On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 03:18:00PM -0700, Anonymous wrote:
>
> >subject filtering's simply the better solution, because it would catch all
>
> You don't get it.
>
> The issue is *COST* of figuring out how to spam.
[..]
> Adding *DYNAMIC* address would require database to have,
> for example, java source that computes the address.
>
> It can happen, but executing that is order of magnitude
> more difficult than the CPUNK postfix.
The obvious conclusion is to do something like hashcash (short
recap: you 'pay' for your email by solving a hash collision of
some length. The more CPU cycles the sender spent on it, the more
the recipient would value the email).
> The point being, if we do something, we should do it so
> that it works for the next 10 years.
No. Do something now that works now, because in 10 years most of our
predictions from 10 years ago will be wrong. Besides, it's hard to
get cypherpunks to even agree on what the problem is, let alone agree on
what it'll be like in 10 years and how to solve for that.
--
Eric Murray www.lne.com/~ericm ericm at the site lne.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5
Security consulting: security models, reviews, protocols, crypto.
