft. The document can be found here: http://www.shaftek.org/asrg/draft-irtf-asrg-problems-causes-00.txt Comments are appreciated :) Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 21 11:41:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29101 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:41:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjLPo-0003PX-Ud for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:41:17 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0LGfG9R013105 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:41:16 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjLPo-0003PI-Ov for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:41:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29088 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:41:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjLPn-0006em-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:41:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjLOr-0006c0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:40:18 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjLO4-0006ZJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:39:28 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjLNc-00039F-Om; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:39:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjLMt-00038s-BE for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:38:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28987 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:38:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjLMs-0006Ve-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:38:14 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjLLw-0006TM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:37:16 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjLLc-0006RH-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:36:56 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AjLLW-0003gQ-IX; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 16:36:50 +0000 In-Reply-To: <01C3DFA8.032BD590.eric@infobro.com> Subject: Re: RE: [Asrg] 3b. LMAP - Another LMAP variant "IMX" To: "Eric D. Williams" From: "Jon Kyme" Cc: "ASRG" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 16:36:50 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > Indeed. If it were presented under the auspices of the asrg I would > concur. > But my draft has not been published 'officially' by the I-D editor. > > > -e > > On Friday, January 16, 2004 4:50 AM, Jon Kyme [SMTP:jrk@merseymail.com] > wrote: > 8<...>8 > > Of course, our (Eric Williams' rather) requirements ID holds that > security > > must be considered. I'd say that any proposal that doesn't even mention > > security can be "knocked-back" right away. > > P.S. I think 'our' is ok ;-) > Of course, you're right. I notice that this seems down as work in progress for the "steering group" :-) -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 22 15:33:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08962 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:33:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjlVV-0007Hk-1v for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:32:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0MKWrut027997 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:32:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjlVU-0007HS-TE for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:32:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA08880 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:32:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjlVT-0006SK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:32:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjlU0-00069s-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:31:22 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjlMr-0005gJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:23:57 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjlLx-00054K-2t; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:23:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjkX4-0003FM-9c for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:30:26 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05695 for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:30:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjkWw-0000tp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:30:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjkTS-0006JD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:26:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjkR4-0006C6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:24:14 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-361-904.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.128.49]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HRW00IYBOJ6HN@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 19:23:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <4010232E.6040803@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - RMX and CRI mailing lists closed Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:23:26 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT The LMAP/RMX and CRI subgroups have been closed and folded into the SMTP VERIFY subgroup. RMX and CRI mailing lists have been closed, archives are available for historical purposes. Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Among all our enemies / The ones to be most feared are often the smallest" (Jean de la Fontaine) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 23 18:36:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02702 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:36:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkAqM-00081U-Kw for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:36:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0NNa6fE030836 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:36:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkAqM-00081H-EM for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:36:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02695 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:35:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkAqD-0005PS-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:35:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AkApF-0005OQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:34:58 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkAon-0005NS-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:34:29 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkAoL-0007vn-4x; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:34:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkAoJ-0007vI-2U for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:33:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02672 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:33:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkAoG-0005Mx-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:33:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AkAnI-0005M9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:32:57 -0500 Received: from fe04.axelero.hu ([195.228.240.92] helo=amitabha.axelero.hu) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkAn7-0005LG-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:32:45 -0500 Received: from amitabha (localhost-02 [127.0.2.1]) by amitabha.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i0O0Wal1093918 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 01:32:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from fe04.axelero.hu [127.0.2.1] via SMTP gateway by amitabha [195.228.240.92]; id A06ED710457 at Sat, 24 Jan 2004 01:32:36 +0100 Received: from axelero.hu (67.14-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu [81.182.14.67]) by fe04.axelero.hu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0O0WZpQ093863 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 01:32:35 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4011AF16.7070101@axelero.hu> From: "Za'mbori, Zolta'n" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: hu, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 1a. Inventory of Problems - Causes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 00:32:38 +0100 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > http://www.shaftek.org/asrg/draft-irtf-asrg-problems-causes-00.txt > > Comments are appreciated :) Just some weak idea. "2. Different Viewpoints of the Spam Problem." 2.x Aspects relevant to polititions. Spam "industry" is like underground/outlaw press (medium?) or companies not liable to taxation. (Are there any political spam?) "3. Some of the Causes of the Spam Problem." 3.x Storage access asymetry. A mailbox storage can not access for reading without authentication by a recipient but it is accessible for writing (reserving space) without authentication by any sender. (Recipient address is like a not-so-secret password to the mailbox storage assigned to any sender.) 3.x Decentralized (hub-free) direct email transport to individual addresses. 3.x Freedom of license free broadcast. "4. Other Messaging Systems." 4.x Door to door or mailbox to mailbox advertizing. 4.x CB radio (is there any spam on CB channels?) z2 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 24 19:29:13 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00818 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:29:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkY8q-0001Uf-AC for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:28:46 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0P0Sip8005738 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:28:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkY8p-0001UT-Me for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:28:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00806 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:28:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkY8o-0004ea-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:28:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AkY7p-0004cA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:27:42 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkY6t-0004ZJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:26:43 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkY6D-0001H9-RQ; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:26:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AkXuJ-0000uQ-7L for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:13:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00420 for ; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:13:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkXuH-0003vG-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:13:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AkXtI-0003sp-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:12:41 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AkXsL-0003p8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:11:41 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-351.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.199.249]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS0003WAR6ILS@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Sun, 25 Jan 2004 00:11:11 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40130993.7010609@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 0. General - New Mailing List for Discussions on Replacing SMTP/etc. Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:10:59 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT From the main IETF list. --- begin forwarded text Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 15:00:56 -0800 To: (various IETF lists) From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: New mail-ng mailing list open for sign-ups Greetings again. There seems to be more discussion these days about replacing SMTP and/or RFC 2822 and/or POP/IMAP for a variety of reasons. The discussion seems to pop up on a few different lists and in a few different hallways, and it might be good to have a single list where folks can congregate. Thus, I have set up a mail-ng mailing list. The first task probably is to determine what the next generation of mail should do, and how that is different than what SMTP/2822/POP-or-IMAP or instant messaging does. It is safe to say that we can ignore actual protocol proposals for many months (if not years) until we figure out what is needed. Once we do that, there are plenty of protocol people who can attack the decided-on requirements. There is no expectation that there will be significant agreement on the list. It is likely that over time the discussion will split into camps of like-minded design goals. The list might then spawn different lists for the folks of the different camps (mail-ng-shoe, mail-ng-sandal, ...). The list is explicitly not yet meant to be an IETF working group yet (if at all), and is probably more akin to the IRTF. But at the beginning, it will most likely be talking, not research. See for information on how to subscribe. The list is taking subscriptions now, and will probably go live for discussions within a week. Having some discussion on a mailing list now should make the dinners and bar gatherings at Seoul more interesting. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 27 12:43:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16049 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:43:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlXEg-0005DJ-Io for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:42:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0RHgonh020037 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:42:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlXEg-0005D6-FK for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:42:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16012 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:42:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlXEe-0002m2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:42:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlXDg-0002iB-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:41:49 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlXCk-0002eO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:40:50 -0500 Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlXCk-0002mO-Fg for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:40:51 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlXBz-0004yP-N0; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:40:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlX6w-0004Wi-JA for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:34:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15698 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:34:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlX6v-0002Bq-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:34:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlX5w-00027h-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:33:49 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlX4y-00020n-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:32:48 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-577.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.218]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS500M73SD0C9@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:24:40 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40169ED4.2080700@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - BOF on LMAP at Seoul Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:24:36 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT The IETF is talking about holding a BOF (see section 4 of RFC 3160) on "MTA Authorization Records in DNS". This BOF, if held, will encompass LMAP proposals: RMX, DMP and SPF, and might discuss DRIP and MTA MARK. It might also discuss other similar proposals from the industry. If this BOF is approved, it will be held at the 59th IETF in Seoul, South Korea during the week of February 29th, 2004 through March 5th, 2004 (see http://www.ietf.org/meetings/IETF-59.html). There might be dedicated mailing list outside the ASRG for BOF discussions, we'll keep you inform with further details. Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 27 18:47:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA00582 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:47:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlcvG-0004WR-TQ for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:47:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0RNlAnq017379 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:47:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlcvG-0004WA-Ol for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:47:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA00553 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:47:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlcvD-000367-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:47:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlcuO-00030y-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:46:17 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlctP-0002u9-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:45:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlctD-0004MB-1T; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:45:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlanS-0005jN-Uj for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:30:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA25317 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:30:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlanR-00029S-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:30:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlamV-00026k-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:30:00 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alam1-00023Z-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:29:29 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-380-577.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.200.218]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS600JP93O5X5@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:28:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <4016D814.9020602@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:28:52 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT From the main IETF announce list. ----------------forwarded text----------------------- To: IETF-Announce :; Subject: Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard From: The IESG Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:53:08 -0500 Reply-to: iesg@ietf.org Sender: owner-ietf-announce@ietf.org The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension ' as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2004-02-23. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-malamud-no-soliciting-04.txt ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "But in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes" (Benjamin Franklin) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 27 21:21:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA11411 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:21:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlfKH-0004p9-FU for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:21:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0S2L9au018539 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:21:09 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlfKH-0004ow-CD for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:21:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA11375 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:21:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlfKE-0003V2-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:21:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlfJH-0003PW-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:20:07 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlfIK-0003KA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:19:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlfIC-0004c0-U3; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:19:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlfHO-0004b9-Qd for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:18:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA11256 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:18:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlfHM-0003Fd-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:18:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlfGa-0003C5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:17:21 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlfFc-000343-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:16:20 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2004012802154701300br7c3e>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 02:15:47 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56207186A2 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:15:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40171B41.20400@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard References: <4016D814.9020602@solidmatrix.com> In-Reply-To: <4016D814.9020602@solidmatrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:15:29 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > - 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension ' > as a Proposed Standard Promulgation of this document as an RFC would encode exactly what we tried to avoid with our consent framework: content-specific solutions that are open to definition wars, redefinition, and even worse, cross-border legal wrangling. It requires that senders, to be compliant with every possible national law, check their mail against each and every registered keyword. I believe that the acceptance of this proposal would be harmful to the operation of the global mail transport system. However, I want to hear some other opinions before submitting my comments to the IETF. Also, should we, as a group, submit a collective opinion, which may carry more weight than just our individual statements? Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 27 23:23:41 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15179 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhEP-0003sz-AA for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:13 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0S4NDTO014934 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:13 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhEP-0003sn-3E for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:13 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15135 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhEN-0003te-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:23:11 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhDQ-0003oQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:22:12 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhCT-0003iw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:21:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhCI-0003gW-S2; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:21:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alfdd-00068F-GQ for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:41:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA12383 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:41:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alfda-0004tJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:41:06 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alfch-0004qF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:40:11 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alfbo-0004j2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:39:16 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-391-916.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.244.249]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS6008QDI0E6D@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 02:38:45 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-reply-to: <40171B41.20400@zemos.net> To: Philip Miller Cc: Carl Malamud , ASRG Message-id: <401720AE.3090206@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <4016D814.9020602@solidmatrix.com> <40171B41.20400@zemos.