[42065] in Cypherpunks
Re: Anonymity: A Modest Proposal
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Futplex)
Mon Oct 23 19:32:35 1995
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 18:35:12 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: nyms@sephiroth.org (Nym Servers Mailing List)
Reply-To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
In-Reply-To: <acb027040402100417fa@[137.110.24.250]> from "Lance Cottrell" at Oct 22, 95 10:02:31 am
From: futplex@pseudonym.com (Futplex)
Lance Cottrell writes:
> I think one solution to this problem is to encourage (require) the use of
> pseudonym servers. Having a server like alpha as the entity on the from
> line has several advantages.
>
> 1) Less Spam since it takes some effort to set up the nym and it will be
> taken away as soon as the spam starts.
I fear this will be a short-lived gain. User-friendly scripts for
establishing pseudonymous accounts are pretty easy to write. They may be
beyond the average Fast Money Maker, but I expect myself and others will be
putting them out on the Net for general consumption.
I can certainly imagine one of those scripts being expanded to automatically
create salesdroid001@nymsrus.org, ..., salesdroid999@nymsrus.org and emitting
the same spam once from each pseudonym to a different destination. You would
want to apply a statistical spam filter (of the kind mentioned recently by
Greg Broiles) to the entire output of each pseudonymizer in an attempt to
nip such spams in the bud.
Semi-permanent account status confers privileges to the user, IMHO. I
believe a pseudonymous account ideally should be treated the same as a
regular account on an ISP. For example, an admin will not unilaterally close
an account upon receiving a single complaint about the account user.
Certainly I don't know of an ISP that routinely blocks its users' accounts
from sending mail to selected other accounts. Lest I seem too presumptuous,
let me say that I realize all immediately foreseeable pseudonymizers are
free services. Clearly these service providers can set whatever policies they
wish, and are not directly competing with the fee-charging ISPs. Perhaps
future fee-charging pseudonymizers will consider these criteria in offering
enhanced services.
-Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>
