Re: [Asrg] request for review for a non FUSSP proposal

Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com> Mon, 22 June 2009 21:37 UTC

Return-Path: <steve@blighty.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76D203A6971 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TGKRFHzSz2Ou for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:37:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from m.wordtothewise.com (fruitbat.wordtothewise.com [208.187.80.135]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 983443A6A03 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:37:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.80.34] (184.wordtothewise.com [208.187.80.184]) by m.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D613E80D62 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <2CCA5AC9-154F-494B-B9BB-63D83AC4393C@blighty.com>
From: Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
In-Reply-To: <4A3FF7F1.1060705@nd.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:37:16 -0700
References: <4A3DFC91.2090506@telmon.org> <4A3F9B2B.8020603@tana.it> <4A3FF3AF.9030401@telmon.org> <4A3FF7F1.1060705@nd.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
Subject: Re: [Asrg] request for review for a non FUSSP proposal
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:37:03 -0000

On Jun 22, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Paul Russell wrote:

> On 6/22/2009 17:12, Claudio Telmon wrote:
>> Well, this stream doubling is something many already do, keeping one
>> address for close friends and business partners, not disclosing it in
>> order to avoid spam and other messages. But again you're right, the
>> framework would need reach a critical mass in some time, or it  
>> would be
>> abandoned even by early adopters.
>
> Back in the day when most spammers obtained addresses by harvesting  
> them from
> web pages, you could, for the most part, keep a mailbox spam-free by  
> disclosing
> your email address only to those from whom you wanted to receive  
> email.  The sun
> set on that scene long ago.  Spammers generate potential recipient  
> addresses
> based on common names and naming schemes, or harvest them from  
> address books and
> private mail archives on compromised systems.  Security by obscurity  
> seldom
> works for very long.

Also any actual usage of an email address leads to it being in a mailbox
on a Windows machine. That, in turn, leads to it being sprayed all over
the internet by viruses, and hence harvested by spammers.

I have lots of uniquely created addresses that were provably not guessed
that get a lot of spam via that route.

Cheers,
   Steve