on Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:46:45PM -0500, Ron Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 19:40, Joyce, Matthew wrote: > > > > > > Maybe this would be the future for e-mail, deny all but specified...
> > It is probably (should be imo) the future of all computing. > > > > Permit this > > Permit that > > Deny everything else > > Isn't this kindred to C-R? Not necessarially. Depends on the implementation. SMTP-time blocks on the basis of whitelisting are an IMO reasonable C-R. Yes, you have to clear you address or IP, but the request is *highly* specific to your own traffic. This does require that you can discriminate between types of C-R, and the naive user may not be able to distinguish between an SMTP bounce providing clearing instructions, and an email reply to a From: or envelope sender address. In general, targeted allow, deny, accept provisionally email policies are where I'm headed. The key is making them very specific. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? At the sound of the toner, boycott Lexmark: trade restraint via DMCA. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-979791.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature