[cap-talk] charging for spam. What are the implications

[Valerio Bellizzomi]

On 23/01/2007, at 10.46, Karp, Alan H wrote:

>Valerio Bellizzomi wrote:
>> 
>> There is another solution to this,
>> 1. The mail client accepts mail based on a senders whitelist,
>> 2. Messages from senders not in the whitelist are put into a 
>> quarantine
>> folder and have to be approved,
>> 3. The quarantine folder accepts only one message per sender until the
>> sender is added to the whitelist,
>> 4. Messages that are not accepted are silently dropped.
>> 
>I don't see how this will reduce spam much, given the millions of zombie
>machines sending spam and that sender info is easy to forge.  Users will
>still have to go through the quarantine folder looking for legitimate
>mail.

Yes, sender info is easy to forge, but in this case it has to be forged
each for each message. That is, it drops duplicate messages.
It reduces spam a little, the greater advantage is that it makes sure that
unwanted spam is in the quantine folder, and not all over your mail
folders.


>
>_________________________
>Alan Karp
>Principal Scientist
>Virus Safe Computing Initiative
>Hewlett-Packard Laboratories 
>1501 Page Mill Road
>Palo Alto, CA 94304
>(650) 857-3967, fax (650) 857-7029
>https://ecardfile.com/id/Alan_Karp
>http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Alan_Karp/
>  
>
>_______________________________________________
>cap-talk mailing list
>cap-talk at mail.eros-os.org
>http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/cap-talk