[16112] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: will spammers early adopt hashcash? (Re: Spam Spotlight on Reputation)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adam Shostack)
Wed Sep 8 16:10:01 2004
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 16:56:40 -0400
From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Cc: bear <bear@sonic.net>, Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@danisch.de>,
"R. A. Hettinga" <rah@shipwright.com>, cryptography@metzdowd.com,
Eric Johansson <esj@harvee.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040907201313.GA10870@bitchcake.off.net>
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 04:13:13PM -0400, Adam Back wrote:
| Well we'll see. If they have lots of CPU from zombies and can get and
| maintain more with limited effort maybe even they can, and CAMRAM's
| higher cost stamp on introductions only will prevail as the preferred
| method.
Adam,
You've thought about this more than me. What do you see as
equilibrium postal rates if the spammers have 10k, 100k, or a million
nodes to send?
Will spammers run under nice? Use your graphics card as a
co-processor? Is the rate of new vulns high enough to keep their CPU
pools filled?
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
