How about treating this as a network issue instead of a mail issue? There's quite a body of work already available, including the idea (packet authentication) being investigated by the team at the link below.
http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~adrian/projects/tesla-cryptobytes/paper/node1.html Just trying to help ... Sincerest regards, James Butler Chairman, Board of Directors Internet Society - Los Angeles Chapter California, USA *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 8/2/06 at 4:15 PM Ken A wrote: >jdow wrote: >> From: "Ken A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>>> That's crazier than I thought you were. If you expect the average >>>> user to go along with that you're not connected with reality very >>>> well. Your idealism is getting in the way. >>> >>> He's engaged in marc-eting ? sorry... but yeah. end this o.t. please... >>> Ken >> >> This is his original email: >> ===8<--- >> I'm writing a paper that I'm submitting to an Internet Governance Forum >> of the United Nations. Keeping in mind that free speech and freedom is >> important, what would you change in the world to stop spam? I'm looking >> for things that are actually possible and practical. Suggestions can be >> anthing. My thoughts include things like requiring ISPs to provide >> better firewalls for end users, requiring Microsoft to provide more hack >> protection even for pirated versions of windows, ways to keep people >> from impersonating other users, evolving the SMTP protocol .... >> >> Looking for more ideas. Paper is due tomorrow. >> ===8<--- >> >> If this is real and not make believe for a class somewhere in school >> then Marc is a VERY dangerous person with an agenda. That agenda seems >> to be to require IMAP. The question becomes "why?" >> >> The answer is easy, remember where IMAP stores your email. This makes >> it VERY easy for the government to dig into your private life without >> invading your home where you generally have some legal protections. >> >> He has been ordered to justify using IMAP instead of SMTP using SPAM >> as an excuse. How else do you explain his irrationality? > >I don't think it's anything that dark.. See previous threads started by >Marc Perkel on this list. He appears to be gaining an education - >perhaps accidentally with his overzealous approach. See subjects: "The >Future of Email is SQL", "The best way to use Spamassassin is to not use >Spamassassin". The one thing in common is that the threads go on way too >long, since they elicit some strong responses. > >Paper is due tomorrow, HA! > >Ken A >Pacific.Net > > >> This makes him an incredibly dangerous person. It is also a very >> telling argument against transferring management of the Internet to >> the UN. It's scary enough having the US government involved. At least >> the US government is mandating remarkably little with its mostly hands >> off approach towards those managing the Internet. If people like Marc >> end up in control the Internet quickly becomes useless and actively >> dangerous to use. Sadly the UN is further down that dangerous road >> than the US, today. That is, of course, subject to change. >> >> What the Internet needs is as little hands on management as possible >> with as many alternatives as possible. Let the people on the Internet >> evolve the protections, such as SpamAssassin. If other people are >> annoyed by spam then they should pressure for the adoption of these >> filtering practices or adopt them for themselves. Dictating what >> protocols can be used and selecting one that exposes as much private >> data as possible to rather direct government scrutiny is NOT the way >> the Internet should evolve. >> >> {^_^} >>
