IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article

"Alan DeKok" <aland@freeradius.org> Mon, 05 May 2003 14:21 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 KAA03915 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:21:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h45ETQO05121 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:29:26 -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 h45ETQ805118 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:29:26 -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 KAA03904; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:20:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Cgrt-000692-00; Mon, 05 May 2003 10:23:01 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Cgrs-00068u-00; Mon, 05 May 2003 10:23:00 -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 h45ER4804976; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:27:04 -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 h45EQs804950 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:26:54 -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 KAA03826 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:18:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CgpR-00067e-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 10:20:29 -0400
Received: from giles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ([192.139.46.36] helo=mail.nitros9.org ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CgpL-00067a-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 10:20:24 -0400
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=giles.striker.ottawa.on.ca ident=aland) by mail.nitros9.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1) id 19Ch0s-0006b5-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 10:32:18 -0400
From: Alan DeKok <aland@freeradius.org>
To: asrg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] seeking comments on new RMX article
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 04 May 2003 14:44:07 PDT." <136840390347.20030504144407@brandenburg.com>
Message-Id: <E19Ch0s-0006b5-00@mail.nitros9.org>
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 10:32:18 -0400

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:
> if you find the rmx record, and then you know the posting is through an
> authorized MTA.
> 
> if you do NOT find the rmx record, you do not know anything.

  Exactly.

> so, what is the real utility of the rmx record?

  Umm... you have more information with which to make better
decisions?  That doesn't seem like a bad thing.

> that is, what can you safely do, versus not do?

  For RMX systems, you can safely be more liberal in filtering
messages, because you have some level of confidence that any spam
coming from RMX systems will be traceable and accountable.  That
doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.

> AD>   Are there NO other methods which a mobile user may use to send mail?
> 
> no.

  I disagree most strongly.

> AD> SMTP is only one of many protocols used to send/receive email.
> 
> interesting.  i believe there are no others.  ("submit" is simply smtp on
> another port.)  which ones are you referring to?

  Some people have posted other alternatives.  An additional one is
mail via a web interface.  If you care about privacy, use SSL.

  The feeling I get here is the same from everyone who's requiring
that mobile users be allowed to send SMTP traffic to any port 25 on
the planet, and to pretend to come from any domain.  They're adamant
that that's the ONLY way they can send mail from remote sites, and
that there are NO other workable alternatives.  The fact that probably
90% of such non-traceable, anonymous traffic worldwide comes from
spammers has no bearing on the subject.

  I'm at a loss to respond to such a position.  It's so trivially,
obviously wrong, that I'm left wondering what I'm missing.

  (I have my suspicions, but in the interest of keeping this
discussion on a technical, rather than political level, I've deleted
the additional paragraph I really wanted to write.)

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email