IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article

"Eric D. Williams" <eric@infobro.com> Mon, 05 May 2003 16:56 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07804 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:56:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h45H46s16960 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 May 2003 13:04:06 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h45H46816957 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 13:04:06 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07785; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:55:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CjHV-000715-00; Mon, 05 May 2003 12:57:37 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CjHV-000711-00; Mon, 05 May 2003 12:57:37 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h45H04816707; Mon, 5 May 2003 13:00:04 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h45Gwf816590 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:58:41 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07598 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:50:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CjCG-0006ys-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 12:52:12 -0400
Received: from black.infobro.com ([63.71.25.39] helo=infobro.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CjCB-0006yg-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 12:52:07 -0400
Received: from red (unverified [207.199.136.153]) by infobro.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id <B0002379448@infobro.com>; Mon, 05 May 2003 12:51:07 -0400
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:51:11 -0400
Message-ID: <01C31305.017BF150.eric@infobro.com>
From: "Eric D. Williams" <eric@infobro.com>
To: 'Alan DeKok' <aland@freeradius.org>, "asrg@ietf.org" <asrg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article
Organization: Information Brokers, Inc.
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 12:50:26 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Monday, May 05, 2003 12:01 PM, Alan DeKok [SMTP:aland@freeradius.org] wrote:
> Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:
> > Spam is about filtering bad guys.  RMX is about labeling good guys.
> >
> > Hence, with RMX, you still know nothing about bad guys.
>
>   I don't quite agree.
>
> > How does it help to control spam if you continue to know nothing about
> > the bad guys?
>
>   Right now, we have a pool of SMTP originators.  The pool contains
> both good guys, and bad guys.  It's difficult and expensive for any
> recipient to distinguish between them.
>
>   With tools like RMX, a recipient can easily seperate the pool into
> "accountable" originators, and "unknown" originators.  This means that
> the bad guys are more likely to be marked as bad guys, and the good
> guys less likely to be so marked.  While this doesn't give you direct
> information about the bad guys, it does give you indirect information:
> They're not the good guys.
>
>   In summary, RMX allows us to increase our confidence in the marking
> probability for bad guys.

I don't quite agree.  I would say:

You increase your pool of known origination points, RMX does not control 
spammers (at all) end system policy would perform that trick, RMX would enable 
the end system manager to establish additional policy controls based on 
'relevant' criteria, nothing more.  It would be just as useful for a spammer to 
use RMX (though if they are engaging in forgery less likely) in order to 
counteract lax policy controls based upon RMX.

-e
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email