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:38:38 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Philip Miller wrote: >> - 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension ' >> as a Proposed Standard > > > Promulgation of this document as an RFC would encode exactly what we > tried to avoid with our consent framework: content-specific solutions > that are open to definition wars, redefinition, and even worse, > cross-border legal wrangling. It requires that senders, to be compliant > with every possible national law, check their mail against each and > every registered keyword. > I believe that the acceptance of this proposal would be harmful to the > operation of the global mail transport system. However, I want to hear > some other opinions before submitting my comments to the IETF. > > Also, should we, as a group, submit a collective opinion, which may > carry more weight than just our individual statements? The current draft sets out that IESG or IANA should appoint a designated expert to do these. This may provide some oversight. However, another problem is that people might use it without going through the registry and use that as a basis for a lawsuit anyway. There is also another issue of exchanging policy information between sending and receiving MTAs, which is related to what SPF is trying to do as well with extensibility. In any case, it would be useful to hear what the author has to say to these. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Why are both drug addicts and computer aficionados both called users?" (Clifford Stoll) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Jan 27 23:44:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15781 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:44:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhYk-0005aI-Ol for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:44:14 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0S4iECF021460 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:44:14 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhYk-0005a3-KX for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:44:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15777 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:44:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhYi-0005HZ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:44:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhXo-0005Ep-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:43:17 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhXc-0005BV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:43:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhXY-0005Qg-Pq; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:43:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhWo-0005L2-6U for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:42:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA15729 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:42:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhWm-0005AQ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:42:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhVq-00057K-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:41:15 -0500 Received: from xuxa.iecc.com ([208.31.42.42]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhVd-00054I-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:41:02 -0500 Received: (qmail 29057 invoked by uid 100); 28 Jan 2004 04:40:56 -0000 Message-ID: <20040128044056.29056.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: John Levine To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: <40171B41.20400@zemos.net> Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA Cc: millenix@zemos.net Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: 28 Jan 2004 04:40:56 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 >Promulgation of this document as an RFC would encode exactly what we >tried to avoid with our consent framework: content-specific solutions >that are open to definition wars, redefinition, and even worse, >cross-border legal wrangling. The CAN SPAM act, already in effect in the US, tells the FTC to study both spam tagging and a do-not-spam list. This gives them advice on the least bad way to do those things, avoiding both junk added to mail headers and a centralized list of people who don't want spam. > It requires that senders, to be compliant with every possible > national law, check their mail against each and every registered > keyword. The alternative is for each country to make up its own rules, many of which will likely contradict each other. For example, Korean law says that the subject line in spam has to start with the Korean word for advertisement, while the US rule will probably be for ADV: or ADV:ADLT at the beginning of the subject line. The same subject line can't simultaneously be in Korean and English. > I believe that the acceptance of this proposal would be harmful to > the operation of the global mail transport system. If you think that the lack of a standard is going to keep governments from passing laws, I think you greatly overestimate our influence. I dislike the per-recipient stuff in Carl's draft, and based on some discussions with him, I don't think he's all that crazy about it either. But if someone demands per-recipient granularity in spam acceptance, that's how you'd do it. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Sewer Commissioner "A book is a sneeze." - E.B. White, on the writing of Charlotte's Web _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 00:01:44 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA16106 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:01:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhpF-0006EY-IA for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:01:17 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0S51H0j023956 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:01:17 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhpF-0006EJ-Cf for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:01:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA16101 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:01:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhpD-0006Dd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:01:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhoE-0006AK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:00:15 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alho6-00067O-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:00:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alho3-000651-KY; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 00:00:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlhnG-00060T-8x for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:59:14 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16068 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:59:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhnE-00066P-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:59:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlhmI-00063Y-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:58:15 -0500 Received: from hyde.uw.no ([195.159.29.204] helo=mail.db.org) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alhlo-0005wv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:57:44 -0500 Received: (qmail 23350 invoked from network); 28 Jan 2004 04:57:08 -0000 Received: from ti122110a080-0339.bb.online.no (HELO db.org) (bob@80.213.193.83) by mail.db.org with SMTP; 28 Jan 2004 04:57:08 -0000 Message-ID: <4017411D.2040506@db.org> From: "B. Johannessen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 04:57:01 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yakov Shafranovich wrote: > - 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension ' > as a Proposed Standard Anyone interested in this should check out the last few days of traffic on the Internet Mail Consortium SMTP mailing list: http://www.imc.org/ietf-smtp/mail-archive/maillist.html A good place to start would be Keith Moores comments: http://www.imc.org/ietf-smtp/mail-archive/msg00959.html I found the thread quite informative. Bob -- -=[ B. Johannessen | bob@db.org -=- http://db.org/ | +4797152009 ]=- -=[ Mail & Spam - News, Drafts & Standards - http://db.org/blog/ ]=- -=[ On the Origin Of Spam: Spam Statistics - http://db.org/spam/ ]=- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 01:58:50 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA19368 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AljeW-0004e0-T6 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:23 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0S6wKO9017852 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:20 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AljeW-0004dr-MG for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:20 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA19365 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AljeT-0006iw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:58:17 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AljdV-0006fc-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:57:18 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AljdO-0006cP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:57:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AljdE-0004V7-W6; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:57:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AljcZ-0004S2-51 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:56:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA19345 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:56:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AljcV-0006bt-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:56:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aljba-0006Yv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:55:18 -0500 Received: from bulk.resource.org ([192.101.98.10]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AljbE-0006Vf-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:54:56 -0500 Received: from bulk.resource.org (localhost.resource.org [127.0.0.1]) by bulk.resource.org (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id i0S6sQ1o028276; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:54:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (from carl@localhost) by bulk.resource.org (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) id i0S6sQs4028275; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:54:26 -0800 (PST) From: Carl Malamud Message-Id: <200401280654.i0S6sQs4028275@bulk.resource.org> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: <401720AE.3090206@solidmatrix.com> To: Yakov Shafranovich CC: Philip Miller , ASRG Organization: Memory Palace Press X-Winch: Warn 9.5i X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL94 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 22:54:26 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Yakov and Philip - Let me take your comments in reverse order. > In any case, it would be useful to hear what the author has to say to these. > > There is also another issue of exchanging policy information between > sending and receiving MTAs, which is related to what SPF is trying to do > as well with extensibility. I've tried hard to keep this draft very focused on a simple mechanism that allows a sender or an mta to assert keywords, a receiver to assert keywords, and a registry to keep track of keywords. I agree it could, in a sense conflict with potential future solutions. But, the hope is that the extension meets the "probably won't hurt, might help" criteria of protocol design. So, if SPF does something in this area, perhaps they could use this mechanism as a partial transport or perhaps just ignore it. I don't see how it could hurt. > The current draft sets out that IESG or IANA should appoint a designated > expert to do these. This may provide some oversight. However, another > problem is that people might use it without going through the registry > and use that as a basis for a lawsuit anyway. > Well, if I were the designated expert (and, believe me, I'd rather not), I'd set up the registry using some neutral algorithm. For example, if you have a verifiable email address, a verifiable reference URI, then keywords are allocated on a first-come, first-serve basis. As to using a keyword not in the registry, then suing [iana, ietf, recipient, sender]? I'm not sure I get that one. > > Philip Miller wrote: > >> - 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension ' > >> as a Proposed Standard > > > > > > Promulgation of this document as an RFC would encode exactly what we > > tried to avoid with our consent framework: content-specific solutions > > that are open to definition wars, redefinition, and even worse, > > cross-border legal wrangling. It requires that senders, to be compliant > > with every possible national law, check their mail against each and > > every registered keyword. No, no, no. :) The draft provides a mechanism for the transport of solicitation class keywords. It does not say when a message is accepted or rejected, or when to send it, or anything else having to do with consent. If you want to assert a keyword (or are required to by a license agreement or other governing document), this is, imho, a much better mechanism than inserting them into subject headers, non-standard headers, or other mechanisms. > > I believe that the acceptance of this proposal would be harmful to the > > operation of the global mail transport system. However, I want to hear > > some other opinions before submitting my comments to the IETF. > > > > Also, should we, as a group, submit a collective opinion, which may > > carry more weight than just our individual statements? > I would recommend against that course of action. ;) Seriously, why would the asrg take a group position on this? If you don't like the draft, send the iesg a note and explain why. (I'd highly recommend a look at the ietf-smtp list, where it appears to me there is at least a glimmer of possible consensus.) Regards, Carl _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 09:49:03 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02444 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:49:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alqzb-0003R9-Qg for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:48:36 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SEmZtk013207 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:48:35 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alqzb-0003Qw-LW for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:48:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02439 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:48:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlqzZ-0007Ia-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:48:33 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alqyg-0007EZ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:47:39 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlqyH-00079w-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:47:13 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alqy5-0003FR-Ch; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:47:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alqxo-0003Ez-BQ for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:46:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02386 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:46:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alqxm-00079B-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:46:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alqwr-00073s-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:45:45 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlqwZ-0006yL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:45:27 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0SEjO1Q007908; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:45:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:45:24 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A2@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Carl Malamud'" , Yakov Shafranovich Cc: Philip Miller , ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Ex tension' to Proposed Standard MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:45:22 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 The legal standard you are trying to achieve here is constructive notice. IANAL but I have spent a considerable time with lawyers and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) tring to establish an international registry for notice documents such as would achieve constructive notice. It is a very hard problem. Instead I would suggest that you abandon the keyword approach entirely and use a referential mechanism based on URIs alone. It is not necessary for the mechanism to guarantee that the end user achieve constructive notice acceptable to a court of relevant jurisdiction, it is merely necessary to give the user the ability to achieve it. The best way to achieve constructive notice would be to use a URI that was a-priori bound to a mechanism that ensured that the name could be resolved to a unique document, i.e. a URN. This is actually quite difficult in practice since there are not many URN sequences that are established in a manner that would be likely to be considered notice. The IETF document sequence is arguably one such sequence. A more practical alternative would be to register the policy document with a third party who made some undertaking to make the document available for reading at any time, track modifications to the document, etc. Phill _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 09:55:01 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02637 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:55:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alr5O-0003l1-2R for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:54:34 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SEsYfN014437 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:54:34 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alr5N-0003km-Tz for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:54:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02623 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:54:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alr5M-0007lt-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:54:32 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alr4R-0007i5-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:53:36 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alr3v-0007e4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:53:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alr3t-0003bz-Nj; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:53:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alr3a-0003ZR-Bs for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:52:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02580 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:52:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alr3Y-0007di-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:52:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alr2c-0007Yr-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:51:42 -0500 Received: from peacock.verisign.com ([65.205.251.73]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alr2H-0007Tl-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:51:22 -0500 Received: from MOU1WNEXC03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer3.verisign.com [65.205.251.55]) by peacock.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0SEpL81005975 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:51:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:51:21 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: ASRG MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:51:20 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 spammers have found a way to break C/R schemes that have a 'turing test' component. You simply set up a free porn web site and get people to crack the turing tests in return for seeing the porn. http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/28/1344207&mode=flat&tid=111&ti d=126&tid=172&tid=95&threshold=1 Phill _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 11:03:11 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05976 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als9M-0005zX-MR for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:44 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SG2iG2023025 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:44 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als9M-0005zI-IN for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05961 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als9J-0005gK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Als8N-0005b1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:44 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als7q-0005Vo-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als7j-0005Zt-4j; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als4R-0005Sf-Aq for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:57:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA05721 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:57:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als4O-0005AS-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:57:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Als3S-00054O-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:56:39 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als2Z-0004uj-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:55:43 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS7001QUIUO6I@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:55:10 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich In-reply-to: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Message-id: <4017DB2D.3000102@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 2. C/R - Exploits for CAPTCHAs Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:54:21 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT [Please follow the posting guidelines, was "Re: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response". Mod.] Phil, First of all this is ancient news, it was mentioned on the ASRG list back in November: https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg07899.html Additionally, we need to clarify this. The spammers do not break C/R per se, rather they overcome the reverse Turing test AKA CAPTCHA part of it. The basic point of C/R is to make sure that the originating email address is valid and in order for spammers to do the scheme described here, they must have valid return addresses. Therefore, if any spammer wants to use this scheme, they become more traceable. Yakov P.S. There are also existing problems with using Turing tests, see the post linked to above for the W3C draft. Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > spammers have found a way to break C/R schemes that have a 'turing test' > component. > > You simply set up a free porn web site and get people to crack the turing > tests in return for seeing the porn. > > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/28/1344207&mode=flat&tid=111&ti > d=126&tid=172&tid=95&threshold=1 > > Phill > ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 11:04:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06052 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:04:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsAF-00061n-Nx for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SG3dg8023165 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsAF-00061Y-Jp for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:39 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06038 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsAC-0005lO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Als9L-0005go-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:44 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als8e-0005bU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als8f-0005qm-UV; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als8M-0005j6-1S for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05911 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als8J-0005aI-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:39 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Als7Q-0005Va-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:00:44 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als6y-0005QS-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:00:16 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0SG0F1Q012623; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:00:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:00:15 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A6@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Yakov Shafranovich'" , "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [Asrg] RE: 2. C/R - Exploits for CAPTCHAs Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:00:13 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 I don't know what a CAPTCHA is and I have no interest in learning a piece of jargon that is completely pointless. Talking in a private language that is only understood by a small clique is a great way to make sure that the outside world ignores important work. > -----Original Message----- > From: Yakov Shafranovich [mailto:research@solidmatrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:54 AM > To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip > Cc: ASRG > Subject: 2. C/R - Exploits for CAPTCHAs > > > [Please follow the posting guidelines, was "Re: [Asrg] Its > all over for > Challenge Response". Mod.] > > Phil, > > First of all this is ancient news, it was mentioned on the ASRG list > back in November: > > https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current /msg07899.html Additionally, we need to clarify this. The spammers do not break C/R per se, rather they overcome the reverse Turing test AKA CAPTCHA part of it. The basic point of C/R is to make sure that the originating email address is valid and in order for spammers to do the scheme described here, they must have valid return addresses. Therefore, if any spammer wants to use this scheme, they become more traceable. Yakov P.S. There are also existing problems with using Turing tests, see the post linked to above for the W3C draft. Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > spammers have found a way to break C/R schemes that have a 'turing test' > component. > > You simply set up a free porn web site and get people to crack the turing > tests in return for seeing the porn. > > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/28/1344207&mode=flat&tid=111&ti > d=126&tid=172&tid=95&threshold=1 > > Phill > ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 11:07:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06495 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:07:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsDF-0006kO-F2 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:06:45 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SG6jbZ025916 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:06:45 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsDE-0006jh-PL for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:06:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06351 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:06:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsDB-00062U-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:06:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsCF-0005ww-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:05:44 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsBZ-0005rt-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:05:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsBa-00064k-8W; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:05:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsBC-00062y-Dk for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:04:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06073 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:04:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsB9-0005qV-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:04:35 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsAE-0005lg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:39 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als9N-0005bX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:46 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20040128160213012002hg92e>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:02:13 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC64B186A2; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4017DD02.2070905@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Subject: Re: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> In-Reply-To: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:10 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > spammers have found a way to break C/R schemes that have a 'turing test' > component. > > You simply set up a free porn web site and get people to crack the turing > tests in return for seeing the porn. > > http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/28/1344207&mode=flat&tid=111&ti > d=126&tid=172&tid=95&threshold=1 We have seen this mentioned here before. This approach to C/R by spammers does have one beneficial side-effect: they must ensure that the challenge gets back to a useful address. Thus, they can no longer forge everything and expect mail to get through. Perhaps we should start sending out fake challenges to spammers with problems that no one would reasonably be able to solve, like asking for proofs of various open problems in mathematics. :-) Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 11:52:36 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05981 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:03:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als9L-0005zG-T9 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:45 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SG2hwZ023008 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als9L-0005z1-OX for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05958 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als9J-0005gF-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:02:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Als8M-0005at-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:43 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Als7q-0005Vn-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:10 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Als7i-0005Zi-L8; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:01:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alpul-00072H-Hu for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:39:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA00734 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:39:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alpuk-00020r-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:39:30 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alptn-0001wL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:38:32 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlptE-0001sT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:37:57 -0500 Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Alpt5-00055k-00 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:37:47 +0100 Received: from footbone.midwestcs.com ([206.222.212.237]) by news.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed Jan 28 13:37:47 2004 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: asrg@ietf.org Received: from sea.gmane.org ([80.91.224.252]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Alpt3-00055c-00 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:37:45 +0100 Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Alpt3-0001Sa-00 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:37:45 +0100 From: wayne Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: <401720AE.3090206@solidmatrix.com> <200401280654.i0S6sQs4028275@bulk.resource.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: footbone.midwestcs.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Reasonable Discussion, linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:qs2COC54lL61me7sClYTaN5VkPk= Subject: [Asrg] Re: 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 07:37:42 -0600 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 In <200401280654.i0S6sQs4028275@bulk.resource.org> Carl Malamud writes: > I've tried hard to keep this draft very focused on a simple mechanism > that allows a sender or an mta to assert keywords, a receiver to > assert keywords, and a registry to keep track of keywords. I confess that I haven't read the draft *real* closely, but can't a spammer just avoid seeing the "no solicitations" sign by using HELO instead of EHLO? -wayne _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 12:24:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15069 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:24:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltQC-0006V2-Eo for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:24:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SHOC9k024978 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:24:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltQC-0006Un-6R for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:24:12 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14982 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:24:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltQA-0002Z1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:24:10 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AltOb-00029o-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:22:33 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltN7-0001rY-06 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:21:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alt6o-0003Ls-8C; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:04:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlsfU-0000M9-9a for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:35:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA08724 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:35:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsfT-0001r4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:35:55 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alse2-0001WY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:34:27 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alscj-0001Fr-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:33:05 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0SGX31Q000762; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:33:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:33:03 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A8@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Philip Miller'" , "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Subject: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Respo nse MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:32:59 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 >We have seen this mentioned here before. This approach to C/R by spammers >does have one beneficial side-effect: they must ensure that the challenge >gets back to a useful address. Thus, they can no longer forge everything and >expect mail to get through. The same effect can be achieved without negative impact on the end user experience. It is possible to save the turing test mechanism, but not for private practices. I just sent this out to the managers responsible for the Turing test mechanisms used to stop mass signups for mail accounts. Basically Microsoft should add a copyright notice to their turing test image and offer a free X-Box for the first person to report each site using a man in the middle attack to defeat it. Problem: Spammers pay people to solve Turing tests with pornography Attack reported in high visibility forum (Slashdot) Risk: Loss of confidence in anti-spam measures, Very high probability of press attention, MUST have prompt response Public MUST NOT believe spammers have upper hand. Solution: Add copyright notice to Turing test and sue malefactors. Reference: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/28/1344207&mode=flat&tid=111&ti d=126&tid=172&tid=95&threshold=1 Background: Turing tests are widely used to limit signups for free email accounts (hotmail, Yahoo!). In addition they are used in some of the more unpleasant email C/R schemes. A typical turing test consists of a GIF image that has been distorted in some way that is difficult to reverse using OCR techniques but is easy for a human viewer to read. The problem here is that the turing test is subject to a form of man in the middle attack. The viewer of one site is tricked (or bribed) into solving the Turing test of another site. Pornography provides an incentive that is free to the spammer and attracts a large number of willing participants. Solution: A quick fix would be to add a copyright tag into the Turing test so that it is clear that this substitution is taking place. Set up a bounty system for reporting such attacks, a free X-Box is probably more attractive than free porn. Or you could give a free X-Box and a subscription to your choice of Penthouse, Comopolitan or a non-porn title. It is important that the press is quickly informed that there is a response if public confidence is to be maintained. For anti-spam measures to be effective as psychology, it is vital that people believe that it is the spammers who are on the defensive. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 12:28:14 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15576 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:28:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltTe-00078N-Nh for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:27:47 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SHRk3k027417 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:27:46 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltTe-000788-JT for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:27:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15542 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:27:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltTd-0003EP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:27:45 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AltSu-00037M-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:27:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltS8-0002z3-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:26:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltRy-0006ni-Kf; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:26:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltRE-0006dR-Op for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:25:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15232 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:25:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltRD-0002mf-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:25:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AltPq-0002V7-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:23:51 -0500 Received: from wbar3.sjo1-4-11-009-147.sjo1.dsl-verizon.net ([4.11.9.147] helo=candle.brasslantern.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltOC-000253-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:22:09 -0500 Received: (from schaefer@localhost) by candle.brasslantern.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id i0SHM1T29698 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:22:01 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: candle.brasslantern.com: schaefer set sender to schaefer@closedmail.com using -f From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <1040128172201.ZM29697@candle.brasslantern.com> References: <200401280654.i0S6sQs4028275@bulk.resource.org> <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A2@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <401720AE.3090206@solidmatrix.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:22:01 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 On Jan 27, 10:54pm, Carl Malamud wrote: } } > Philip Miller wrote: } > > } > > It requires that senders, to be compliant } > > with every possible national law, check their mail against each and } > > every registered keyword. } } No, no, no. :) The draft provides a mechanism for the transport } of solicitation class keywords. It does not say when a message is } accepted or rejected, or when to send it, or anything else having } to do with consent. If you want to assert a keyword (or are required } to by a license agreement or other governing document), this is, } imho, a much better mechanism than inserting them into subject } headers, non-standard headers, or other mechanisms. On Jan 28, 6:45am, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: } } The legal standard you are trying to achieve here is constructive notice. On Jan 28, 7:37am, wayne wrote: } } I confess that I haven't read the draft *real* closely, but can't a } spammer just avoid seeing the "no solicitations" sign by using HELO } instead of EHLO? I have a related question/concern. Suppose that this draft is published as a (proposed) standard. Suppose further that the FTC actually does adopt it as the labeling mechanism for commercial email. Doesn't that effectively legislate that everyone who wishes to send commercial email in any capacity, must immediately upgrade their mail servers to something that supports ESMTP including this extension? In which case, why propose it as an extension at all? It's effectively scrapping the existing email system anyway; if you're going to legislate that the infrastructure must be upgraded, you might as well choose a better target for the end result of the upgrade. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 12:44:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16424 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:44:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltjD-0000OR-Nr for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:43:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SHhpRp001505 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:43:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltjD-0000OC-IQ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:43:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16395 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:43:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltjB-0004yz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:43:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AltiI-0004rs-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:42:55 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlthT-0004kz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:42:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AltgS-0008Kk-SO; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:41:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Altg9-0008I3-M4 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:40:41 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16216 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:40:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Altg8-0004cY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:40:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AltfG-0004Y1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:39:46 -0500 Received: from smtp.everyone.net ([216.200.145.17] helo=rmta02.mta.everyone.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alteh-0004Sv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:39:12 -0500 Received: from sohonotebook (ip68-100-37-118.dc.dc.cox.net [68.100.37.118]) by rmta02.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 114D681EE; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:38:16 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric Dean" To: "'Hallam-Baker, Phillip'" , "'Philip Miller'" Cc: "'ASRG'" Subject: RE: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response Message-ID: <016b01c3e5c5$849c2710$6401a8c0@sohonotebook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-Reply-To: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A8@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:38:17 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In fact, this is all an argument for CRI...one that does not involve humans. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 12:58:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA17175 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:58:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Altwk-0002Dl-Qo for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:57:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SHvoPW008531 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:57:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Altwk-0002DT-MR for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:57:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA17154 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:57:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Altwi-0006Ls-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:57:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Altvo-0006G5-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:56:53 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AltvM-00069w-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:56:24 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Altv0-0001mp-7Z; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:56:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alsef-0000GN-U9 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:35:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA08458 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:35:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alsed-0001f9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:35:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlsdM-0001PZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:33:46 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alsbg-0000t7-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:32:00 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS7000IIKKATC@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:31:28 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-reply-to: <200401280654.i0S6sQs4028275@bulk.resource.org> To: Carl Malamud Cc: Philip Miller , ASRG Message-id: <4017E3D9.4010703@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <200401280654.i0S6sQs4028275@bulk.resource.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:31:21 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Carl Malamud wrote: > Hi Yakov and Philip - > > Let me take your comments in reverse order. > Thanks for the quick response! > >>In any case, it would be useful to hear what the author has to say to these. >> >>There is also another issue of exchanging policy information between >>sending and receiving MTAs, which is related to what SPF is trying to do >>as well with extensibility. > > > I've tried hard to keep this draft very focused on a simple mechanism > that allows a sender or an mta to assert keywords, a receiver to > assert keywords, and a registry to keep track of keywords. > > I agree it could, in a sense conflict with potential future solutions. > But, the hope is that the extension meets the "probably won't hurt, > might help" criteria of protocol design. So, if SPF does something > in this area, perhaps they could use this mechanism as a partial > transport or perhaps just ignore it. I don't see how it could hurt. > I have no problems with your specific draft, rather I am afraid of it being overloaded and used for things other than solicitions and more as a generic policy mechanism. It would be helpful if the IANA registry guidelines are restricted to only "solicition" stuff, and nothing else. There are problems with policy expression mechanisms mainly from the design point, since this particular mechanism was intended for a specific purpose, overloading as a generic mechanism might not work so well. Therefore, it might be better to have a separate generic policy mechanism. > >>The current draft sets out that IESG or IANA should appoint a designated >>expert to do these. This may provide some oversight. However, another >>problem is that people might use it without going through the registry >>and use that as a basis for a lawsuit anyway. >> > > > Well, if I were the designated expert (and, believe me, I'd rather not), > I'd set up the registry using some neutral algorithm. For example, > if you have a verifiable email address, a verifiable reference > URI, then keywords are allocated on a first-come, first-serve basis. One possibility I was wondering about - what if Saudia Arabia wants to register a keyword for "ISLAMIC-conformant email" in order to censor? It would be highly recommended that the IANA registry operates under specific guidelines and restricts these keywords to "NO SOLICIT" stuff only, and not anything else. In any case, that would probably be up to the IESG. > As to using a keyword not in the registry, then suing [iana, ietf, > recipient, sender]? I'm not sure I get that one. > The basic premise of this is to provide ability to pursue the spammers legally by giving them prior notice. Being that SMTP uses English and somewhat readable keywords, it is feasible that someone will use these to give notice with "semi" English keywords they made themselves, and then try to sue incoming emailers for not keeping them. And these "semi English" words maybe something else other than spam, although I am not sure if such lawsuit will ever be successful. In any case, these are not technical issues but rather is social ones. > >>Philip Miller wrote: >> >>>>- 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension ' >>>> as a Proposed Standard >>> >>> >>>Promulgation of this document as an RFC would encode exactly what we >>>tried to avoid with our consent framework: content-specific solutions >>>that are open to definition wars, redefinition, and even worse, >>>cross-border legal wrangling. It requires that senders, to be compliant >>>with every possible national law, check their mail against each and >>>every registered keyword. > > > No, no, no. :) The draft provides a mechanism for the transport > of solicitation class keywords. It does not say when a message is > accepted or rejected, or when to send it, or anything else having > to do with consent. If you want to assert a keyword (or are required > to by a license agreement or other governing document), this is, > imho, a much better mechanism than inserting them into subject > headers, non-standard headers, or other mechanisms. > Nevertheless, this mechanism is intended for legal use as the draft describes: " The service extension allows a mail recipient to notify the sender that certain forms of electronic mail are not desired and thus gives policy makers a mechanism for requiring senders of such electronic mail to identify their missives any penalties for failure to do so. " The problem that Philip is pointing out is not relevant to the actual draft, rather to the idea behind it - the fact the multiple jurisdictions have multiple laws, and for emailers to comply with them would be complicated. But as John pointed out, there are many laws anyway today, and governments are passing even more. Having a single mechanism might or might not make things simpler. >>>I believe that the acceptance of this proposal would be harmful to the >>>operation of the global mail transport system. However, I want to hear >>>some other opinions before submitting my comments to the IETF. >>> >>>Also, should we, as a group, submit a collective opinion, which may >>>carry more weight than just our individual statements? >> > > I would recommend against that course of action. ;) Seriously, > why would the asrg take a group position on this? If you don't > like the draft, send the iesg a note and explain why. > > (I'd highly recommend a look at the ietf-smtp list, where it appears > to me there is at least a glimmer of possible consensus.) > I would also recommend that whomever wants to submit comments on these, should do so to the IESG directly. Keep in mind, that if you mention that you are an ASRG member, nevertheless do not make it sound that you are speaking for the whole group. