[Mailman-Users] The economics of spam
rsk at gsp.org
Sun Jan 4 14:27:07 CET 2009
On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 02:52:21PM -0800, Jan Steinman wrote:
> No, it is based upon the idea that a system could be implemented whereby
> it would be impossible to avoid the payment.
This idiotic idea resurfaces periodically (see "hashcash" and other
similar products of the wishful thinking of clueless newbies ).
It is one of the very stupidest anti-spam ideas -- and there's a lot
of competition for that "honor", unfortunately.  I suggest that
you refer to the archives of the spam-l and irtf-asrg mailing lists
for a quite thorough debunking of this nonsense by the most senior and
experienced people working in the field.
 Hashcash fails on inspection because attackers control vastly more
computing resources than defenders, by several orders of magnitude.
 Including "anti-spam" ideas which actually make the problem worse.
See "C/R" and "SAV", for example.
More information about the Mailman-Users