From: tallpaul@pipeline.com (tallpaul)
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 04:48:49 +0800
To: "Robert A. Rosenberg" <hal9001@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Only accepting e-mail from known parties
Message-ID: <199512261823.NAA27668@pipe3.nyc.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Dec 26, 1995 08:37:30, '"Robert A. Rosenberg" <hal9001@panix.com>'
wrote: 
 
 
>At 14:33 12/25/95, tallpaul wrote: 
> 
>>Thoughts? (I see one problem with this but it should be able to be worked

>>out once the basic method is agreed to). 
> 
>I assume that the "Problem" is that by only giving each corespondent ONE 
>E-Stamp, you are single streaming your connections with them (ie: Are 
>talking Half-Duplex). Not only are they restricted to one message 
>"in-flight" but they can not start another message until they have done a 
>capture run to acquire your ACK and get the new key. 
> 
 
Actually, with e-mail the problem was an infinite loop of stamp exchanges.
E.G. both of us are finickians who only accept e-mail from known
associates. So they send me an e-message with the correct stamp. I send
them an acknowlegmenet with a new stamp, but ... they won't accept the
message from me unless I stamp it. So I stamp my return receipt. They get
the return receipt and have to send me a new stamp, using the stamp I just
sent them. I then ackowledge receipt from them, using the stamp they just
sent me, and it is turtles all the way down. 
 
The workaround would be to have a semi-psycho e-bot who hoarded stamps,
i.e. would accept stamps from anybody without treating an e-stamp as an
e-mail message to me. 
 
I hadn't picked up the problem you mentioned. Thanks for pointing it out. 
 
I supposed the fix would be to send family (so to speak) books of stamps so
they could send multiple messages when I was on vacation, my personal e-bot
was down, etc. Of course, then family could get conned out of their stamps
by smooth talking ad spammers. But this would, I think, be a rare
occurance. That is, I wasn't thinking of *absolute* security just "good
enough privacy." 
 
--tallpaul