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "I want to know G-d's thoughts... the rest are details" (Albert Einstein) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 13:22:16 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18288 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:22:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluJx-0005A2-Tt for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:21:49 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SILnKq019832 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:21:49 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluJx-00059n-Pr for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:21:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18233 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:21:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluJv-00010S-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:21:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AluJ0-0000t1-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:20:52 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluGd-0000fK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:18:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluGH-0004qj-Fy; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:18:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluG0-0004q3-PU for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:17:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18135 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:17:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluFt-0000ZZ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:17:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AluDD-0000Qv-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:14:52 -0500 Received: from bulk.resource.org ([192.101.98.10]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluCq-0000LG-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:14:28 -0500 Received: from bulk.resource.org (localhost.resource.org [127.0.0.1]) by bulk.resource.org (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id i0SIDp1o023975; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:13:51 -0800 (PST) Received: (from carl@localhost) by bulk.resource.org (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) id i0SIDpTl023974; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:13:51 -0800 (PST) From: Carl Malamud Message-Id: <200401281813.i0SIDpTl023974@bulk.resource.org> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: <1040128172201.ZM29697@candle.brasslantern.com> To: Bart Schaefer CC: asrg@ietf.org Organization: Memory Palace Press X-Winch: Warn 9.5i X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL94 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:13:51 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Doesn't that effectively legislate that everyone who wishes to send > commercial email in any capacity, must immediately upgrade their mail > servers to something that supports ESMTP including this extension? I'm not the ftc, I don't sit in congress, and I don't enforce an aup policy for an isp. But, if I were, I might say: 1. If you send any unsolicited bulk mail in class x, you must use a solicitation: header. 2. If you do more than x messages per year, you must also use esmtp and the no-soliciting extension. > > In which case, why propose it as an extension at all? It's effectively > scrapping the existing email system anyway; if you're going to legislate > that the infrastructure must be upgraded, you might as well choose a > better target for the end result of the upgrade. > Well, esmtp is pretty widely deployed and the effort to do a simple extension like this is far from the effort to do an ng solution. I think ng is the right answer, I just don't know what it is. :)) Even if the sender does not use esmtp, this extension might be quite helpful once it has reached your own mail processing system: as a customer, you might be running several dozen mail servers and if those all speak esmtp, this facility might be useful. Don't forget: my draft does not specify who has to use it or how recipients should act when presented with various keywords. This is simply a way for senders, mtas, and recipients to assert keywords using a common mechanism. Regards, Carl _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 13:27:09 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18542 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:27:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluOh-0005Zt-Jb for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:26:43 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SIQhPs021435 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:26:43 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluOh-0005Ze-F0 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:26:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18511 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:26:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluOf-0001Te-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:26:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AluNh-0001OU-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:25:42 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluNA-0001KA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:25:08 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluN3-0005PP-Tz; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:25:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AluMm-0005Ok-E5 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:24:44 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18453 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:24:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluMk-0001Ja-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:24:42 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AluLy-0001FE-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:23:54 -0500 Received: from wbar3.sjo1-4-11-009-147.sjo1.dsl-verizon.net ([4.11.9.147] helo=candle.brasslantern.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluLU-00019P-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:23:24 -0500 Received: (from schaefer@localhost) by candle.brasslantern.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id i0SINFj29797 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:23:15 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: candle.brasslantern.com: schaefer set sender to schaefer@closedmail.com using -f From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <1040128182315.ZM29796@candle.brasslantern.com> In-Reply-To: <200401281813.i0SIDpTl023974@bulk.resource.org> Comments: In reply to Carl Malamud "Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard" (Jan 28, 10:13am) References: <200401281813.i0SIDpTl023974@bulk.resource.org> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:23:15 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 On Jan 28, 10:13am, Carl Malamud wrote: } } I'm not the ftc, I don't sit in congress, and I don't enforce an aup } policy for an isp. But, if I were, I might say: } } 1. If you send any unsolicited bulk mail in class x, you must use } a solicitation: header. } } 2. If you do more than x messages per year, you must also use } esmtp and the no-soliciting extension. Unfortunately the federal legislation doesn't mention or define "bulk", only "commercial", so I'm not sure that the FTC has enough leeway to limit the labeling requirements only to large-volume senders. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 15:33:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA26684 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:33:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlwMk-0006Jv-Tn for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SKWo3P024289 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlwMk-0006Jg-N9 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA26674 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwMj-0007Od-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwLm-0007I6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:31:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwLH-0007Ck-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:31:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlwL0-0005qv-8r; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:31:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlvLm-0000Vp-O5 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:27:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22005 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:27:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlvLk-0000GK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:27:44 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlvKi-00008o-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:26:40 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlvJm-0007j9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:25:42 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS7000DXPTQNE@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:25:08 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-reply-to: <200401281813.i0SIDpTl023974@bulk.resource.org> To: Carl Malamud Cc: Bart Schaefer , asrg@ietf.org Message-id: <4017FE7C.2050406@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <200401281813.i0SIDpTl023974@bulk.resource.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:25:00 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Carl Malamud wrote: > Don't forget: my draft does not specify who has to use it or > how recipients should act when presented with various keywords. > This is simply a way for senders, mtas, and recipients to > assert keywords using a common mechanism. > Carl, This is part that actually worries me more than anything else. Can you explain what is the exact scope of this mechanism? If it is generic, than it should be stated so, otherwise, the scope of it including the operations of the IANA registry, should be narrowed. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 15:33:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA26686 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:33:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlwMl-0006KD-G8 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SKWpFa024307 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlwMl-0006Jy-Bi for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA26678 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwMk-0007Oi-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:32:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwLn-0007IE-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:31:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwLH-0007Cl-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:31:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlwKz-0005qk-Pc; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:31:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aluye-0007c3-PE for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:03:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20575 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:03:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aluyc-0005L1-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:03:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aluxk-0005FL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:02:57 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AluxF-00057T-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:02:25 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS700DSFOE0D9@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:54:12 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich In-reply-to: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A8@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: "'Philip Miller'" , ASRG Message-id: <4017F734.1080109@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A8@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:53:56 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: >>We have seen this mentioned here before. This approach to C/R by spammers >>does have one beneficial side-effect: they must ensure that the challenge >>gets back to a useful address. Thus, they can no longer forge everything > > and > >>expect mail to get through. > > > The same effect can be achieved without negative impact on the end user > experience. > Beside regular C/R without Turing tests, I am not aware of something that can do the same thing without changing something in the underlying email architechture. The whole advantage of C/R is that it does not require anything to be changed, but annoys end-users. If you can list some other alternatives that can verify the return address, that would be helpful. Also, like Eric Dean mentioned, if the whole purpose of C/R is to verify return addresses, adding an automated proposal like CRI would help reduce the end-user problems, ASSUMING that return address verification is useful at all. (Just a note, I am not advocating C/R, just engaging in a discussion about it) Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 16:37:42 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01377 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:37:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlxN5-00038z-A0 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:37:15 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SLbFlB012075 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:37:15 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlxN5-00038g-0t for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:37:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01361 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:37:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlxN3-000072-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:37:13 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlxM7-0007l3-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:36:16 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlxL8-0007Zv-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:35:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlxKx-0002pr-2C; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:35:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlxJy-0002oK-Se for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:34:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01047 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:33:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlxJx-0007O8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:34:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlxIx-0007GL-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:32:59 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlxIH-00078x-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:32:17 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.54]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0SLWD1Q006807; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:32:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:32:13 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B2@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Yakov Shafranovich'" , "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: "'Philip Miller'" , ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:32:12 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > Beside regular C/R without Turing tests, I am not aware of something > that can do the same thing without changing something in the > underlying > email architechture. The whole advantage of C/R is that it does not > require anything to be changed, but annoys end-users. If you can list > some other alternatives that can verify the return address, > that would be helpful. S/MIME does not require a change to the email architecture:-) The issue here is deployment. An individual can deploy C/R without any deployment dependencies on any other party. That is only a show stopper if you are not in a position to influence the deployment of a new architecture for a substantial fraction of the Internet. As people on the list know there is a coalition in existence that has precisely that capability. One member of that coalition has already deployed SPF, another has proposed a cryptographic authentication proposal, yet another has made a proposal whose details are not at present public. Phill _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 17:42:21 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04529 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:42:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlyNc-0000Yv-UG for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:41:55 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SMfqpX002161 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:41:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlyNc-0000Ym-Mq for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:41:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04521 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:41:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyNa-0006oI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:41:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyMk-0006jo-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:40:58 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyM7-0006eq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:40:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlyLu-0000Np-AG; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:40:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlyLd-0000Mh-P2 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:39:49 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA04473 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:39:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyLb-0006ds-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:39:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyKh-0006ZK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:38:51 -0500 Received: from bulk.resource.org ([192.101.98.10]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyJl-0006Pi-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:37:53 -0500 Received: from bulk.resource.org (localhost.resource.org [127.0.0.1]) by bulk.resource.org (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id i0SMXO1o003424; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:33:24 -0800 (PST) Received: (from carl@localhost) by bulk.resource.org (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) id i0SMXOBd003423; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:33:24 -0800 (PST) From: Carl Malamud Message-Id: <200401282233.i0SMXOBd003423@bulk.resource.org> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-Reply-To: <4017FE7C.2050406@solidmatrix.com> To: Yakov Shafranovich CC: Bart Schaefer , asrg@ietf.org Organization: Memory Palace Press X-Winch: Warn 9.5i X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL94 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:33:24 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Carl Malamud wrote: > > Don't forget: my draft does not specify who has to use it or > > how recipients should act when presented with various keywords. > > This is simply a way for senders, mtas, and recipients to > > assert keywords using a common mechanism. > > > > Carl, > > This is part that actually worries me more than anything else. Can you > explain what is the exact scope of this mechanism? If it is generic, > than it should be stated so, otherwise, the scope of it including the > operations of the IANA registry, should be narrowed. > Well, the scope is pretty narrow now: solicitation class keywords. The i-d gives guidance on the puropse, and a designated expert is recommended to develop any further policies. I really think it is wise to spec out the fewest things that are absolutely necessary. Do we really need to go further? I'm not sure how anybody reading the draft could be confused into thinking this is a more generic, multi-purpose mechanism and the combination of registration in a registry and the strong recommendation that documentation of the registry be in the form of an rfc gives it significant inertia. Regards, Carl _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 18:05:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA05711 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:05:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alyjs-0004AM-4P for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:04:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SN4q4d016013 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:04:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alyjs-0004A7-0Q for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:04:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA05661 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:04:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alyjp-0001Qz-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:04:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alyiv-0001ME-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:03:54 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlyiA-0001Gw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:03:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alyi5-00032b-Ou; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:03:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alyhw-0002tr-Ua for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:02:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA05484 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:02:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alyhu-0001Fy-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:02:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alyh4-0001Ay-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:01:59 -0500 Received: from goose.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.18]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alygn-00015g-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:01:41 -0500 Received: from dialup-67.30.211.101.dial1.atlanta1.level3.net ([67.30.211.101] helo=earthlink.net) by goose.