From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e5c972d04da95d51 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-16 12:19:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!4.24.21.153!chcgil2-snh1.gtei.net!chcgil2-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: SPAM-less email (was If anybody wants to make something in Ada Date: 16 Apr 2003 14:19:54 -0500 Organization: LJK Software Message-ID: References: <3E9D61C0.5070103@cogeco.ca> <3E9D8090.F86AF4EC@spam.no> <3E9D8625.4090308@cogeco.ca> <3E9D9642.2030303@cogeco.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1050520740 23310 192.135.80.34 (16 Apr 2003 19:19:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:19:00 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:36203 Date: 2003-04-16T14:19:54-05:00 List-Id: In article <3E9D9642.2030303@cogeco.ca>, "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes: > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> In article <3E9D8625.4090308@cogeco.ca>, "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes: >> >>>What I really want, is a "solicited email only" channel, so that I >>>can give my electronic business card (read "cert.") to associates, >>>and not get pestered with offensive SPAM that I have to delete >>>every morning. I also want to protect my kids from this kind of >>>crap. >> >> Unfortunately, some of us must accept correspondence (and therefore >> under your plan, give a certificate to) people who cannot be trusted >> to protect their own private key. > > Yes of course. But that is why you need a key that is only usable > by a specific sender. But the only way to determine that a specific sender is using it is via their private key. And if they do not protect that, someone can steal it along with the certificate you issued. This will all get automated by the bad guys, aided by their dupes in Redmond. Therefore such an attack against spam is much less useful than some other method, even a program to automatically write letters to one's legislators.