on Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:46:45PM -0500, Ron Johnson (ron.l.johnson@cox.net) wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 19:40, Joyce, Matthew wrote:
> > >
> > > Maybe this would be the future for e-mail, deny all but specified...
> > It is probably (should be imo) the future of all computing.
> >
> > Permit this
> > Permit that
> > Deny everything else
>
> Isn't this kindred to C-R?
Not necessarially. Depends on the implementation.
SMTP-time blocks on the basis of whitelisting are an IMO reasonable C-R.
Yes, you have to clear you address or IP, but the request is *highly*
specific to your own traffic. This does require that you can
discriminate between types of C-R, and the naive user may not be able to
distinguish between an SMTP bounce providing clearing instructions, and
an email reply to a From: or envelope sender address.
In general, targeted allow, deny, accept provisionally email policies
are where I'm headed. The key is making them very specific.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
At the sound of the toner, boycott Lexmark: trade restraint via DMCA.
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-979791.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature