Subject: Re: [Asrg] Death, taxes and E-Postage.

From: "Bill Mcinnis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 17:09:43 -0400

Regardless of which route you go, you need to 
establish some sort of message level info in a queryable form,
something will need to keep track of who sent what, from where.
Once you have set that up, why not just use that check to validate
if a message came from where it said it did, by going back to the
purported originating system and see if they have the origination
record.
All that needs to be done from there is to set up a local database
to store your origination records, and a module to communicate 
server to server (or to the central database) to check it.  A system can be set up to store records 
for small mailers (law firsm, etc) who choose not to do that for themselves.

bill mcinnis

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Alan DeKok" <[email-masked]>
Date:  Wed, 28 Apr 2004 15:07:37 -0400

>"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> Sure we could do clearing. Any idea what it would take to set up
>> such a system?
>
>  A fair bit, which is why I was concentrating on the "conceptual"
>portion.  "If we did it, ignoring the costs, it would look a lot like
>system FOO, so why don't we just do FOO from the start, and avoid the
>costs?"
>
>> The actual figures would be rather different and go through a 
>> clearing center:
>
>  Not necessarily.  Clearing centers are used when independent parties
>wish to exchange information through an accredited service.  On the
>net, people can talk to each other directly, without using an
>accreditation service for each transaction.
>
>  e.g. I don't need to contact Verisign to check someones credentials,
>if I see that their certificate is signed by Verisign.
>
>  In a theoretical e-postage system, parties can sign messages
>indicating consent to nullify mutual "costs" for e-postage.  Those
>costs don't have to be real money, they can be e-postage tokens.  The
>only need for a central clearing house is then to deal with the final
>portions of the costs which aren't mutually negated.
>
>  But again, if such a system is set up, the end result of e-postage
>is pretty much a central accreditation service.  So why not just set
>up an accreditation service, and stop the pretense that e-postage is
>useful?
>
>  Alan DeKok.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Asrg mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
>

Checked for SPAM and email fraud by MessageLevel.
Guarantee the authenticity of your email.
(http://www.messagelevel.com)
Version 1 / Released April 26, 2004

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Barry Shein <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:08:43 -0400

Because the latter would require an extra real-time transaction where
the former may or may not?

---

From: Seth Breidbart <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:58:34 -0400 (EDT)

> purported originating system and see if they have the origination

So why can't the spammer-controlled box lie about that (or, actually,
tell the truth)?  Some spamware uses the DNS or rDNS of the box it
runs on as its HELO string even now.

Seth