IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] epostage is still a bad idea, the inedible parts of IETF dogfood consumption - SMTP version

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 18 December 2019 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.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 444DE120948 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 06:21:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=DiEcf6Lc; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=JWdl9XJT
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qOXOX2IRwO-Q for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 06:21:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 809AE120812 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 06:21:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 45223 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2019 14:21:13 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=b0a5.5dfa35d9.k1912; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=QIzVKyZI5u7DXPvqQzHHnyvoilcPndgT1kt8no1Po+w=; b=DiEcf6LcRl1W0ocQvDycnH0QlHKLvDC66WqeBHfN9jJxCX3PYn2WgjiGHP13ag6tYxpLL/DWWGCdh2cS3K4mfY14IS2ZnMMJSwoOxrW0/6FnLdm8x5qMppGGSqz6qVVd3ZLGDnWIJQIrL0ZUsDHblZ+dDn1itvDg+d3/6mbtsKyMJeQOmTGVB417Us7e3Z9K1/V50/8vR5eBsBZteay7vshdp7n9k4yG7A50k2CPph7rSd5vGSYqwJHMeFvY0Mhl
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=b0a5.5dfa35d9.k1912; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=QIzVKyZI5u7DXPvqQzHHnyvoilcPndgT1kt8no1Po+w=; b=JWdl9XJTeFHntM0NqkXKImlgiQ/uHsThpv1qqsUUeSy4Wo0a0CWJyKxGi05sT8YK9fuGePXC30yIE4QFl825SkWZthLCLTQFv7sRIDYlrC1z2/mq+4ZacMvaF2et5tc/zaJ6NRnDJ6VuT4f1edYpTE6EMfQZchChQRh3CJxtJW2/8PnQiZjkxMVcQNWC8gpEL8eWscj0oV5Em0VJIQWQIEziNaMA/P7ch6PLFNIpAGP56yuve61mgeIKCxKIHl7M
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP6; 18 Dec 2019 14:21:12 -0000
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:21:12 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.374.1912180916250.77074@ary.qy>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] epostage is still a bad idea, the inedible parts of IETF dogfood consumption - SMTP version
In-Reply-To: <CAKr6gn0JYfziVEyL1mH-WZxyy7tFct77jafjbh2fVGU4CPysQA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20191218020726.4FA601178860@ary.qy> <aacdb008-a894-d116-d0ee-afb5bfa36477@network-heretics.com> <CAKr6gn0JYfziVEyL1mH-WZxyy7tFct77jafjbh2fVGU4CPysQA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.99999 (OSX 374 2019-10-27)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/zF4ZQOMUPeZj72TkKU05BFm4Eko>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 14:21:20 -0000

On Wed, 18 Dec 2019, George Michaelson wrote:
> IF we had implemented sender-pays, the SPAM problem would be radically
> different. It would still be there, and the existence proof is SMS
> spam.

I wrote a white paper on e-postage in 2004.  Nothing has changed since 
then other than that some of the numbers would have a few more zeros.

https://www.taugh.com/epostage.pdf

tl;dr:

Nobody knows how to run a payment system for billions of messages a day

Nobody knows how to pay for a payment system for billions of messages a day

Nobody knows how to manage a payment system for billions of messages a day

Typical problem: botnet takes over Grandma's computer and sends a spam 
blast.  Does she pay the postage?  If not, who does?  If the answer is 
nobody does, how is that an e-postage system?  Keep in mind that every 
spammer in the world will claim to be a botted grandmother (many already do.)

R's,
John

PS: The current STIR/SHAKEN mess reminds us that settlements in the phone 
system no longer work either.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email