http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/...ighters_1.html

It seems we are losing the battle against spam and that the Internet will
ultimately be overwhelmed by spam. I've been walking around with the idea
for a long time to amend the SMTP protocol such that you have to give
permission to people to mail you (same as with IM), otherwise the mail is
simply tossed.

Any comments?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Guy Fawkes" <spare_the_rod@spoilthechild.com> schreef in bericht
news:45136287$0$19719$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
> http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/...ighters_1.html
>
> It seems we are losing the battle against spam and that the Internet will
> ultimately be overwhelmed by spam. I've been walking around with the idea
> for a long time to amend the SMTP protocol such that you have to give
> permission to people to mail you (same as with IM), otherwise the mail is
> simply tossed.
>
> Any comments?

To elaborate a little bit:

The idea that there would be an addional command:

OPT-IN_REQUEST<SP>FROM:<SP><reverse-path><CRLF>

The SMTP server for the recipient would store the request.

The recipient would have to log in on the SMTP server to receive a list of
opt-in requests. Note that this means that everyone would have to log in on
both the SMTP server and their POP/IMAP server. Also the mail server for the
domain would have to store the OPT-IN_REQUEST queues and the list of allowed
senders, a fairly large overhead, but so be it.

The MAIL FROM command would be the same but the RCPT TO would have different
failure codes:

S: RCPT TO:Smith@pipex.com
R: 560 Not allowed to send mail to recipient.









--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Guy Fawkes" <spare_the_rod@spoilthechild.com> schreef in bericht
news:4513a966$0$19680$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>
> "Guy Fawkes" <spare_the_rod@spoilthechild.com> schreef in bericht
> news:45136287$0$19719$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>> http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/...ighters_1.html
>>
>> It seems we are losing the battle against spam and that the Internet will
>> ultimately be overwhelmed by spam. I've been walking around with the idea
>> for a long time to amend the SMTP protocol such that you have to give
>> permission to people to mail you (same as with IM), otherwise the mail is
>> simply tossed.
>>
>> Any comments?
>
> To elaborate a little bit:
>
> The idea that there would be an addional command:
>
> OPT-IN_REQUEST<SP>FROM:<SP><reverse-path><CRLF>
>
> The SMTP server for the recipient would store the request.
>
> The recipient would have to log in on the SMTP server to receive a list of
> opt-in requests. Note that this means that everyone would have to log in
> on both the SMTP server and their POP/IMAP server. Also the mail server
> for the domain would have to store the OPT-IN_REQUEST queues and the list
> of allowed senders, a fairly large overhead, but so be it.
>
> The MAIL FROM command would be the same but the RCPT TO would have
> different failure codes:
>
> S: RCPT TO:Smith@pipex.com
> R: 560 Not allowed to send mail to recipient.
>

The OPT-IN_REQUEST would only have a mail address in it, no 'message' of
some sort where the sender can ask for a reason to be allowed to be on the
opt-in list since this could be misused by spammers to send spam.

There would be further commands to:

- retrieve the OPT-IN_REQUEST queue from the server
- abillity to add or remove mail addresses to/from the OPT-IN_LIST (the list
with e-mail addresses which are allowed to send mail to the recipient)
- login on the server to enable the user to alter the OPT-IN_LIST and
retrieve the OPT-IN_REQUEST queue. Internet service providers will ussually
make the login/password combinations identical to the POP/IMAP authorization
for practical purposes.

Guy



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com