Re: new spam functionality added

[Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>]

David Masterson <dmaster@synopsys.com> writes:

>>>>>> Simon Josefsson writes:
>
>> (Assuming TMDA contains the part which bounces mail, asking the sender
>> to answer with a cookie to deliver the mail.  That's annoying, and I
>> haven't understood how two people not on each other's whitelist could
>> ever communicate with each other if they both uses the scheme.
>
> Three ways that I can think of:
>
> 1. The first person sends the second person a "dated" email address
>    which allows the second person to respond within (say) 5 days
>    without a cookie request.

This will sort of work, but it requires a UI for the first person to
specify the time delay.  Sometimes I send mail I know wont be read for
or replied to for many months, and having it default to 3 months will
allow too much spam.  E.g., bug reports.  And if the message ends up
in public before this time, you will get spam to it and the system
fails.

> 2. The first person can generate a special email address for the
>    second person that will never ask for a cookie (if it's abused, the
>    address can be dropped).

This doesn't work if you don't know the second person.  E.g., on
mailing lists and UseNet.  It deteriorates into using temporary email
addresses all the time, which breaks address books etc.

> 3. The first person adds the second person to his whitelist before
>    sending the original message.

Again doesn't work on mailing lists.