on Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 07:25:00AM +0200, Ole Wolf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Ole dared world+dog to call his bluff. I did. He's arrogant.
>
> You extended your data with yet more assumptions about current trends.
Specifics?
> Listen, you little piece of waste:
Jason: Im requesty you apply rules concerning insults evenly.
> You're emotionally involved in this and would rather insult people and
> destroy current defense systems than help improve them.
Quite the contrary.
C-R as a pure-play spam mitigation is fundamentally flawed. I've
pointed this out. I'm hardly the only person to do so:
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000389.html
A Challenging Response to Challenge-Response
Edward W. Felten
http://www.politechbot.com/p-04746.html
Challenge-response systems are as harmful as spam
John Levine
http://news.com.com/2010-1071_3-1009745.html
Spam blockers may wreak e-mail havoc
Declan McCullagh
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_27/b3840044.htm
A Spam-Fighter More Noxious Than Spam
Stephen H. Wildstrom
Challenge-Response Spam Control
http://www.ibgames.net/alan/society/challenge.html
Alan Lenton
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/125638_spamtech06.html
System challenges more than spam
Anick Jesdanun
http://tardigrade.net/challengeresponse.html
Why Challenge-Response is a Bad Idea
Allyn Weaks
(also here: http://csf.colorado.edu/archive/2003/nwnatives/msg01201.html)
Challenge-Response for spam blocking will fail
http://www.mccmedia.com/pipermail/brin-l/Week-of-Mon-20030519/020477.html
Chad Cooper
http://mmd.foxtail.com/Archives/Digests/200305/2003.05.20.06.html
E-Mail Problems: Challenge-Response Verification
Ray Finch
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2003-06-05-spam-challenge-response_x.htm
Challenge-response approach to spam could make e-mail more problematic
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20030605/1230201.shtml
Challenging Challenge Response Anti-Spam Systems
http://archive.mail-list.com/shoptalk/msg00019.html
Challenge/Response Systems
Interestingly, most of those came from a simple search for "challenge
response" on Google. Don't know how to break it to you, but y'all have
an image problem.
> You are being ignorant in terms of your data use, and you are abusive
> against people on this list.
I'm pressing my point hard. I'm getting a lot of handwaving and "we
don't go there". I've seen very little in the way of serious
consideration, acknowledgement of concerns. or any initiative to
address the situation. I'll note that I started getting mail even
before I posted to the list
> You're shit-disturbing.
I'm raising questions that people apparently would rather not have
raised. C-R people seem to have a problem with this, as a rule. Just an
o0bservation.
> My only regret is that I replied to your first mail without checking
> your homepage first; had I done that, I'd have avoided yet another
> "discussion" with a born-again Believer.
Ole, mind putting those broad brushes away and addressing the issues?
The spamming problem. Mitigating this within TMDA. Warning your users
of the possible consequences. _Not_ blindly challenging all spam and
viral mail. The point man, stick to the point....
> I noticed that nowhere on your web page do you mention your
> girlfriend/wife, nor your children. This is where I begin to think
> this about you: Get a life.
You know, this is really touching.
I can assure you that I have a satisfying and fulfilling relationship
with my loved ones.
And I honestly hope that you do too -- wife, boyfriend, girlfriend,
sheep, gopher hole, whatever. As long as it's deep.
But this really has nothing to do with what I'm concerned about. Care
to stick to the point?
...or are you seriously proposing that the problem with Edward, John,
Declan, Stephen, Alan, Anick, Allyn, Chad, Ray, and me is that none of
us is getting laid.
> Rest assured I'm not going to even *think* of debating this issue
> further with you. I hate religious people. You should have perished in
> the abortion your mother wanted to have. FOAD.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Defeat EU Software Patents! http://swpat.ffii.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
