From: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 17:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
To: Adam Shostack <steve@edmweb.com (Steve)
Subject: Re: SSL weakness affecting links from pa
Message-ID: <v02140b04af805f8ec8b6@[10.0.2.15]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>| That would only work until someone abuses it. People could create web
>| robots to run around selling referers and several gigabytes of
>| worthless cookie space. Worthless, because nobody cares about the web
>| browsing habits of J. Random Robot, and they certainly don't want to
>| blow $50 e-bucks on the bot's repeated visits.
>
>        Thats true, but can they avoid it?  I'm considering writing a
>database pollution bot, which runs around, claiming to be Mozilla or
>IE, and randomly following a link once per minute.  Why?  Database
>pollution.  If there are a few thousand of these randomly collecing
>links and creating arbitrary (or perhaps biased) viewing habbits in
>the databases of the advertisers, then their individual data becomes
>worth less.  They'll need to actively solicit peoples permission to
>collect data before doing so, to avoid people polluting their
>databases.
>
>        Similarly, putting a randomly generated email address in those
>sign up fields produces pollution in the data used by spammers, which
>costs them (and no one else) money.  If you run your own site, you can
>even bit bucket the email, trading their bandwidth for yours, and
>making them think they're delivering more junk email than they are.
>
>Adam

Now that's the CP spirit!

Whenever you wish to influence policy, follow the money.

--Steve