Lucky Green wrote: > I share John's dislike for the (thoroughly ineffective, except in making > the lives of legitimate users more difficult) anti-spam zealots ...
Actually I'm not sure it has been completely ineffective. Cutting the numbers of open relays won't be an effective anti-spam measure until there are almost none left. I saw figures implying that the proportion of open relays is now well below 10%, from nearly 100% a few years ago. Pretty soon open relays will become unusable for legitimate users, not because of anti-spam campaigners, but because they will be relaying so much spam! This may cause the decline to accelerate in the near future. If you want to run an open relay, why not make it ask for hashcash before it accepts mail? > ... cypherpunks.to of course supports IPSec under both IPv4 and > IPv6 in addition to higher-level encryption protocols such as smtp's > STARTTLS). I don't know if it's still like it, but I remember years ago, to post to alt.hackers you had to forge an Approved: header line. I've sometimes thought that it would be nice to do the same thing with IPsec or IPv6. Imagine a clone of Kuro5hin or Slashdot, but with the extra hurdle that you have to use IPv6 (probably using 6 over 4 encapsulation) or opportunistic IPsec. You would automatically exclude non-hackers. More importantly, such a development would encourage deployment of those technologies across the Internet. As more content emerges that is inaccessible to people using only plain IPv4, it creates an incentive to switch. The more people that switch, especially to IPv6, the more likely it is that more similar content will emerge. -- Pete --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
