From: “Michael H. Warfield” <mhw@wittsend.com>
To: snickers@mejl.com
Message Hash: 2176ae9708ae9af205993694516450e634f5f2ec9e5d247b7d2cf2b6df163eb0
Message ID: <199803192105.QAA27595@alcove.wittsend.com>
Reply To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980319045525.2632A-100000@rigel.cyberpass.net>
UTC Datetime: 1998-03-19 21:16:22 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 13:16:22 -0800 (PST)
From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 13:16:22 -0800 (PST)
To: snickers@mejl.com
Subject: Re: Will New Sendmail Block Remailers?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980319045525.2632A-100000@rigel.cyberpass.net>
Message-ID: <199803192105.QAA27595@alcove.wittsend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Yupin Mungdee enscribed thusly:
>
> > >All it really does is force spammers to search for someone's real address
> > >to spoof and harass. (They can just scan usenet, and pick on random
> > >people if they want..)
> >
> > The ultimate end of this line of measure/countermeasure is code that sniffs
> > out peoples passwords so spammers can "borrow" their accounts to send a
> > million or so messages.
>
> But that can be defeated with encryption.
>
> Another possible "ultimate end" for the spammer wars would be making
> spamming illegal, like fax spamming, and having the cops hunting down the
> spammers. But that can be defeated with truly anonymous markets, still
> assuming that encryption will be legal.
Oh yeah right... Just like gambling being illegal has eliminated
it from the Internet. We need to make it UNPROFITABLE and the scum will
slink back under the rocks they came from.
> To really beat spamming we probably need filters that only allow messages
> from inside our web of trust. Don't you agree?
Mike
--
Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw@WittsEnd.com
(The Mad Wizard) | (770) 925-8248 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
Return to March 1998
Return to “Yupin Mungdee <snickers@mejl.com>”