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Alygm-0005tg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:01:40 -0800 Message-ID: <40183F00.5050902@earthlink.net> From: Paul Tenny User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Respo nse References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A8@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> In-Reply-To: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A8@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:00:16 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > > Problem: Spammers pay people to solve Turing tests with pornography > Attack reported in high visibility forum (Slashdot) The same flaw applies to just about everything. If you have the money, you can beat just about anything. > Risk: Loss of confidence in anti-spam measures, > Very high probability of press attention, MUST have prompt > response > Public MUST NOT believe spammers have upper hand. > Based on what I've read on this list and the technology available now as well as the total lack of interest in "doing what it takes" to get results, I have about the least amount of confidence possible in anti-spam measures. Tricking the public into thinking what YOU want them to think versus the truth as it stands today (they have always had the upper hand) is just stalling. Always tell the truth, it's the best policy. > Solution: Add copyright notice to Turing test and sue malefactors. Yes, because we all know how well copyright protects everything else in the digital realm, like music and movies. > Background: > > Turing tests are widely used to limit signups for free email > accounts (hotmail, Yahoo!). In addition they are used in some of the more > unpleasant email C/R schemes. > > A typical turing test consists of a GIF image that has been > distorted in some way that is difficult to reverse using OCR techniques but > is easy for a human viewer to read. > > The problem here is that the turing test is subject to a form of man > in the middle attack. The viewer of one site is tricked (or bribed) into > solving the Turing test of another site. Pornography provides an incentive > that is free to the spammer and attracts a large number of willing > participants. The real problem here is that like all C/R these things are nothing but stopgap measures, not solutions. [Please don't CC responses to me, I'm subscribed here.] _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 18:39:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07695 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:39:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzGn-0001LD-2E for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:38:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SNcr9Z005151 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:38:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzGm-0001L0-Sd for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:38:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07690 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:38:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzGj-0004aC-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:38:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzFo-0004Uf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:37:53 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzF4-0004PV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:37:06 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzEy-0000u9-Eq; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:37:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alwkx-0008Ew-9S for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:57:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA28023 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:57:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alwkv-0002PY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:57:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alwk8-0002K9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:57:01 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlwjN-0002Aw-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:56:13 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS700I80VINSP@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:28:07 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <40181B4D.10105@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: [Asrg] 3b. SMTP Session Verification - Update on LMAP BOF Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:27:57 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT The BOF on MTA authorization records in DNS (MARID) will take place at the next IETF. The BOF chairs are Patrik Faltstrom and Ted Hardie from the IETF. There is a new mailing list for BOF discussions, ietf-mxcomp@imc.org (see http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/). This mailing list is NOT an ASRG list but rather is a list used for the BOF discussions only. The SMTP Verify subgroup will still continue working on other methods besides DNS designated senders to verify the SMTP session. Detailed information appears below: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- BoF Description: This meeting will review a set of related proposals for the DNS publication of data which authorizes SMTP senders within a specific domain. The proposals to be discussed vary in the proposed resource record type, syntax, and operation, but all include DNS publication of data intended to allow validation of IP-address, envelope, or header-originator data for SMTP MTAs. This BoF will be strictly limited to measures related to MTA authentication; no other anti-spam measures or topics will be considered. The BoF will explicitly consider how DNS-based MTA authentication mechanisms would be implemented and deployed, and it will consider the impact on the overall DNS infrastructure of this deployment. This meeting will discuss whether or not an IETF working group is needed to continue work on this topic. BoF Agenda: Agenda Bashing 5 Problem Overview 35 Taking draft-irtf-asrg-lmap-discussion as a starting point, this discussion will focus on the problem these proposals attempt to solve, the broad outlines of the solution space proposed, and the constraints implied by that solution space. Current Proposals SPF 15 RMX 15 DMP 15 MS 15 Implications for the DNS 15 Based on the current proposals, the BoF will discuss how this approach generally and each proposal specifically interacts with the DNS. Implications for SMTP 15 Based on the current proposals, the BoF will discuss how this approach generally and each proposal specifically interacts with existing and proposed mechanisms for mail transfer. Discussion of scope for IETF work 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Yakov Shafranovich Co-Chair, ASRG ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Among all our enemies / The ones to be most feared are often the smallest" (Jean de la Fontaine) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 18:49:22 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07945 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:49:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzQW-0002No-KI for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:56 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SNmut0009160 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:56 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzQW-0002Nf-GF for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07934 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzQT-0005Y3-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzPT-0005SW-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:51 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzOj-0005NH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzOe-000221-2t; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzLg-0001kI-Pd for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:44:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07833 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:43:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzLd-00055s-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:43:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzKh-000505-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:42:56 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzKQ-0004u9-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:42:38 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS80047I4HAZM@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:41:45 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R In-reply-to: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B2@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Message-id: <401848A9.1040900@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B2@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:41:29 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: >>Beside regular C/R without Turing tests, I am not aware of something >>that can do the same thing without changing something in the >>underlying >>email architechture. The whole advantage of C/R is that it does not >>require anything to be changed, but annoys end-users. If you can list >>some other alternatives that can verify the return address, >>that would be helpful. > > > S/MIME does not require a change to the email architecture:-) > > The issue here is deployment. An individual can deploy C/R without > any deployment dependencies on any other party. > > That is only a show stopper if you are not in a position to influence > the deployment of a new architecture for a substantial fraction > of the Internet. > While we are on the topic of S/MIME: currently majority of MUAs have S/MIME support built-in including root certificates. Why is that no banks or financial companies that are suffering from "phishing" attacks, consider signing their email via S/MIME? Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "And this too shall come to pass" ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 18:49:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07962 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:49:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzQX-0002OC-S1 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:57 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0SNmvi2009178 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:57 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzQX-0002Nx-Nd for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07938 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzQU-0005YD-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:48:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzPT-0005Sh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:52 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzOj-0005NI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzOe-000229-Le; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzNY-0001vQ-9o for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:45:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07852 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:45:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzNV-0005Gj-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:45:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzMY-0005BX-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:44:51 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzM0-000542-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:44:16 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS8006HB4KFY1@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:43:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. Legal - Last Call: 'A No Soliciting SMTP Service Extension' to Proposed Standard In-reply-to: <200401282233.i0SMXOBd003423@bulk.resource.org> To: Carl Malamud Cc: asrg@ietf.org Message-id: <4018491D.6050303@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <200401282233.i0SMXOBd003423@bulk.resource.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:43:25 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Carl Malamud wrote: >>Carl Malamud wrote: >> >>>Don't forget: my draft does not specify who has to use it or >>>how recipients should act when presented with various keywords. >>>This is simply a way for senders, mtas, and recipients to >>>assert keywords using a common mechanism. >>> >> >>Carl, >> >>This is part that actually worries me more than anything else. Can you >>explain what is the exact scope of this mechanism? If it is generic, >>than it should be stated so, otherwise, the scope of it including the >>operations of the IANA registry, should be narrowed. >> > > > Well, the scope is pretty narrow now: solicitation class keywords. > The i-d gives guidance on the puropse, and a designated expert is > recommended to develop any further policies. > > I really think it is wise to spec out the fewest things that > are absolutely necessary. Do we really need to go further? I'm > not sure how anybody reading the draft could be confused into > thinking this is a more generic, multi-purpose mechanism and > the combination of registration in a registry and the > strong recommendation that documentation of the registry > be in the form of an rfc gives it significant inertia. > Thank you for the clarification. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 19:03:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08265 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:03:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alze0-0002yT-BV for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:02:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T02q2H011430 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:02:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alze0-0002yH-7a for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:02:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08257 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:02:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzdx-0006jG-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:02:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzd7-0006eq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:01:57 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzcO-0006Zj-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:01:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzcE-0002oH-AU; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:01:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alzc6-0002nb-DR for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:00:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08222 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:00:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzc3-0006Y2-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:00:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzb5-0006Ta-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:59:52 -0500 Received: from peacock.verisign.com ([65.205.251.73]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzaj-0006P6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:59:29 -0500 Received: from MOU1WNEXC03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer3.verisign.com [65.205.251.55]) by peacock.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0SNxT81003729 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:59:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:59:29 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B4@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: RE: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge R espo nse MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:59:28 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > > Solution: Add copyright notice to Turing test and sue malefactors. > > Yes, because we all know how well copyright protects everything else > in the digital realm, like music and movies. Actually this is a rather different case. There is already a pretty successful spam litigation bar. Folk like Jon Praed who go and sue spammers and get huge damages awards for AOL, Microsoft etc. Copyright is not very effective when it is used in a scattergun fashion. The risk of being selected for prosecution is not a deterent when you have millions of infringers. The point of the copyright notice is to notify the end user who is being fooled into answering the test on the spammer's behalf. The purpose of the XBox is to give the end-user an incentive to turn them in. It is a consequence based security measure and so it is less satisfactory than crypto. But it still works to protect Yahoo and hotmail signups. Real security analysis is risk mitigation, not risk elimination. Now that the attack has been broadcast on slashdot it is only a matter of days before it gets tried. So we will see how effective the response is. Phill _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 19:11:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08449 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:11:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alzlm-0003t9-0S for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:10:54 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T0ArbH014941 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:10:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alzll-0003su-Rv for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:10:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08432 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:10:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzli-0007Vw-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:10:50 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzkq-0007Q6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:09:57 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzjx-0007K0-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:09:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alzjw-0003jD-Nv; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:09:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Alzjs-0003iu-Bn for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:08:56 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08378 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:08:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzjo-0007Il-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:08:53 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzis-0007DD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:07:54 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlziC-00077x-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:07:12 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0T07A1Q028828; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:07:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:07:10 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B5@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Yakov Shafranovich'" , "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:07:09 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > While we are on the topic of S/MIME: currently majority of MUAs have > S/MIME support built-in including root certificates. Why is that no > banks or financial companies that are suffering from > "phishing" attacks, > consider signing their email via S/MIME? I know several banks that are considering it. The disadvantage is that there are email users with MUAs that don't handle S/MIME. The big problem is that Eudora is effectively an orphan code-base with little serious development work. There is a private working group looking at this. Yahoo! Domain keys looks like a better fit for what it is intended to achieve. Phill _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 19:24:19 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08882 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:24:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzyK-0004tX-Mm for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:23:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T0NqrA018809 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:23:52 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzyK-0004tI-IR for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:23:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08863 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:23:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzyJ-00015E-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:23:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzxO-0000ze-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:22:55 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzwa-0000uJ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:22:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzwX-0004Yq-JF; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:22:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AlzuY-0004Pn-TK for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:19:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA08757 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:19:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AlzuX-0000fm-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:19:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AlztZ-0000Zh-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:18:57 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Alzsy-0000SB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:18:20 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS800FBJ63Y7Q@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:16:51 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R In-reply-to: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B5@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Message-id: <401850EC.3080803@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B5@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:16:44 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: >>While we are on the topic of S/MIME: currently majority of MUAs have >>S/MIME support built-in including root certificates. Why is that no >>banks or financial companies that are suffering from >>"phishing" attacks, >>consider signing their email via S/MIME? > > > I know several banks that are considering it. The disadvantage is that there > are email users with MUAs that don't handle S/MIME. The big problem is that > Eudora is effectively an orphan code-base with little serious development > work. > Any ideas on what is the percentage of users that do not have S/MIME? If MSFT, Mozilla, etc. and the other MUAs cover a virtual majority of the market, and would cover a majority of users affected by the phishing attacks, why aren't the banks deploying it? It would be easier to tinker with the edges of the network, rather than the center. > There is a private working group looking at this. Yahoo! Domain keys looks > like a better fit for what it is intended to achieve. > Wouldn't a profile of S/MIME that stores keys in DNS achieve essentially the same thing? Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (Lord Acton) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 20:53:33 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11541 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:53:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am1Mf-00041U-ET for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:53:05 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T1r5Nx015460 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:53:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am1Mf-00041H-Au for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:53:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11534 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:53:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am1Mc-0001bt-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:53:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am1Lk-0001W5-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:52:09 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am1Ks-0001PP-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:51:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am1Kf-0003io-Lr; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:51:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am1KY-0003iG-1I for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:50:54 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11373 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:50:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am1KV-0001ND-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:50:51 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am1Jb-0001IM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:49:56 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am1Ij-0001DJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:49:01 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0T1n11Q014639; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:49:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:49:01 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B7@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Yakov Shafranovich'" , "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:48:59 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > Any ideas on what is the percentage of users that do not have > S/MIME? If > MSFT, Mozilla, etc. and the other MUAs cover a virtual > majority of the > market, and would cover a majority of users affected by the phishing > attacks, why aren't the banks deploying it? It would be > easier to tinker > with the edges of the network, rather than the center. Pretty close to 80% of users have S/MIME today, the main gap at the moment is actually hosted email and that will close very quickly regardless of the spam issue. Call it 95%. The problem is the 5% remainder which tends to be network ops running PINE, MUTT and Eudora. > > There is a private working group looking at this. Yahoo! > Domain keys looks > > like a better fit for what it is intended to achieve. > > > > Wouldn't a profile of S/MIME that stores keys in DNS achieve > essentially > the same thing? Not quite, there is a major semantic shift taking place here, it is the domain owner rather than the email sender being authenticated. and actually the authentication may be for the sole purpose of getting an accreditation. I might send you a mail from turtlerecall.com through comcast.net and comcast.net sees it comes from a legit user who is not sending excessive quantities of email and sign it under their domain and policy and get the benefit of an accreditation that VeriSign provides. Otherwise you need an accreditation for every single domain, not a cheap solution. > Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org > SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com > "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts > absolutely" (Lord > Acton) All power corrupts Absolute power is absolutely wonderful - (Oscar Wilde?) _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 22:02:28 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13724 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2RN-0001dl-Pf for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T321Y5006299 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2RN-0001dW-IV for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13717 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:01:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2RK-0000Hu-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:01:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2QM-0000Cp-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:00:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2Pe-00007g-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:00:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2PU-0001U2-2z; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:00:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2OQ-0001Rn-SL for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:58:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA13661 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:58:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2ON-00001f-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:58:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2NU-0007kT-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:58:01 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2MZ-0007Zu-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:57:03 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS8004FEDHADG@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:56:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R In-reply-to: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B7@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Message-id: <4018763E.8040402@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133B7@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:55:58 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: >>Any ideas on what is the percentage of users that do not have >>S/MIME? If >>MSFT, Mozilla, etc. and the other MUAs cover a virtual >>majority of the >>market, and would cover a majority of users affected by the phishing >>attacks, why aren't the banks deploying it? It would be >>easier to tinker >>with the edges of the network, rather than the center. > > Pretty close to 80% of users have S/MIME today, the main gap at the > moment is actually hosted email and that will close very quickly > regardless of the spam issue. Call it 95%. > > The problem is the 5% remainder which tends to be network ops running > PINE, MUTT and Eudora. > Aren't the people that use PINE and MUTT tend to be more knowledgable computer users who would not be tricked by phishers? >>>There is a private working group looking at this. Yahoo! >>Domain keys looks >>>like a better fit for what it is intended to achieve. >> >>Wouldn't a profile of S/MIME that stores keys in DNS achieve >>essentially >>the same thing? > > Not quite, there is a major semantic shift taking place here, > it is the domain owner rather than the email sender being > authenticated. and actually the authentication may be for the > sole purpose of getting an accreditation. > What I meant is: isn't S/MIME with keys in DNS be the same thing as DomainKeys? > I might send you a mail from turtlerecall.com through comcast.net > and comcast.net sees it comes from a legit user who is not sending > excessive quantities of email and sign it under their domain and > policy and get the benefit of an accreditation that VeriSign > provides. > > Otherwise you need an accreditation for every single domain, not > a cheap solution. > Why do we need accreditation? The whole point of Domain Keys and similar solutions, is to tie the email to the original domain, not a specific accreditation authority. The DNS packet size restricts large certificates from being used with any DNS/PKI approach, and would require external reputation and accredition systems anyway. With S/MIME we can have the outgoing MTA or MUA sign the message, or even both: MUA signs with sender key, and MTA resigns the signed message body with the domain key. This way you can have the same effect as Domain Keys seems to provide, plus a possibility for sender authetication as well. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" (Benjamin Franklin) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 22:05:23 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13774 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:05:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2UD-00021d-3q for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:04:57 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T34vlg007779 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:04:57 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2UC-00021O-VA for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:04:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13768 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:04:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2U9-0000XG-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:04:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2TE-0000SQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:03:56 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2SJ-0000Nd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2SL-0001pU-5S; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:03:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2SH-0001p9-0z for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13743 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2SE-0000Mm-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:02:54 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2RI-0000Hc-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:01:57 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2QL-0000CV-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:00:57 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.53]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0T30v1m016496; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:00:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:00:57 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BA@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Yakov Shafranovich'" , "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Subject: RE: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:00:50 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > Aren't the people that use PINE and MUTT tend to be more knowledgable > computer users who would not be tricked by phishers? Not really, they tend not to be folk who can't afford real software:-) > What I meant is: isn't S/MIME with keys in DNS be the same thing as > DomainKeys? No, different semantics, close but not the same. > Why do we need accreditation? The whole point of Domain Keys > and similar > solutions, is to tie the email to the original domain, not a specific > accreditation authority. The accreditation is what you would work on, the knowledge that someone has bought a domain is not very interesting on its own. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 22:43:26 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15541 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:43:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am352-0005CE-5f for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:43:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T3h0oX019967 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:43:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am352-0005By-0J for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:43:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15525 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:42:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am34y-0004uf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:42:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am341-0004pD-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:41:57 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am33B-0004kM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:41:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am338-00051P-0q; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:41:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am2zT-0004il-Kw for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:37:15 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15414 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:37:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2zQ-0004N8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:37:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2yW-0004GD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:36:16 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am2y6-00048b-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:35:50 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS800CU6FAQ58@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 03:35:21 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R In-reply-to: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BA@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" Cc: ASRG Message-id: <40187F6F.6000901@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BA@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:35:11 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: >>What I meant is: isn't S/MIME with keys in DNS be the same thing as >>DomainKeys? > > No, different semantics, close but not the same. > Doesn't RFC 3183 uses a domain wide key? (there is some discussion on the S/MIME list about using that for domain-to-domain security) >>Why do we need accreditation? The whole point of Domain Keys >>and similar >>solutions, is to tie the email to the original domain, not a specific >>accreditation authority. > > The accreditation is what you would work on, the knowledge that someone has > bought a domain is not very interesting on its own. > If a specific piece of email can be traced to a specific domain, than it is interesting. This would force spammers to use their own domains, and will reduce both spoofing and phishing. In security and cybersecurity, it is important to narrow the playing field and with these schemes we can narrow them to spammer's own domains. Then other solutions can be applied. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "Why are both drug addicts and computer aficionados both called users?" (Clifford Stoll) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Wed Jan 28 23:17:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA17491 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:17:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am3bn-0007nm-89 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:16:51 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T4GpHE029984 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:16:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am3bn-0007nX-2C for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:16:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA17340 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:16:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am3bl-0001C7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:16:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am3aU-0000vq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:15:30 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am3ZF-0000lk-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:14:13 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Am3QY-0002NM-0W for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:05:14 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am3QN-0006wQ-7s; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:05:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am3Ng-0006k0-9K for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:02:16 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16841 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:02:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am3Nc-0007Vy-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:02:12 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am3MS-0007HF-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:01:01 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am3LF-0006tO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:59:45 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-382-801.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.209.129]) by dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HS8001MDGENQS@dedicated59-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 03:59:16 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich To: ASRG Message-id: <4018850F.9000608@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Asrg] 2. Legal - FTC Seeks Public Comment on Adult Content Spam Rule Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:59:11 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE From the FTC website (http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/01/adult.htm), thi= s=20 will be enacted WITHIN 120 DAYS. ---------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------- FTC Seeks Public Comment on Adult Content Spam Rule As required by the CAN-SPAM Act, the Federal Trade Commission today= =20 announced a proposal to establish a mark or notice that will be requi= red=20 for inclusion in spam that contains sexually oriented material. The= =20 purpose of the mark or notice is to inform the recipient that a spam= =20 message contains sexually oriented material and to facilitate filteri= ng=20 of such spam messages. Establishment of a mark to accomplish these= =20 purposes is one of several actions that Congress has directed the= =20 Commission to undertake by enacting the CAN-SPAM Act, which was signe= d=20 into law on December 16, 2003. A Federal Register Notice to be published shortly will seek public= =20 comment on the proposal. The CAN-SPAM Act requires the Commission to= =20 prescribe the mark or notice within 120 days after passage of the Act= .=20 Because of the statutory deadline, the comment period ends on Februar= y 17. The FTC proposes to adopt a rule prescribing the phrase=20 =93SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT-CONTENT: =94 as the mark or notice mandated by t= he=20 CAN-SPAM Act. The proposed rule also would follow the intention of th= e=20 CAN-SPAM Act to protect consumers from unwitting exposure to=20 pornographic images in spam, by requiring this mark to be included bo= th=20 in the subject line of any e-mail message that contains sexually=20 oriented material, and in the electronic equivalent of a =93brown pap= er=20 wrapper=94 in the body of the message. This =93brown paper wrapper= =94 would be=20 what a recipient would initially see when opening a message containin= g=20 sexually oriented material. It would include the prescribed mark or= =20 notice, certain other specified information, and no other information= or=20 images. The proposed rule would include a =93definitions=94 section t= o=20 clarify that certain terms taken from the Act and appearing in the ru= le=20 have the definitions prescribed by particular referenced sections of = the=20 Act. Finally, the proposed rule would include a severability provisio= n,=20 so that in the event a portion of the rule is struck, the remainder o= f=20 the rule will stay in effect. The Commission vote to approve publication of the Federal Register= =20 notice was 5-0. Questions or comments can be directed to adultlabel@ftc.gov or to= =20 Jonathan Kraden at 202-326-2614. Copies of the federal register notice are available from the FTC=92s = Web=20 site at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC=92s Consumer Respons= e=20 Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 205= 80.=20 The FTC works for the consumer to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and= =20 unfair business practices in the marketplace and to provide informati= on=20 to help consumers spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint, or= to=20 get free information on any of 150 consumer topics, call toll-free,= =20 1-877-FTC-HELP (1 877-382-4357), or use the complaint form at=20 http://www.ftc.gov. The FTC enters Internet, telemarketing, identity= =20 theft, and other fraud-related complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a= =20 secure, online database available to hundreds of civil and criminal l= aw=20 enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. MEDIA CONTACT: Claudia Bourne Farrell, Office of Public Affairs 202-326-2181 ---------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------- Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 02:22:40 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA05698 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:22:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am6VA-00026q-LY for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:22:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0T7MCpA008101 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:22:12 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am6V9-00026X-Od for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:22:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA05661 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:22:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am6V6-0004iQ-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:22:08 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am6UB-0004cg-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:21:12 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am6TL-0004Wn-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:20:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am6T4-0001MH-U4; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:20:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Am6SE-00017P-VA for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:19:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA05429 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:19:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am6SB-0004Q3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:19:07 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Am6RL-0004KJ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:18:16 -0500 Received: from albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.120]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Am6QQ-0004Dj-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:17:18 -0500 Received: from dialup-67.30.211.101.dial1.atlanta1.level3.net ([67.30.211.101] helo=earthlink.net) by albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Am6QQ-0001mU-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:17:18 -0800 Message-ID: <4018B37A.8040406@earthlink.net> From: Paul Tenny User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge R espo nse References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BB@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> In-Reply-To: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BB@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 02:17:14 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,YOU_WON autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > The report hit this morning. Until the exploit was announced in > slashdot it could be ignored. The whole Turing thing is a progressive > response strategy, you do not lay out your defense in full for the > attacker to analyze. > > It is security through obscurity - just like a lot of real world security. Which is precisely why real word security often is not as secure as it could and should, be. > All of those can be defeated. The Referer field is not secured. It is also > spelt with a single r. I thought we could save some bandwidth. Actually > its because I am dyslexic that I did not spot the mis-spelling. But neither > did Tim come to that. I beg to differ: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referrer ;) But alas, it's really a web authentication problem which makes it their problem, not ours. If they'd like to solicit advice from us I would tell them to invent something better than laying one insecure system (HTTP) on top of another (SMTP/POP3). > That is a viable attack, no question, do me a favor, don't mention > it on the front page of slashy. The way Slashdot tends to regurgitate whatever comes their way without an ounce of journalistic integrity, I wouldn't send anything to that place with my name on it while I still value my reputation, however small it may be. > Nah, pay them $10 an hour, or get slave labour for $2/hr in India. I thought about that but based on some things I've seen a month or so ago, I get the feeling OCR is about to catchup and make this entire discussion irrelavant. > The C/R schemes are an abomination and should be killed, its the signups > for Yahoo accounts that are the problem. I'm not sure they have to be killed. As long as they all _basicly_ do the same thing no one will prevail over the other, and with no prevailing technology it will never take hold. Earthlink may be testing it but as an Earthlink user I'm not being forced to use it and neither is anyone else, which makes it pretty flat. I still believe that dancing around the existing system will only result in a system of spit and duct tape. > Spam is a psychological problem, people don't do it because it makes money, > they do it because they think it makes money. There is no point in spending > money persecuting the blighters if they think they are keeping the upper > hand. Unless we find a few of them and torture them I doubt we'll ever get a solid estimate, but I have heard that a decent amount of them make a decent living. > This is a war, you win a war when the other side decides that they are > beaten. I thought you won by killing everybody? :) P.S. Sorry for sending the last one directly to you, I wasn't paying attention. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 10:09:45 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA21793 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:09:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDnC-0001tz-Ea for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:09:18 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0TF9IP0007294 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:09:18 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDnC-0001tR-47 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:09:18 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA21692 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:09:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDnA-0000ID-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:09:16 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDm8-00001H-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:08:13 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDkJ-0007ON-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:06:19 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDk2-0000c2-Vq; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:06:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDjN-0000Tb-EB for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:05:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA20846 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:05:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDjL-0007A7-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:05:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDhm-0006ny-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:03:43 -0500 Received: from peacock.verisign.com ([65.205.251.73]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDgV-0006VV-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:02:23 -0500 Received: from MOU1WNEXC03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer3.verisign.com [65.205.251.55]) by peacock.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0TEwk3G015535; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 07:01:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc03.