IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] Consent Proposal

Markus Stumpf <maex-lists-spam-ietf-asrg@Space.Net> Wed, 02 July 2003 17:24 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03109 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:24:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XlL6-0001Dd-HA for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:24:16 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h62HOGfB004681 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:24:16 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XlL6-0001DQ-EE for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:24:16 -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 NAA03068; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:24:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19XlL4-0004Zu-00; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:24:14 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19XlL3-0004Zr-00; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:24:13 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XlKr-00017A-Id; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:24:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XlKQ-00016o-3M for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:23:34 -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 NAA02983 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:23:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19XlKO-0004ZE-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:23:32 -0400
Received: from moebius2.space.net ([195.30.1.100] ident=qmailr) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19XlKN-0004ZB-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 13:23:31 -0400
Received: (qmail 94611 invoked by uid 1013); 2 Jul 2003 17:23:30 -0000
From: Markus Stumpf <maex-lists-spam-ietf-asrg@Space.Net>
To: "C. Wegrzyn" <wegrzyn@garbagedump.com>
Cc: Markus Stumpf <maex-lists-spam-ietf-asrg@Space.Net>, "Asrg@Ietf. Org" <asrg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Consent Proposal
Message-ID: <20030702192330.D82235@Space.Net>
References: <20030702015753.F74353@Space.Net> <HKEFKPNPJLANNFPFMDKJIELDIIAA.danny@apache.org> <20030702184054.B82235@Space.Net> <3F030C58.3050605@garbagedump.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <3F030C58.3050605@garbagedump.com>; from wegrzyn@garbagedump.com on Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 12:46:16PM -0400
Organization: SpaceNet AG, Muenchen, Germany
X-PGP-Fingerprint: 66 F3 75 79 01 D0 B8 5F 1A C7 77 88 4A B6 70 DF
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: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 19:23:30 +0200

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 12:46:16PM -0400, C. Wegrzyn wrote:
> I'll just tell you what I designed..your mileage can vary. Trust was 
> established between two parties, out of band perhaps. Once that trust 
> was established all that was required was the use of X509 certs. A proxy 
> in front of the MTAs would do all the rest....

I /do/ like the idea in principle.
What do you think would be required to establish a web of trust large
enough to cover the current email infrastructure.
I know quite some mailadmins (some personally, some virtually for years)
good enough to "trust" them. We could exchange the keys and have a
small web of trust. What is the benefit? I cannot reject all emails from
mailservers I don't have a key or I won't have any customers in zero time.

Current practise is to trust everyone unless configured otherwise. I don't
see a chance for a system that works the opposite way in the near future.

What we need is a simple system that says "trust me" and that even
allows to say "don't trust me" (because I am a workstation and probably
hacked or virus infected or abused).
And IMHO the cheapest, simplest and fastest method would be to associate
TXT records along with PTR records for IP addresses that would contain:
    "MTA=yes"
or
    "MTA=no"
and an optional abuse contact in form of an URI like
    "MTA=yes;mailto:abuse@example.com"
    "MTA=no;http://www.example.com/abuse/contact.html"

If no such record is available it's up to you whether you accept or not.

It wouldn't break any of the existing mechanisms like forwarding, it
wouldn't have problems with large DNS packets, it uses standard existing
methods and it's easy to deploy.
However it would be weaker than RMX or SPF or ...

	\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet AG            | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0
Research & Development |       D-80807 Muenchen    | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299
"The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally
 proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin"

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email