3 ms·

Following would kill 99.999% of spam: - All mailing addresses are linked to a persona and are impossible to guess. - Personas pay per address issued. - Sende

Following would kill 99.999% of spam: - All mailing addresses are linked to a persona and are impossible to guess. - Personas pay per address issued. - Senders pay per message sent with a per volume of data fee too.

StavrosK 6y ago
Following would kill 100% of spam: - Shut down all communication entirely.
stiray 6y ago
Let me propose another solution, much simpler, the one that internet was made for but looks like no one cares about. Host your own mail server. Each and every site I register to gots its own mail address. Not only that I know when address was sold, site was hacked,.. I also know which site. The only thing that is left is vi /etc/mail/aliases and one '#'. No spam at all. (That is not entirely true, i have few emails I use hidden from users just to collect spam and feed it to bayes. But that is another story.) It is 2020, stop using spyware sites like gmail and start using INTERNET.
- sbuk 6y ago
  Its a wonderful idea, but I fear there are too many blocks in place at the moment to achieve this, technical literacy being the main one. The reason that people go to GMail, Outlook.com (formerly Hotmail) and other services is For the convenience - mainly the simplicity. It’s easy. Running a mail server is hard (tm), well in relative terms. There is a lot that needs fixing, especially on the ISP front. Until we can all agree to use IPv6, or another solution that isn’t constrained in the same manner as IPv4, it’s a non starter. I hate to be one of those that doesn’t proffer an alternative solution...
- magicalhippo 6y ago
  Wouldn't require hosting your own server as far as I see. Gmail or Fastmail could do something similar. Provider could have UI to generate unique alias, the alias address being account.uid.hash@provider.com. The uid is unique per alias, and the hash is h(account|uid|salt). The salt is of course stored by the provider. This way the provider can easily verify the alias is not forged, and it is easily blocked if leaked. Mails going straight to the account (not an alias) could then be strictly whitelisted. Or did I miss something?
dijit 6y ago
Wouldn't we get most of those gains by simply implementing proof-of-work for senders? (with an exponential backoff). Then you can add on things later like increased reputation of senders, and that can be on an individual basis instead of web-of-trust- IE; I have 10 users and those 10 users get 10 emails from princeofnigeria.com and github.com; but github.com has increased reputation due to previous email or following graylisting guidelines or whatever.
- Endlessly 6y ago
  To me, “proof-of-work” is toxic to the environment and is just an abstraction of “sender pays” — it also doesn’t address the carelessness of people sharing mailing addresses, which is at the root of the problem.

StavrosK 6y ago

Following would kill 100% of spam: - Shut down all communication entirely.

stiray 6y ago

Let me propose another solution, much simpler, the one that internet was made for but looks like no one cares about. Host your own mail server. Each and every site I register to gots its own mail address. Not only that I know when address was sold, site was hacked,.. I also know which site. The only thing that is left is vi /etc/mail/aliases and one '#'. No spam at all. (That is not entirely true, i have few emails I use hidden from users just to collect spam and feed it to bayes. But that is another story.) It is 2020, stop using spyware sites like gmail and start using INTERNET.

sbuk 6y ago
Its a wonderful idea, but I fear there are too many blocks in place at the moment to achieve this, technical literacy being the main one. The reason that people go to GMail, Outlook.com (formerly Hotmail) and other services is For the convenience - mainly the simplicity. It’s easy. Running a mail server is hard (tm), well in relative terms. There is a lot that needs fixing, especially on the ISP front. Until we can all agree to use IPv6, or another solution that isn’t constrained in the same manner as IPv4, it’s a non starter. I hate to be one of those that doesn’t proffer an alternative solution...
magicalhippo 6y ago
Wouldn't require hosting your own server as far as I see. Gmail or Fastmail could do something similar. Provider could have UI to generate unique alias, the alias address being account.uid.hash@provider.com. The uid is unique per alias, and the hash is h(account|uid|salt). The salt is of course stored by the provider. This way the provider can easily verify the alias is not forged, and it is easily blocked if leaked. Mails going straight to the account (not an alias) could then be strictly whitelisted. Or did I miss something?

dijit 6y ago

Wouldn't we get most of those gains by simply implementing proof-of-work for senders? (with an exponential backoff). Then you can add on things later like increased reputation of senders, and that can be on an individual basis instead of web-of-trust- IE; I have 10 users and those 10 users get 10 emails from princeofnigeria.com and github.com; but github.com has increased reputation due to previous email or following graylisting guidelines or whatever.

Endlessly 6y ago
To me, “proof-of-work” is toxic to the environment and is just an abstraction of “sender pays” — it also doesn’t address the carelessness of people sharing mailing addresses, which is at the root of the problem.