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 06:13:59 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BD@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Paul Tenny'" , asrg@ietf.org Subject: RE: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge R espo nse MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 06:13:59 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > I beg to differ: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referrer ;) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referer I wrote the referer field. I know how to spell it. Real dictionaries describe use, they cannot logically contain a mis-spelling since the definition of being spelt right is to be in the dictionary. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 10:19:57 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23351 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:19:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDx4-0005Ko-45 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:19:30 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0TFJUG6020500 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:19:30 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDx4-0005KZ-09 for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:19:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23291 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:19:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDx1-0001sI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:19:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDwE-0001m6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:18:39 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDvg-0001eh-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:18:04 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDvd-0004me-8U; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:18:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDv9-0004fE-0v for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:17:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23004 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:17:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDv6-0001cD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:17:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDu5-0001VY-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:16:26 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDtH-0001Oo-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:15:35 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AmDtB-0001I0-KD for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:15:29 +0000 In-Reply-To: <4017DB2D.3000102@solidmatrix.com> Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2. C/R - Exploits for CAPTCHAs To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:15:29 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > Additionally, we need to clarify this. The spammers do not break C/R per > se, rather they overcome the reverse Turing test AKA CAPTCHA part of it. > The basic point of C/R is to make sure that the originating email > address is valid and in order for spammers to do the scheme described > here, they must have valid return addresses. Therefore, if any spammer > wants to use this scheme, they become more traceable. > Yep, *functioning* return addresses. Which adds some cost for the spammer - but how small can this cost be? Of course, in the sense that "CAPTCHAs" are proof-of-work, it highlights a generic issue with proof-of-work schemes in that they assume that the work is *prohibitively* expensive. This is a way of getting your "dirty deeds done dirt cheap", invalidating (?) the assumption. However, I'm not sure that even with a popular porn site, you're going to solve enough puzzles, fast enough, to support any sizable spam run. I'd be interested to know if anyone has actually seen an exploit. -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 10:24:07 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23959 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:24:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmE16-0006mM-G5 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:23:40 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0TFNe4Z026059 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:23:40 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmE16-0006mC-5r for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:23:40 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23950 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:23:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmE13-0002Np-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:23:37 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmE06-0002Go-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:22:39 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDzZ-00028h-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:22:05 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDzW-0006O0-KA; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:22:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmDz3-0005yW-Ba for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:21:33 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23639 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:21:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDz1-00027A-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:21:31 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDy7-00020M-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:20:35 -0500 Received: from argon.connectinternetsolutions.com ([193.110.243.33] helo=argon.connect.org.uk) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmDxi-0001tK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:20:11 -0500 Received: from mmail by argon.connect.org.uk with local (connectmail/exim) id 1AmDxi-0002KB-ME for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:20:10 +0000 In-Reply-To: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133BD@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Subject: Re: RE: 2. Uselessness of C/R RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge R espo nse To: "ASRG" From: "Jon Kyme" X-Mailer: [ConnectMail 3.10.1] X-connectmail-Originating-IP: 172.25.243.3 Message-Id: Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:20:10 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 > > > I beg to differ: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referrer ;) > > > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=referer > > I wrote the referer field. I know how to spell it. Real dictionaries > describe use, they cannot logically contain a mis-spelling since the > definition of being spelt right is to be in the dictionary. > "real" dictionary? I like that :-) See also: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prescriptive http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=descriptive -- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 10:54:18 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA27638 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:54:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmEUJ-0000oK-LF for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:53:52 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0TFrpgs003110 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:53:51 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmEUJ-0000o5-HP for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:53:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA27484 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:53:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmEUH-0000C7-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:53:49 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmESf-0007a6-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:52:10 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmERa-0007JY-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:51:02 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AmEMx-0006Mv-ST for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:46:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmEMj-0000HI-SB; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:46:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmELl-0000F5-73 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:45:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA26019 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:44:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmELi-0005r0-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:44:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmEJW-0005HW-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:42:43 -0500 Received: from guttormur.frisk-software.com ([213.220.100.9]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmEH4-0004Ww-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:40:10 -0500 Received: by guttormur.frisk-software.com (Postfix, from userid 517) id B138A3820D; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:39:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pc28.frisk-software.com. (pc28.frisk-software.com [172.16.5.2]) by guttormur.frisk-software.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7617D381CC for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:39:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: by pc28.frisk-software.com. (8.11.6/client-1.3) id i0TFd6x02228; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:39:06 GMT From: Fridrik Skulason To: asrg@ietf.org Message-ID: <20040129153906.C622@f-prot.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Subject: [Asrg] 3b - LMAP/SPF/etc - a request for clarification Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:39:06 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 As I have mentioned before, my perspective is that of an anti-virus developer. I am very much in the favour of the adoption of an authentication protocol, as that would make my life a lot easier - any method that will make it easier for me to block firuses (or spam for that matter) that forges the sender Now, what I am trying to understand is the relationsship between the various proposals, and their differences - I am sure I am not the only one who is getting a bit confused. So, a request - could someone familiar with all the schemes, RMX, DMP, SPF, LMAP etc... please create a summary of the differences - I am not trying to start a discussion on which is the "best" - I am only trying tu understand the differences between several proposals, all of which are sort-of supposed to help with the same problem. -- Fridrik Skulason Frisk Software International phone: +354-540-7400 Author of F-PROT E-mail: frisk@f-prot.com fax: +354-540-7401 _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 12:45:49 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA04306 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:45:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmGED-0001ti-LY for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:45:22 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0THjLf8007288 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:45:21 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmGED-0001tT-Hg for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:45:21 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA04173 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:45:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmGEB-00073n-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:45:19 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmGCh-0006k4-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:43:48 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmGBO-0006Oa-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:42:26 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmG2H-00088K-DN; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmG1k-00085p-Qm for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:32:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03472 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:32:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmG1j-0005IA-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:32:27 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmG0p-0005Cs-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:31:31 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmG0c-000570-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:31:18 -0500 Received: from art.lextek.com (c-67-161-220-214.client.comcast.net[67.161.220.214]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id <2004012917304101100kr4c0e>; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:30:41 +0000 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040129102443.09544290@mail.1s.com> X-Sender: pollarda@mail.1s.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 To: Philip Miller , Asrg@ietf.org From: Art Pollard Subject: Re: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response In-Reply-To: <4017DD02.2070905@zemos.net> References: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133A3@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:30:39 -0700 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 At 09:02 AM 1/28/2004, you wrote: >Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: >>spammers have found a way to break C/R schemes that have a 'turing test' >>component. >>You simply set up a free porn web site and get people to crack the turing >>tests in return for seeing the porn. Yes. I agree ... Sort of. However, let's put it this way. Even with all the "free" porn sites that could potentially be set up and even with the potentially large number of vistors that they could have, it would still be a signficant drop in the amount of spam. I doubt that many would hang around a free porn site for long if they had to type/decypher a CR each time they switched pages. It would simply be too irritating. And besides, let's say a visitor visits 20-50 pages, that would mean that for one spammer's spam to get through to 1,000,000 addresses, they would need an equal number of page views or 20,000-50,000 visitors -- a lot for any free porn site. And of course, there are all the other spammers trying to do the same thing diluting the potential number of visitors. This would still be a major bottleneck. This sort of workaround seems to make sense for automating some things such as getting a Yahoo/Hotmail account or similar. But it doesn't seem very practical to me for sending out millions of pieces of junk mail. -Art -- Art Pollard http://www.lextek.com/ Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Jan 29 17:36:17 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24255 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:36:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmKlK-0007Zr-L2 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:35:50 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0TMZoYv029126 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:35:50 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmKlK-0007Zh-Bb for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:35:50 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24170 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:35:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmKlH-0007Al-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:35:47 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmKjH-0006jf-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:33:44 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmKiv-0006dK-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:33:21 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AmKgI-0005oU-1Y for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:30:38 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmKfj-0007DC-Mp; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:30:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmKfO-0007AB-HP for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:29:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24052 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:29:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmKfL-0006JM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:29:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmKeO-0006D5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:28:41 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmKeA-00066v-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:28:26 -0500 Received: from fda.zemos.net ([68.38.12.170]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2004012922275601100kr4eqe>; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:27:56 +0000 Received: from zemos.net (phil [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fda.zemos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B453C186A2; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:27:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <401988EA.4040602@zemos.net> From: Philip Miller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fridrik Skulason Cc: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b - LMAP/SPF/etc - a request for clarification References: <20040129153906.C622@f-prot.com> In-Reply-To: <20040129153906.C622@f-prot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:27:54 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fridrik Skulason wrote: > As I have mentioned before, my perspective is that of an anti-virus > developer. I am very much in the favour of the adoption of an > authentication protocol, as that would make my life a lot easier - any > method that will make it easier for me to block firuses (or spam for > that matter) that forges the sender > > Now, what I am trying to understand is the relationsship between the > various proposals, and their differences - I am sure I am not the only > one who is getting a bit confused. > > So, a request - could someone familiar with all the schemes, RMX, DMP, > SPF, LMAP etc... please create a summary of the differences - I am not > trying to start a discussion on which is the "best" - I am only trying > tu understand the differences between several proposals, all of which > are sort-of supposed to help with the same problem. LMAP as it stands is just a discussion document, not a specific technical design. Its intent is to provide the justification and defense for whichever technical proposal implements it. Since I lack familiarity with the technical drafts, I'll leave their description to their authors or others who are more familiar with them. Philip Miller _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 30 01:21:24 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15143 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:21:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmS1P-0005Nj-Ok for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:20:55 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0U6Kt0l020683 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:20:55 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmS1P-0005NW-Iq for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:20:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA15140 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:20:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmS1M-0004AA-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:20:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmS0Y-00044F-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:20:03 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmRzp-0003xb-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:19:17 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmRzZ-0005CC-9u; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:19:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmOjP-0008CG-Gu for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:50:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA07910 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:50:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmOjM-0002kC-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:50:04 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmOiR-0002aD-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:49:07 -0500 Received: from smtp.sprintpcs.com ([63.167.114.16] helo=dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmOhU-0002FP-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:48:08 -0500 Received: from solidmatrix.com (000-389-336.area3.spcsdns.net [68.29.234.239]) by dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTPA id <0HSA001GH7OYGJ@dedicated60-bos.wh.sprintip.net> for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 02:46:18 +0000 (GMT) From: Yakov Shafranovich Subject: Re: [Asrg] 3b - LMAP/SPF/etc - a request for clarification In-reply-to: <20040129153906.C622@f-prot.com> To: Fridrik Skulason Cc: asrg@ietf.org Message-id: <4019C56B.1050302@solidmatrix.com> Organization: SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, he, ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime References: <20040129153906.C622@f-prot.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:46:03 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Fridrik Skulason wrote: > As I have mentioned before, my perspective is that of an anti-virus > developer. I am very much in the favour of the adoption of an > authentication protocol, as that would make my life a lot easier - any > method that will make it easier for me to block firuses (or spam for > that matter) that forges the sender > > Now, what I am trying to understand is the relationsship between the > various proposals, and their differences - I am sure I am not the only > one who is getting a bit confused. > > So, a request - could someone familiar with all the schemes, RMX, DMP, > SPF, LMAP etc... please create a summary of the differences - I am not > trying to start a discussion on which is the "best" - I am only trying > tu understand the differences between several proposals, all of which > are sort-of supposed to help with the same problem. > The basic concept of LMAP is to publish in DNS a list of IPs that are authorized to use the domain name in the MAIL FROM or HELO arguments of the SMTP transaction. The technical differences between RMX, SPF and DMP is how this data is stored in DNS, how it is parsed, extensibility and whether HELO parameter is addressed. The discussion document provides a high level discussion of the issues relevant to the idea itself, with the drafts discussing the technical implementation details. Hope this helps. Yakov ------- Yakov Shafranovich / asrg shaftek.org SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research solidmatrix.com "All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR) ------- _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 30 12:01:55 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA28109 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:01:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amc1I-0002ho-7a for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:01:28 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0UH1SoL010394 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:01:28 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amc1I-0002hZ-3F for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:01:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA28066 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:01:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amc1G-0007jT-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:01:26 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Amc0P-0007aq-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:00:33 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Ambza-0007Sb-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:59:42 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Ambyv-0001mH-KS; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:59:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmbyF-0001kk-EE for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:58:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27821 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:58:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmbyE-0007HR-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:58:18 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmbxJ-00078I-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:57:22 -0500 Received: from out010pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.133] helo=out010.verizon.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmbwO-00070E-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:56:24 -0500 Received: from verizon.net ([68.193.227.199]) by out010.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20040130165623.LGDX26012.out010.verizon.net@verizon.net> for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:56:23 -0600 Message-ID: <401A8CB7.1010003@verizon.net> From: Bruce Lilly Reply-To: asrg@ietf.org Organization: Bruce Lilly User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: 3c. message verification (Was Re: [Asrg] Re: 2. Uselessness of C/R) References: <20040129170007.15415.59633.Mailman@www1.ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <20040129170007.15415.59633.Mailman@www1.ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out010.verizon.net from [68.193.227.199] at Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:56:23 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:56:23 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:55:58 -0500 > From: Yakov Shafranovich > Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > >>>Wouldn't a profile of S/MIME that stores keys in DNS achieve >>>essentially >>>the same thing? >> >>Not quite, there is a major semantic shift taking place here, >>it is the domain owner rather than the email sender being >>authenticated. and actually the authentication may be for the >>sole purpose of getting an accreditation. >> > > > What I meant is: isn't S/MIME with keys in DNS be the same thing as > DomainKeys? > > >>I might send you a mail from turtlerecall.com through comcast.net >>and comcast.net sees it comes from a legit user who is not sending >>excessive quantities of email and sign it under their domain and >>policy and get the benefit of an accreditation that VeriSign >>provides. Hmmm, that would be the same Verisgn that engaged in the moral equivalent of spamming (wildcard DNS entries leading to unsolicited marketing) last year? I suppose that could be called a benefit to the extent that it could be used for filtering -- but there may be some disagreement as to whether the involvement of Verisgn indicates the presence or absence of spam. In any event, this isn't a filtering discussion... Nor, for that matter, is this a C/R discussion, hence the change in Subject. >>Otherwise you need an accreditation for every single domain, not >>a cheap solution. If DNS is to be used, and signing is to be used to validate the source of a message as being that domain, then third party accreditation is not necessary. One could simply use a public key cryptography scheme such as DNSSEC KEY RRs. > Why do we need accreditation? The whole point of Domain Keys and similar > solutions, is to tie the email to the original domain, not a specific > accreditation authority. The DNS packet size restricts large > certificates from being used with any DNS/PKI approach, and would > require external reputation and accredition systems anyway. There are other issues. I believe DNSSEC mentions some issues involving sharing a private key for use over a domain. If validation is to be used for individual senders, identified by email address, DNS probably isn't the right place for the keys for other reasons. There has been some limited discussion about this on the ietf-822 mailing list; some issues are mentioned in the message archived at http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg03987.html and a brief outline of how keys might be handled via an SMTP extension is in http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg03941.html > With S/MIME we can have the outgoing MTA or MUA sign the message, or > even both: MUA signs with sender key, and MTA resigns the signed message > body with the domain key. This way you can have the same effect as > Domain Keys seems to provide, plus a possibility for sender > authetication as well. And the possibility of encryption. There is even the possibility of step-by-step verification (each successive MTA handling a message signs what it receives using S/MIME), though an end-to-end verification is likely to be more practical. And if MTAs handle the keys associated with a sender's email address, the signing and verification can be performed at the MTA level, transparent to the MUA and user. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 30 21:15:06 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19501 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:15:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amkec-0004By-Qk for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:14:39 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0V2EcWx016108 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:14:38 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amkec-0004Bj-Ku for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:14:38 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19496 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:14:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amkea-0001RM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:14:36 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Amkdh-0001L9-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:13:42 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmkdM-0001EI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:13:20 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amkd2-00042D-LO; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:13:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amkcm-00041b-0P for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:12:48 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19404 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:12:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amkcj-0001BK-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:12:41 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Amkbq-00014D-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:11:46 -0500 Received: from smtp.everyone.net ([216.200.145.17] helo=rmta05.mta.everyone.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmkbA-0000wF-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:11:05 -0500 Received: from sohonotebook (ip68-100-37-118.dc.dc.cox.net [68.100.37.118]) by rmta05.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75DEA634CF; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 18:10:42 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric Dean" To: "'Art Pollard'" , "'Philip Miller'" , Subject: RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response Message-ID: <00a101c3e79f$72522bf0$6401a8c0@sohonotebook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040129102443.09544290@mail.1s.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:10:47 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN,FREE_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone have any idea how much it costs to host a porn site? Does anyone have any idea how little it costs to send spam (see prior analysis $0.0000002/spam)? Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's sensible > -----Original Message----- > From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Art Pollard > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 12:31 PM > To: Philip Miller; Asrg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response > > > At 09:02 AM 1/28/2004, you wrote: > >Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > >>spammers have found a way to break C/R schemes that have a 'turing > >>test' component. You simply set up a free porn web site and > get people > >>to crack the turing tests in return for seeing the porn. > > Yes. I agree ... Sort of. > > However, let's put it this way. Even with all the "free" > porn sites that > could potentially be set up and even with the potentially > large number of > vistors that they could have, it would still be a signficant > drop in the > amount of spam. I doubt that many would hang around a free > porn site for > long if they had to type/decypher a CR each time they > switched pages. It > would simply be too irritating. And besides, let's say a > visitor visits > 20-50 pages, that would mean that for one spammer's spam to > get through to > 1,000,000 addresses, they would need an equal number of page views or > 20,000-50,000 visitors -- a lot for any free porn site. And > of course, > there are all the other spammers trying to do the same thing > diluting the > potential number of visitors. This would still be a major bottleneck. > > This sort of workaround seems to make sense for automating > some things such > as getting a Yahoo/Hotmail account or similar. But it > doesn't seem very > practical to me for sending out millions of pieces of junk mail. > > -Art > -- > Art Pollard > http://www.lextek.com/ > Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines. > > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg > _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Jan 30 23:07:20 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA22668 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:07:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmmPF-0003qg-F4 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:06:53 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0V46rwE014795 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:06:53 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmmPE-0003qY-Bq for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:06:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA22662 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:06:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmmPA-0006VI-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:06:48 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmmOK-0006OH-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:05:57 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmmNn-0006Fd-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:05:23 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmmNV-0003Ym-Tw; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:05:05 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmmNB-0003XY-7N for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:04:45 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA22514 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:04:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmmN6-0006CW-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:04:40 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmmMH-000652-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:03:50 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmmLW-0005x2-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:03:02 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.54]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0V430H6023301; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 20:03:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 20:02:55 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133E6@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: "'Eric Dean'" , "'Art Pollard'" , "'Philip Miller'" , Asrg@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 20:02:55 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > Does anyone have any idea how much it costs to host a porn site? Does > anyone have any idea how little it costs to send spam (see prior > analysis $0.0000002/spam)? > > Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's sensible If you are hosting the porn site on owned machines it costs you nothing. Several of the spam scams are already doing this, they hack your machine and run a porno server on it. The problem with slashdot is that once a theoretical attack is described there it almost always gets into the wild if it is at all possible. Hackers exchange owned machines as a form of currency, they sell them to spammers and they will no doubt sell spamers yahoo accounts if they can sign up in bulk. The fact it is bizare makes it more, not less likely. Phill _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 31 09:15:39 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21670 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:15:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amvtu-0007bc-PA for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:15:11 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0VEFARc029233 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:15:10 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amvtu-0007bQ-Gh for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:15:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21655 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:15:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amvts-0006If-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:15:09 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Amvst-0006BM-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:14:08 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amvs3-00064N-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:13:15 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amvrp-0007RI-GU; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:13:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Amvqs-0007Qg-1v for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:12:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21588 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:11:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amvqq-0005w4-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:12:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Amvpu-0005qE-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:11:03 -0500 Received: from smtp.everyone.net ([216.200.145.17] helo=rmta03.mta.everyone.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Amvp9-0005kF-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:10:15 -0500 Received: from sohonotebook (ip68-100-37-118.dc.dc.cox.net [68.100.37.118]) by rmta03.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB4E3C295; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 06:10:13 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric Dean" To: "'Hallam-Baker, Phillip'" , "'Art Pollard'" , "'Philip Miller'" , Subject: RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response Message-ID: <000801c3e803$f7313910$6401a8c0@sohonotebook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133E6@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:10:21 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Certainly it's hard to build a fool-proof model when people are willing to commit felonies. In that case, sure, this is easy to do. But if you are a typical spammer, and base your model on hacking machines..you might want to re-think. If you are going to host free-porn to attract users to crack the Turing tests...you will have a major hosting bill at the end of the month. > If you are hosting the porn site on owned machines it costs > you nothing. Several of the spam scams are already doing > this, they hack your machine and run a porno server on it. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 31 09:57:30 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA23165 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:57:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmwYQ-0001j6-Jl for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:57:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0VEv20n006630 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmwYQ-0001ir-Eo for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:57:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA23113 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:56:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmwYO-0003Ta-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:57:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmwXV-0003L5-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:56:06 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmwWZ-0003DO-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:55:07 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmwWW-0001TF-1O; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:55:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmwVY-0001S1-UO for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:54:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA22938 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:54:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmwVX-00034u-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:54:03 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AmwUX-0002uM-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:53:01 -0500 Received: from pigeon.verisign.com ([65.205.251.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AmwTY-0002jH-00 for Asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:52:00 -0500 Received: from mou1wnexc02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (verisign.com [65.205.251.54]) by pigeon.verisign.com (8.12.10/) with ESMTP id i0VEpxTs012821 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 06:51:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mou1wnexc02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 06:50:17 -0800 Message-ID: <2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E011133E9@mou1wnexm02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" To: Asrg@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 06:50:08 -0800 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 > Certainly it's hard to build a fool-proof model when people > are willing > to commit felonies. In that case, sure, this is easy to do. > But if you > are a typical spammer, and base your model on hacking machines..you > might want to re-think. A typical spammer is willing to commit felonies. That was not the case two years ago, but it is now. Basically the bad have been displaced by the worse. It is not necessarily the spammer that commits the crime, there are hackers who wholesale supplies to the spammers. It is interesting to read some of the case proceedings, FedEx enveolpes stuffed with $10,000 in cash keep appearing. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 31 21:24:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA17631 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:24:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An7HI-0006qP-O1 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:24:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i112O4Iw026298 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:24:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An7HI-0006po-BJ for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:24:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA17605 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:24:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An7HF-0002mN-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:24:01 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1An7Ft-0002Td-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:22:38 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An7Dl-00020y-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:20:25 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An7DQ-0006Jm-LJ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:20:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An7Ct-0006In-12 for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:19:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA17030 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:19:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An7Cq-0001rr-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:19:28 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1An7Bq-0001g6-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:18:26 -0500 Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.12]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An7B0-0001YQ-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:17:34 -0500 Received: from dialup-67.30.211.10.dial1.atlanta1.level3.net ([67.30.211.10] helo=earthlink.net) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1An7B0-0002gw-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 18:17:35 -0800 Message-ID: <401C61B7.8010106@earthlink.net> From: Paul Tenny User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response References: <000801c3e803$f7313910$6401a8c0@sohonotebook> In-Reply-To: <000801c3e803$f7313910$6401a8c0@sohonotebook> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:17:27 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BEST_PORN autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It becomes exceptionally difficult when you rely on the law as part of the solution to a problem. Your doors have locks even though it's illegal to break in, not because the lock compliments the law but because the law only means something to people who aren't criminals in the first place. I think our legal system has shown over and over it doesn't matter how much you punish or threaten someone, the only way to stop them is to put up a better defense against *them*, not their methods. Eric Dean wrote: > Certainly it's hard to build a fool-proof model when people are willing > to commit felonies. In that case, sure, this is easy to do. But if you > are a typical spammer, and base your model on hacking machines..you > might want to re-think. > > If you are going to host free-porn to attract users to crack the Turing > tests...you will have a major hosting bill at the end of the month. > > >>If you are hosting the porn site on owned machines it costs >>you nothing. Several of the spam scams are already doing >>this, they hack your machine and run a porno server on it. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Asrg mailing list > Asrg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg > _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Jan 31 22:40:31 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21152 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:40:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An8Sp-0002hc-TN for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:40:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i113e3wf010377 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:40:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An8So-0002hA-Ni for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:40:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21113 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:39:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An8Sl-0004lV-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:39:59 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1An8Ru-0004ao-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:39:06 -0500 Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An8Qz-0004OA-03 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:38:09 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1An8BX-0006PY-RL for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:22:12 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An8BN-0001hn-HB; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:22:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1An8B8-0001cB-4t for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:21:46 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA20637 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:21:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An8B4-0002u3-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:21:43 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1An8AF-0002mO-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:20:52 -0500 Received: from newgiles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([205.150.200.131] helo=mail.nitros9.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1An89X-0002ch-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:20:08 -0500 Received: from newgiles.nitros9.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.nitros9.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6C5170F9 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:22:13 -0500 (EST) From: "Alan DeKok" To: asrg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Asrg] Its all over for Challenge Response In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:17:27 EST." <401C61B7.8010106@earthlink.net> Message-Id: <20040201032213.6F6C5170F9@mail.nitros9.org> Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:22:13 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Paul Tenny wrote: > It becomes exceptionally difficult when you rely on the law as part > of the solution to a problem. Your doors have locks even though it's > illegal to break in, not because the lock compliments the law but > because the law only means something to people who aren't criminals in > the first place. You've got it 100% backwards. Everyone knows (or should know) that locks won't keep all criminals out. So the locks obviously aren't there to keep the criminals out. The locks are there as a public statement by you that people have no legal right to enter your home. When someone does, they get charged with "break and enter", which is a serious crime. If you did not have a lock, or left your door open, they would have been charged with "trespass", which is a lesser crime. (obligatory IANAL) So the conclusion is that locks are a legal statement which permit the justice system to file more serious charges than they could have without the locks. In the same way, technological methods of fighting spam should be not only used to stop the amateur spammer, they can be used to leverage more serious charges against the professional spammer. Despite the recent phenomenal increase in spam, there is still massive opposition to *doing* anything about the problem. I remain, as always, amazed. Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Asrg mailing list Asrg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg