Adam Shostack wrote:
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 04:13:13PM -0400, Adam Back wrote:
| Well we'll see. If they have lots of CPU from zombies and can get and | maintain more with limited effort maybe even they can, and CAMRAM's | higher cost stamp on introductions only will prevail as the preferred | method.
Adam,
You've thought about this more than me. What do you see as equilibrium postal rates if the spammers have 10k, 100k, or a million nodes to send?
Will spammers run under nice? Use your graphics card as a co-processor? Is the rate of new vulns high enough to keep their CPU pools filled?
We have some figures for that kind of stuff in http://www.apache-ssl.org/proofwork.pdf.
Cheers,
Ben.
-- ApacheCon! 13-17 November! http://www.apachecon.com/
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/
"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
--------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
