Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reputation (was Re: Service outages planned for April 25)
Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Sun, 15 May 2022 00:56 UTC
Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EC23C14F723 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 May 2022 17:56:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.402
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.248, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MARKETING_PARTNERS=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oe1rFqsCPfqJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 May 2022 17:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-f180.google.com (mail-yb1-f180.google.com [209.85.219.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C62DC14F719 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 May 2022 17:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-f180.google.com with SMTP id w187so21440685ybe.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 May 2022 17:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JPONTxYe/Nuq19Dr0JE3cJd3Eqfqsis+l/cqtTPhxRU=; b=hkpcTgwRjuNEczbkWyz5gyMK5obWf8Fw4KYuwiy/6UGp8ZKnaFGhwUSk1Qin1PW2j1 i+MWKriY4VhcE3h1kJI1z1AQLJeWd2SQAH+Jw1zMM1jc2zwzx3SP+/9nJCR2nX+nJcnX f8mzFB1JlBI0CJEMlXLmE8AT+egX2Nw9etKk14heu8Sqmk3rwZvoKMoAT0lJI8u42Std BtcjKKISX68oIWVXtQ1/kTh+2XizZn1qVPSuobx/RPgiBs5s+Ad8exHhL5RzE95kaBOo LC3zpnH9e9CjV4cunc89+582rF+CwsHzT6XeMvbmZ4ngxPHBKs2XUP24XzIbvG/teO6w zHSw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530CI/9FbyobI87nlCgCLSbXD4hZveKocDH57Kof+R+aCjGfvrN9 5uDvtWPhuHg41nk9gGRWeL9U9UY96LJGUqlZR7+xDB6MYqs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzV2Ojul0oiy4t5pAjRB8Y5XhuPG6VyP/B9c78l0K5Z78ubHJOijs9Uh3liWa+ljWCvusfeOSmd2uqulFAiO04=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:fe12:0:b0:64b:473f:cb79 with SMTP id k18-20020a25fe12000000b0064b473fcb79mr12254468ybe.82.1652576177748; Sat, 14 May 2022 17:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMm+LwhD8wHJ284z91X5XP-8f+9=Dx1Kd50=8-Pd3SX==W6ivw@mail.gmail.com> <20220514171447.23A3840334EA@ary.qy>
In-Reply-To: <20220514171447.23A3840334EA@ary.qy>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2022 20:56:05 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwivypwPG_mAc=3w=dY4w9rgvO8+qY=c3Et+Gkitdw8GMA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reputation (was Re: Service outages planned for April 25)
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000a009b05df0260e5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/VkJnlt7PLjXSot0ng8seSbld4wU>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 00:56:22 -0000
On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 1:14 PM John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote: > It appears that Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> said: > >-=-=-=-=-=- > > > >Since y'all are claiming this problem is impossible, I want the glittering > >prizes if my proposal turns out to work. > > I believe that Mesh does what you say, but it's not going to solve the > introduction > problem because it's fundamentally not a technical problem. There is one > set of > people who I do want to hear from, a second sent I don't want to hear > from, and > a much larger set where I don't know. People shift among those three > groups > unpredictably. > My goal is to sufficiently solve the problem so that I spend a negligible amount of time dealing with unwanted communications. You keep setting up this binary success/failure. >People can and will abuse any messaging modality but for the point of view > >of spam control, I would be MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH > >MUCH better off is the only folder I was receiving communications from > >unknown parties was my contact requests folder. > > Well, OK, but I can do that with procmail. Or Boxbe. > Not for your telephone calls you can't. I am not claiming originality. Far from it. I am providing an infrastructure which allows you to reduce the spam problem to the introductions problem and then apply any techniques available to the introductions problem. > >So for example, I think I would be pretty safe accepting contact requests > >from: > > > >* Anyone who is an Alumni of Southampton, Oxford or MIT > >* Anyone who has attended an RSA Conference, IETF, OASIS or W3C meeting > >* Anyone who is an accredited expert witness search agent > >* Anyone whose validated email address matches one of my SMTP contacts > > > >That is going to cover the vast majority of my legitimate contact > requests. > > That's essentially web of trust, give or take the implausibility that > everyone > will tag themselves at that level of detail. I get way more expert work > from > random lawyers who found me on the web than from search agents. > Umm, I am thinking it is more X.509 model but there are some very important differences. First off, PGP Web o' Trust was all about validating keys. That is not a concern in my model. The key binding for @alice is by definition the callsign registration binding. The question 'is @alice the person I know as Alice' may or may not be relevant to me, for purposes of rejecting spam, all I care about is whether they are an abusive actor. So no, this is really not Web of Trust even if it has some superficial resemblances, as does every model of social interactions because that is what Web o' Trust is an abstraction of. > >* Anyone with an introduction from someone I have authorized to give > >introductions > > That's exactly web of trust, and we have seen why that doesn't scale, > because your contacts' preferences aren't yours. ("Gee, he seemed so > nice and it would have been rude to refuse.") > Not really, not least because Web o' Trust was never much more than an aspirational goal in the code. This is a fairly old analysis now, I have moved on, but it explains why my hybrid model is superior to Web of Trust alone or PKIX alone and quantifies it: draft-hallambaker-mesh-trust-09 - Mathematical Mesh 3.0 Part X: The Trust Mesh (ietf.org) <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hallambaker-mesh-trust/> > Just as important, people and entities change. I buy a widget from > someone, > and I give them an address so they can send me a receipt and tracking info. > Then the week after the widget arrives, they start sending this week's > specials > or even worse they share my address with their Treasured Marketing > Partners. > As I said, I am @PHB and that is public. I am not relying on the secrecy of my address. So they share it with their marketing partners, but those partners are not in my acceptance list so the most they can do is to send a contact request. I get a lot of messages from NewEgg, but I don't read any of them except the ones with order confirmations. And my goal is that the order confirmations, shipping notices etc. integrate to my assets management so those are going to be easy enough to identify and separate. > > PS: Madonna will solve her contact problem the same way she does now, by > paying > someone to sort through her mail. For some problems the most effective > solution > is to throw money at it. > Which is pretty much what I said she would be doing.
- Service outages planned for April 25 Robert Sparks
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Robert Sparks
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 tom petch
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Jay Daley
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Keith Moore
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Carsten Bormann
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Keith Moore
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Carsten Bormann
- Re: Service outages planned for April 25 Keith Moore
- Email and reputation (was Re: Service outages pla… Vittorio Bertola
- Re: Email and reputation (was Re: Service outages… Keith Moore
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … John Levine
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… John Levine
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Keith Moore
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Keith Moore
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … John R Levine
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Keith Moore
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … touch@strayalpha.com
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Keith Moore
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Keith Moore
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … touch@strayalpha.com
- Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the … Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Vittorio Bertola
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… John R Levine
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Christian Huitema
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Masataka Ohta
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Masataka Ohta
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Michael Richardson
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Laurence Lundblade
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… John Levine
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM)
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… John Levine
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Keith Moore
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Christopher Morrow
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Keith Moore
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… John Levine
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Keith Moore
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Christopher Morrow
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Keith Moore
- Deployment strategy for email+ Was: Mail is worse… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: mail crypto, was the introduction problem, wa… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… John Levine
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Keith Moore
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… John R Levine
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Masataka Ohta
- Re: the introduction problem, was Email and reput… Masataka Ohta
- Trying to do too much (was Re: the introduction p… Jim Fenton
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Keith Moore
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Keith Moore
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Michael Richardson
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Masataka Ohta
- Re: potable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (wa… John Levine
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: potable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (wa… Michael Richardson
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Keith Moore
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… John R Levine
- Re: potable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (wa… Keith Moore
- Re: Trying to do too much (was Re: the introducti… Masataka Ohta
- Re: potable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (wa… Masataka Ohta
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… Michael Richardson
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… John Levine
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… Michael Richardson
- We are not a mail forwarding service Carsten Bormann
- Re: We are not a mail forwarding service John R Levine
- ugly hacks (was: Re: We are not a mail forwarding… Keith Moore
- Re: ugly hacks (was: Re: We are not a mail forwar… John Levine
- Re: ugly hacks (was: Re: We are not a mail forwar… Keith Moore
- Re: We are not a mail forwarding service Robert Sparks
- Re: We are not a mail forwarding service Carsten Bormann
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: potable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (wa… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… Keith Moore
- Re: portable e-mail, now Trying to do too much (w… Phillip Hallam-Baker