From: "Mark M." <markm@voicenet.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 20:29:31 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Hardening lists against spam attacks
In-Reply-To: <199612312032.MAA04214@crypt.hfinney.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.961231232113.2776A-100000@eclipse.voicenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Hal Finney wrote:

> This is an interesting idea, however it will be possible for someone with
> a respectable public persona to continue getting tokens indefinately for
> posting abusive anonymous messages.  There is no way to link the anonymous
> tokens with the ones which were issued to good subscribers.

If the number of tokens given to each subscriber per day is limited (5 to 7
is probably reasonable), then this will limit the amount of abusive anonymous
messages posted.  This scheme might not prevent people from anonymously
posting abusive messages, but it will prevent spam.

Limiting the number of abusive anonymous messages one can post is an
interesting idea, but this only allows pseudonymity and not anonymity.  The
pseudonymity-anonymity issue seems to be a trade-off between more privacy and
less noise.


Mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMsnpCSzIPc7jvyFpAQFovggAhOFPeHaj/huH/kQUSI7FViH8TrUOH3X1
c3Ux5ZjiBPyO0dknI2crLhDZuBYf5dVH0K6rR5D5vXMsNn6+0p8Ec4w5HXouHN6K
zP6sUnntcFXFuddOblit8R4LGCZbmaW+7WZBp4h+UfBsN1Xg/iP156VrwFy7eBve
MXhyoROwDpRq8ENceqA9CvgyXtbjb5xBJVnB8rj+y5qc0kQH4mFZZZBRX+sgXHdI
6XdI7R1Thoy8ZXa+LQV+imOe68lykPYaV1rKkqC91Ne7kjMGh09qOPseVWl2RAqe
8dacmuneryrsEr8MMXJPAyOqSSrTpKEIHF//MmL+IkRePd1nv4zaAg==
=ckjR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----