At 7:46 PM + 12/30/03, Richard Clayton wrote:
where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ?
A whitelist for my friends, etc...
Whitelist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation
At 07:46 PM 12/30/2003 +, Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[what about mailing lists]
Obviously you'd have to whitelist anybody's list you're joining
if you don't want your spam filters to robo-discard it.
moan
I never understand why people think spam is a technical problem :( let
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Bill Stewart wrote:
At 07:46 PM 12/30/2003 +, Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[what about mailing lists]
Obviously you'd have to whitelist anybody's list you're joining
if you don't want your spam filters to robo-discard it.
moan
I never understand why
Richard Clayton wrote:
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do
we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks
moves to the ingress to the mailing lists :(
He uses the
Scott Nelson wrote:
d*b
---
s
where: d = stamp delay in seconds
s = spam size in bytes
b = bandwidth in bytes per second
I don't understand this equation at all.
It's the rate limiting factor that counts, not a combination of
stamp speed + bandwidth.
well, stamp speed is method of
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly
73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time
to regain their old throughput.
Believe me, the professionals have enough 0wned machines that this is
(The use of memory speed leads to an interesting notion: Functions that are
designed to be differentially expensive on different kinds of fielded hardware.
On a theoretical basis, of course, all hardware is interchangeable; but in
practice, something differentially expensive to calculate on an
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly
73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time
to regain their old throughput.
Believe me, the professionals have enough 0wned machines that this is
At 11:49 AM -0800 12/28/03, Jim Gillogly wrote:
wouldn't it be preferable to prove that you've contributed
the same amount of power to a useful compute-bound project, such as
NFSNET.org or GIMPS or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Simple economics. If you're going to go so far as using some
At 09:37 PM 12/26/2003 -0500, Adam Back wrote:
The 2nd memory [3] bound paper (by Dwork, Goldber and Naor) finds a
flaw in in the first memory-bound function paper (by Adabi, Burrows,
Manasse, and Wobber) which admits a time-space trade-off, proposes an
improved memory-bound function and also in
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3324883.stm
Adam Back is part of this team, I think.
Similar approach to Camram/hahscash. Memory-based approaches have been
discussed. Why hasn't Camram explored them?
steve
BTW, Penny Black stamp was only used briefly. It was the Penny Red which
At 09:13 AM 12/26/03 -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3324883.stm
Mr Wobber and his group calculated that if there are 80,000
seconds in a day, a computational price of a 10-second levy
would mean spammers would only be able to send about 8,000
messages a day, at
I did work at Microsoft for about a year after leaving ZKS, but I quit
a month or so ago (working for another startup again).
But for accuracy while I was at Microsoft I was not part of the
microsoft research/academic team that worked on penny black, though I
did exchange a few emails related to
Steve Schear wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3324883.stm
Adam Back is part of this team, I think.
Similar approach to Camram/hahscash. Memory-based approaches have been
discussed. Why hasn't Camram explored them?
They were only invented recently, and indeed, I've been planning
Oh yes forgot one comment:
One down-side of memory bound is that it is memory bound. That is to
say it will be allocated some amount of memory, and this would be
chosen to be enough memory to that a high end machine should not have
that much cache so think multiple MB, maybe 8MB, 16MB or
15 matches
Mail list logo
